When law recognizes the hurt

When law recognizes the hurt | Daily Tribune

XXX and AAA married in 1999 and had two children. Their problems began in 2009, when XXX started coming home late and grew distant. In January 2010, XXX sent AAA text messages saying that he would no longer return home, wanted to start a new life alone, and intended to seek the nullity of their marriage.

AAA later discovered that XXX was living with another woman, HHH. Surveillance conducted by her brother and a private investigator, together with the testimony of other witnesses, confirmed the relationship.

AAA testified that XXX’s actions caused her severe mental and emotional suffering and the loss of her self-esteem and dignity. She experienced depression and even attempted to take her own life several times. The psychologist who evaluated her found signs of depression, including feelings of inferiority, sleep problems, and difficulty concentrating, and linked these to XXX’s abandonment of the family for another woman. Their son likewise testified that he saw his mother crying and depressed for more than two years after his father left.

XXX denied the accusations. He also pointed out that he and HHH had been acquitted in a separate concubinage case filed by AAA.

The Regional Trial Court convicted XXX of violating Section 5(i) of the Anti-VAWC Act, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. The case eventually reached the Supreme Court.

The Court sustained the conviction.

Importantly, however, the Court emphasized that an extramarital relationship may or may not cause mental or emotional anguish, depending on the circumstances. Infidelity may be one of the acts through which psychological violence is committed, but the resulting mental or emotional suffering remains a separate element that must be established by evidence.

In this case, AAA’s testimony, the psychological evaluation and the testimonies of other witnesses sufficiently established the mental and emotional suffering she endured. The Court likewise ruled that XXX’s acquittal in the concubinage case did not preclude liability under the Anti-VAWC Act because the two are separate offenses with different elements.

XXX was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of up to eight years and one day of prision mayor, ordered to pay a P100,000 fine and P30,000 in moral damages, and directed to undergo mandatory psychological counseling or psychiatric treatment.

The case draws an important and careful line. The Anti-VAWC Act is not intended to punish every failed relationship or every act of marital infidelity. Neither does the law presume that every broken heart gives rise to criminal liability.

But where the evidence establishes that the acts committed caused genuine and serious mental or emotional suffering, the law affords protection and redress.

The law may not be able to restore a marriage or mend a broken heart. But it can recognize the dignity of those who have suffered, acknowledge the harm done and, when the evidence warrants, provide the justice that the law promises.

For more of Dean Nilo Divina’s legal tidbits, please visit www.divinalaw.com. For comments and questions, please send an email to cad@divinalaw.com.