Dear Atty. Kathy,

I worked abroad for more than five years soon after I got married. When I left, my wife gave up our rented home because she did not want to be alone and she wished to live with her siblings instead in their family home. At first, I regularly sent money to my wife even if she is earning from her own businesses, more than enough to pay for her needs and the upkeep of their family home. However, because of the long-distance relationship, we became estranged and no longer communicated with each other. I also had to stop sending her money because three members of my family got seriously ill one after the other, and I was the only one who could help them pay the medical bills. When I went back to the Philippines to take care of my terminally ill family members, I was surprised to hear from common friends that my wife was going to file a criminal case against me, for acts of violence against women, claiming I cause her mental or emotional anguish, public ridicule or humiliation because I denied her financial support. Am I liable for this crime even if it was not my intention to stop giving support to my wife?

Vesper

Dear Vesper,

Among the guidelines for determining what properly constitutes a violation of Section 5(i) of RA 9262, Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004 (RA 9262), for cases involving denial of financial support are:

• The offender willfully refuses to give or consciously denies the woman and/or her child or children financial support that is legally due her and/or her child or children; and

• The offender denied the woman and/or her child or children the financial support for the purpose of causing the woman and/or her child or children mental or emotional anguish.

The presence of criminal intent is required for criminal liability to arise from the denial of financial support. The mere failure to provide support is not enough to sustain a conviction.

It is also important to note that, as ruled by the Supreme Court, the obligation to provide support is imposed by the law mutually upon both spouses; that the obligation is not a one-way street for the husband to support his wife; that the wife has the identical obligation to provide support to her husband; and that the law certainly did not intend to impose a heavier burden on the husband to provide support for his wife, or institutionalize criminal prosecution as a measure to enforce support from him.

Further, it must also be noted that based solely on your narration, it appears that your wife is capable of providing for herself, as she is earning from her own businesses, more than enough to pay for her needs and the upkeep of their family home. Therefore, she does not appear to be a helpless victim compelled to rely solely on your financial support for survival. In this regard, the Supreme Court has likewise ruled that while RA 9262 was enacted to protect women, the purpose thereof was not to limit or reduce their capacity to take care of themselves financially.

In view of all the above, for you to be held criminally liable for denying financial support, the facts must clearly show that you deliberately and consciously withheld financial support legally due to your wife, for the specific purpose of causing her mental or emotional anguish. However, even if your wife experienced mental or emotional anguish because you stopped giving financial support, but you simply were unable to give financial support due to your own family’s medical circumstances, not because you did so willfully and deliberately for the purpose of causing your wife mental anguish, then you cannot be held criminally liable.

(XXX versus People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 255877, 29 March 2023)

Atty. Kathy Larios