19/07/2026
SUPREME COURT IMPOSES HARSHER PENALTY FOR VAWC OFFENSES COMMITTED ONLINE
The Supreme Court (SC) has imposed a harsher penalty on a man convicted of committing psychological violence against his former girlfriend through social media, emphasizing that the use of information and communication technology aggravates the penalty under the Cybercrime Prevention Act.
In a 20-page decision authored by Associate Justice Ramon Paul Hernando, the SC's First Division affirmed the man's conviction for violating Republic Act No. 9262, or the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children (VAWC) Act of 2004, but increased his prison term after partially granting his motion for reconsideration.
The case involved a couple who had been in a relationship for three years and had a daughter together. After the woman rejected the man's marriage proposal because of problems in their relationship, he raised their child with the help of his parents.
During one visit to see their daughter, the man allegedly grabbed and groped the woman, prompting her to block him on Facebook and other social media platforms.
Years later, the woman's siblings received Facebook Messenger messages from an account they recognized as belonging to the man. The messages blamed the woman for causing his mother's heart attack.
The following day, the woman learned that the same account had posted a public Facebook message calling her a "dirty woman" and an "animal" and threatening to physically assault her. The insults were repeated in the comments section. Fearing for her safety, the woman filed a complaint for violation of the Anti-VAWC Act.
The Regional Trial Court, acting as a Family Court, found the man guilty, a ruling later affirmed by the Court of Appeals and subsequently by the Supreme Court.
Initially, the High Court upheld the P100,000 fine imposed by the lower courts and ordered the offender to undergo psychological counseling or psychiatric treatment.
It rejected the bare denial of the accused that he was not the one using the social media account, ruling that the prosecution established beyond reasonable doubt that he controlled the account and authored the posts.
In filing his motion for reconsideration, the accused argued that the mere appearance of his name and photograph on the Facebook account was insufficient to prove that he authored the posts.
It emphasized that the use of information and communication technology in committing a crime constitutes a qualifying circumstance under Section 6 of Republic Act No. 10175, or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012.
"By virtue of Section 6 of Republic Act No. 10175, the use of an ICT in the commission of a crime or offense is a qualifying circumstance warranting the imposition of a higher penalty," the resolution stated.
The Court, however, emphasized that the qualifying circumstance must be specifically alleged in the criminal complaint or information, as required under the Rules of Court. Otherwise, it cannot be appreciated even if proven during trial.
It added that the statute stands even if the criminal Information does not expressly mention "information and communications technology" (ICT), as long as the use of the social media platform is clearly alleged and proven during trial.
The SC also reiterated the factors that may be considered in proving ownership or control of a social media account, including admissions of authorship, eyewitness accounts of account access, information known only to the accused, writing style, records from internet service providers or social media platforms, digital forensic evidence, patterns consistent with previous posts, and other circumstances linking the account to the offender.
The Court raised the prison sentence of the offender from six months and one day to eight years to six years and one day to 14 years, eight months and one day, while retaining the P100,000 fine and ordering the accused to undergo psychological counseling or psychiatric treatment.
