Girlfriend May File Case Against Cheating Boyfriend – Law Dean

Couples in the “dating” phase of a relationship are also covered by the expanded Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act Children Act of 2004 (Anti-VAWC Act), which classifies marital infidelity a violation, a law school dean said. 

Lyceum of the Philippines University College of Law dean Soledad Mawis told “Agenda” on One News on Monday, April 10, that it is “possible” for a girlfriend to file a case against a cheating boyfriend under the law.

“What’s important here is that the infidelity caused psychological abuse toward the person. In other words, that is the element of the violation in Republic Act [No.] 9262 [Anti-VAWC Act] just like the mental anguish or emotional anguish caused on the victim,” Mawis explained.

Last March 23, the Supreme Court (SC) held that marital infidelity falls under the law’s definition of psychological abuse. 

This came after its First Division struck down a petition for certiorari filed by a man who said that his violation of RA 9262’s Section 5(i) was not established beyond reasonable doubt. 

Under the provision, an act of violence against women and children, meant “causing mental or emotional anguish, public ridicule or humiliation to the woman or her child, including, but not limited to, repeated verbal and emotional abuse, and denial of financial support or custody of minor children of access to the woman's child/children.” 

The man in question cohabited with another woman and impregnated her while his wife was working overseas. 

In January 2016, the man was first found guilty by a regional trial court (RTC) of inflicting psychological violence against his wife and daughter through emotional and psychological abandonment. 

The man then attempted to plead his case before the Court of Appeals (CA), where he claimed that his wife and daughter were the ones who abandoned him. When he lost the CA case, he then took it to the SC, which upheld the rulings of the RTC and the CA.

The SC noted that the daughter’s “psychological trauma was evident when she wept in open court upon being asked to narrate the petitioner's infidelity.” In particular, the daughter explained “that she was deeply hurt because her father had another family and loved another woman other than her mother.”

Mawis pointed out that Section 3(a) of the law states that an offended party can also be a “woman with whom the person has or had a sexual or dating relationship,” aside from a former or current wife, and a legitimate or illegitimate child. 

“We should also look at the [expanded] law as offended parties are not limited to a spouse…Boyfriend and girlfriend, dating relationship, there is still a freedom of choice supposedly and it’s different from husband and wife…it’s not like you want to marry her already,” Mawis said. 

“But the problem is that the law is very clear. It involves those who had, or (have) a romantic or dating relationship, so it’s not only limited to a wife,” Mawis added. 

Mawis stressed, however, that girlfriends must be able to prove that cheating boyfriends employed psychological violence to win a case.

“It all boils down to evidence, what evidence do you have? You can only win a case based on evidence. Of course, the skill of a lawyer comes in but that’s secondary. At the end of the day, it’s evidence that will determine whether you win a case or not,” she said. 

Mawis also noted that aggrieved women must be able to establish mental or emotional anguish caused by infidelity, rather than focusing on cheating itself. 

“For example, financial support, is it being used to manipulate the offended party?...Or in the case [which the SC upheld], the marital infidelity caused psychological trauma not only on the mother, but also on the child and you need to show that,” she said in a mix of English and Filipino.