The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled that psychological violence under the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children (VAWC) Act committed through Facebook warrants the higher penalty under the Republic Act No. 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act.

In a resolution penned by Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin S. Hernando, the SC First Division denied with finality the petitioner’s motion for reconsideration but modified its earlier decision by imposing the higher prison term under RA 10175, or the Cybercrime Prevention Act, after ruling that the psychological violence offense under the VAWC Act was committed through Facebook, which constituted the use of information and communications technology (ICT).

“The use of Facebook, a social media platform accessed through the internet, undeniably constitutes the use of ICT. Consequently, the penalty for violation of Section 5(i) of Republic Act No. 9262 should be imposed one degree higher pursuant to Section 6 of Republic Act No. 10175,” the Court stressed.

FACTS AND ISSUE

The case arose from a complaint filed by a woman against her former boyfriend, with whom she had a child, after he allegedly posted on Facebook insulting, humiliating and threatening remarks directed at her. 

According to the prosecution, the public post caused her serious emotional distress, mental anguish and public humiliation. Although complaints for cyber libel and grave threats were dismissed during preliminary investigation, protection orders were later issued in her favor. 

The accused denied owning the Facebook account or authoring the post, claiming he was being impersonated and suggesting that the complainant created the account to falsely implicate him. He also invoked alibi. 

The Family Court convicted him of violating Section 5(i) of RA 9262, while the Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. After the SC upheld the conviction in October 2025, the accused sought reconsideration.

Before the SC, the main issues were whether the prosecution had proven beyond reasonable doubt that the petitioner authored the Facebook post and committed psychological violence under the VAWC Act, and whether the proper penalty had been imposed.

RULING

The SC denied the motion with finality, ruling that the prosecution had established beyond reasonable doubt that the petitioner authored the Facebook post and committed psychological violence under Section 5(i) of RA 9262. 

The SC reiterated that ownership of or access to a social media account, and authorship of online posts or messages, may be established through direct or circumstantial evidence.

The Court also modified the penalty after ruling that using Facebook constituted the use of ICT, bringing the offense within Section 6 of the Cybercrime Prevention Act, which increases by one degree the penalty for crimes committed through ICT.

Accordingly, the Court increased the prison sentence to an indeterminate term of six years and one day of prision mayor, as minimum, to 14 years, eight months and one day of reclusion temporal, as maximum, while retaining the P100,000 fine and the order to undergo mandatory psychological counseling or psychiatric treatment.

Follow Tan Briones & Associates on LinkedIn for more legal updates and law-related articles.