Violence against an ex-girlfriend

KARLO and Stella were in a romantic relationship for about six months. Eventually, they separated.

On one occasion a month after their separation, they figured in a quarrel over the new boyfriend of Stella, and Stella ended up slapped and her arm was also injured by Karlo. She filed a criminal complaint against Karlo for violence against women.

Karlo put up the defense that he cannot anymore be charged for violence against women since their relationship with Stella has already ended when the alleged violence occurred. If at all, he can only be charged with simple physical injuries.
Is he correct?

The Supreme Court ruled in the case of Karlo Angelo Dabalos vs. RTC of Angeles City (G.R. No. 193960, Jan. 7, 2013) that it is immaterial whether the relationship had ceased for as long as there is sufficient evidence showing the past or present existence of a relationship between the offender and the victim when the physical harm was committed.

Section 3(a) of RA 9262 provides that “violence against women and their children refers to ant act or series of acts committed by any person against a woman who is his wife, former wife, or against a woman with whom the person has or had a sexual or dating relationship, or with whom he has a common child, or against her child whether legitimate or illegitimate, within or without the family abode, which result in or is likely to result in physical, sexual, psychological harm or suffering, or economic abuse including threats of such acts, battery, assault, coercion, harassment or arbitrary deprivation of liberty.”

From the broad definition of the term, violence against women does not limit the relationship to be current. Ex wives and ex-girlfriends are covered by the protection of this rule.

So Karlo cannot use as his defense that only physical injuries can be charged against him.

The elements of the offense of violence against women are: 1) The offender has or had a sexual or dating relationship with the offended woman; 2) the offender, by himself or through another, commits an act or series of acts of harassment against the woman and; 3) the harassment alarms or causes substantial emotional or psychological distress to her.

The court further said that while the degree of physical harm under RA 9262 and Article 266 of the Revised Penal code are the same, there is sufficient justification for prescribing a higher penalty for the former. Clearly, the legislative intent is to purposely impose a more severe sanction on the offenders whose violent acts physically harm women with whom they have or had a sexual or dating relationship.

This should be a wake-up call to the violent masochists who harm helpless women, bang their heads or bodies against the wall, shout demeaning words at their wives or send harassing texts or calls to their girlfriends.

Men are physically built superior or stronger than women. This law restrains the abusers. And Karlo will be penalized more severely because for his previous relationship with the victim.

E-mail: joepallugna@yahoo.com