SC division abandons ‘women’s honor’ doctrine, reverses rape suspects' conviction

The Supreme Court's (SC) Third Division abandoned the “women’s honor” doctrine as it reversed a rape conviction due to doubts in the integrity of an alleged rape victim’s testimony.

The doctrine suggests a woman victim of sexual abuse would not admit she had been abused, unless the incident is true, out of a “natural instinct” to "protect her honor."

The division said the court can no longer hinge upon the doctrine as it cannot be “stuck to the Maria Clara stereotype of a demure and reserved Filipino woman.”

“We should stay away from such a mindset and accept the realities of a woman’s dynamic role in society today; she who has over the years transformed into a strong and confidently intelligent and beautiful person, willing to fight for her rights,” it said.

SC spokesperson Theodore Te, asked for confirmation, said “the decision speaks for itself.”

But he advised that the ruling be read in relation to Article VIII, Section 4(3) of the Constitution, which says a doctrine laid down by the court en banc can only be modified or reversed by the court en banc.

In a decision dated January 17, the Third Division acquitted two previously convicted rape suspects after it found circumstances that “cast doubt” on the credibility of the testimony of the victim, a housekeeper who claimed she was raped by two men in 2009.

The division found gaps in her testimony, from differences between her affidavit-complaint and court testimony, a supposed inability for her to have identified one of her assailants because the crime scene was dark and she allegedly saw him for the first time, a lack of material details on some events in the alleged rape incident, to medico-legal findings that raised questions on whether she had consented to sex after all. 

It reversed and set aside the ruling of a Davao City regional trial court in 2012 and the affirmatory decision of the Court of Appeals in 2016 “due to the presence of lingering doubts” that are “inconsistent with the requirement of guilt beyond reasonable doubt” to convict an accused.

The 20-page decision was penned by Third Division member and Associate Justice Samuel Martires and concurred in by Associate Justices Presbitero Velasco, Jr., Lucas Bersamin, Marvic Leonen, and Alexander Gesmundo.

'Travesty of justice'

While the court ruled against the victim in this case, its decision came with a rejection of the apparently outdated doctrine, which says “no young Filipina of decent repute would publicly admit that she has been sexually abused, unless that is the truth, for it is her natural instinct to protect her honor.”

"However, this misconception, particularly in this day and age, not only puts the accused at an unfair advantage, but creates a travesty of justice," it said.

This first floated in jurisprudence in 1960, when the SC affirmed the conviction of three armed robbers who were said to have taken turns raping a woman named Herminigilda Domingo, according to the ruling.

Speaking through Justice Alejo Labrador, the Court then said it was a “well-known fact that women, especially Filipinos, would not admit that they have been abused unless that abuse had actually happened.”

Labrador had said this was because of women’s “natural instinct to protect their honor.”

But for the Third Division now, this opinion “borders on the fallacy of non sequitor,” or fails to logically follow from the previous statement.

It acknowledged that it would have been “appropriate” to consider as "natural" a woman’s reluctance to disclose an incident of sexual assault decades ago, but said it “cannot be stuck” to the Maria Clara stereotype.

This way, the division said it can evaluate a complainant’s testimony “without gender bias or cultural misconception."

It talked of the importance of removing such “unnecessary notions,” as an accused person may only be convicted on the strength of a victim’s testimony provided that it is “credible, natural, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things.”

Maria Clara is a character in national hero Dr. Jose Rizal’s classic novel “Noli Me Tangere.” The daughter of a Spanish friar, she was the love interest of the novel’s protagonist Crisostomo Ibarra.

Her name has become almost a colloquial term for traditional femininity among Filipino women. —ALG, GMA News