The Supreme Court (SC) has clarified that marital infidelity by itself is not what the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act criminalizes as psychological violence, stressing that the prosecution must prove that the conduct caused mental or emotional suffering to the victim.
In a decision penned by Associate Justice Amy C. Lazaro-Javier, the SC Second Division made the clarification as it affirmed the conviction of a husband under Section 5(i) of Republic Act No. 9262, finding that his marital infidelity caused mental and emotional anguish to his wife and child.
“What Republic Act No. 9262 criminalizes is not the marital infidelity per se but the psychological violence causing mental or emotional suffering on the victim,” the Court said.
FACTS AND ISSUE
The case stemmed from a charge of psychological violence against a husband whose wife accused him of maintaining an extramarital relationship and leaving their family, causing her and their children mental and emotional anguish.
The wife testified that their relationship deteriorated before her husband told her in January 2010 that he would no longer return home and wanted to start a new life alone. She later learned that he was living with another woman.
The prosecution presented testimony from the wife, their child and other witnesses, along with a psychological evaluation documenting the wife’s depression and emotional difficulties.
The husband denied the allegations, maintained that he continued supporting his family, and cited the dismissal of a separate concubinage case against him.
The Regional Trial Court found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt of psychological violence, while the Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction and denied his motion for reconsideration.
The case reached the SC on the issue of whether the prosecution sufficiently established the elements of psychological violence under Section 5(i) of RA 9262.
RULING
The SC dismissed the petition and affirmed the conviction, finding that the prosecution established beyond reasonable doubt the elements of psychological violence under Section 5(i).
The Court explained that marital infidelity per se is not the offense punished under Section 5(i); the prosecution must separately establish that the acts complained of caused the mental or emotional anguish contemplated by the law.
In this case, the SC found the required psychological harm established through the wife’s testimony about the humiliation, depression and loss of self-confidence caused by her husband’s infidelity, corroborated by a psychological evaluation and other testimony. The Court likewise found that their child suffered emotional distress after learning of his father’s relationship with another woman.
The SC also rejected the husband’s reliance on the dismissal of the separate concubinage case, explaining that it did not preclude conviction for psychological violence because the offenses have different elements.
“Depending on the circumstances of the spouses and for myriad of reasons, the illicit relationship may or may not even be causing mental or emotional anguish on the wife. Thus, the mental or emotional suffering of the victim is an essential and distinct element in the commission of the offense,” the Court said.
The SC affirmed the prison sentence of six years and one day to eight years and one day, along with a ₱30,000 fine, ₱100,000 in moral damages with six percent annual interest from finality until full payment, and mandatory psychological counseling or psychiatric treatment.
Follow Tan Briones & Associates on LinkedIn for more legal updates and law-related articles.
