Can Men File VAWC Cases Against Women?

We previously discussed the Violation Against Women and Their Children (VAWC) law in an earlier article. While this legal provision aims to protect the rights and welfare of women and children, what happens if the perpetrator of the abuse is also a woman? Consider the following hypothetical example:

Klarette was once a renowned model before she met Geoffrey. Two years after their marriage, Klarette gave birth to their first child, Zanea. Struggling to adapt to a lifestyle outside the entertainment industry, she began to feel resentment toward her child. The weight she gained during pregnancy frustrated her, as she was accustomed to maintaining a slim figure. Additionally, she found it hard to return to her modeling career and turned to alcohol for escape.

In one troubling incident, Klarette locked Zanea in an isolated room and refused to provide her with nourishment, blaming the child for the decline of her career. Geoffrey began to loathe Klarette, realizing that the woman he once loved had become an abusive monster. When he decided to end their relationship, Klarette threatened to kill their child if he left her, instilling fear in Geoffrey for their daughter's safety.

In cases like this, would women be held liable under the VAWC law?

The answer is yes.

On February 9, 2023, the Supreme Court of the Philippines ruled that mothers who abuse their children can be held liable under the Violence Against Women and Their Children (VAWC) law. Additionally, fathers can file petitions on behalf of their children in such cases.

On G.R. No. 239215, Randy Michael Knutson, acting on behalf of his minor child Rhuby Sibal Knutson, is the petitioner against Hon. Elisa R. Sarmiento-Flores, who is serving as the acting presiding judge of Branch 69. In 2017, Randy filed for a protection order for Rhuby under Republic Act 9262 (the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act) due to harmful tendencies exhibited by his wife, Rosalina, towards Rhuby. However, the petition was later dismissed for reasons that “Applying the foregoing jurisprudence to the case at bar, considering that the petitioner is the husband, a Protection Order cannot be issued against herein respondent, his wife.”

Randy subsequently filed a motion for reconsideration, arguing that “Section 3 of [RA No.] 9262 does not limit the offender to a male person. Otherwise, the law could have used the term, "any male person", and not "any person” which was also rejected.

Later, Randy filed a Petition for Certiorari, indicating that he was seeking these remedies on behalf of his daughter, who had been a victim of violence at the hands of her mother. The petition was ultimately granted. In that decision, the Court reiterated that:

“Logically, a mother who maltreated her child resulting in physical, sexual, or psychological violence defined and penalized under RA No. 9262 is not absolved from criminal liability notwithstanding that the measure is intended to protect both women and their children. In this case, however, the RTC dismissed Randy's petition for protection orders on behalf of his minor daughter on the ground that the mother cannot be considered as an offender under the law. To restate, the policy of RA No. 9262 is to guarantee full respect for human rights. Towards this end, the State shall exert efforts to address violence committed against children in keeping with the fundamental freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and other international human rights instruments of which the Philippines is a party.”

While women are often considered a vulnerable group in society, this does not mean they are exempt from being perpetrators of abuse. The Violence Against Women and Their Children (VAWC) law recognizes two vulnerable parties: women and their children. When the rights of the more vulnerable individual are at risk, the offender—regardless of whether it is the mother—should be held equally accountable.