SC imposes higher penalty for psychological violence through social media

As it affirmed the conviction of an individual who committed psychological violence against his former partner, the Supreme Court (SC) ruled to increase his penalty by one degree as it was alleged and proven that the offense was committed through social media.

In a 20-page resolution promulgated in June 2026, the SC First Division denied the motion for reconsideration filed by petitioner XXX, saying he failed to raise any ground or argument warrant the reversal of the decision.

“[The case] illustrates how social media can be misused to facilitate psychological abuse and exacerbate the suffering and humiliation of the offended party,” it said.

“As such, the law mandates the imposition of a higher penalty in recognition of the greater and more far-reaching harm done when violence is inflicted through an ICT system,” it added.

According to the court, XXX and AAA were in a relationship for three years when AAA became pregnant. He offered to marry her but she refused due to their problems in their relationship.

She then lived with her parents and raised their daughter alone.

During a visit to his daughter, XXX suddenly groped AAA, leading her to block him from all her social media accounts.

Years later, the SC said that AAA’s siblings received a private message from an account that they knew belonged to XXX. He insinuated that she caused his mother to have a heart attack.

The same account also posted a statement on Facebook, calling her demeaning names and threatening to box her when he sees her. He repeated the insults in the comments made to the post.

AAA then filed a complaint against XXX for violation of the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004.

The Family Court and the Court of Appeals found XXX guilty while the SC initially affirmed his conviction.

The court upheld the penalty of imprisonment from six months to eight years, a fine for P100,000, and psychological counseling or psychiatric treatment.

XXX appealed the decision.

In denying his motion, the SC ruled that his authorship of the Facebook post was established beyond reasonable doubt.

The SC, however, imposed a penalty higher than one degree.

According to the SC, Section 6 of the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 mandates the imposition of a penalty higher by one degree for crimes committed through the use of information and communications technology (ICT).

The SC said that for the higher degree to apply, the use of ICT must be alleged in the criminal information and proven during trial.

In this case, the SC said that though the term “ICT” was not stated in the information filed against XXX, the information stated that he made a post using his “Facebook Messenger Account… which would set a public view.”

The SC said the statement constitutes a sufficient allegation of the use of ICT as a qualifying circumstance.

Due to this, XXX was sentenced from six years up to 14 years of imprisonment, fined P100,000, and ordered to undergo counseling or psychiatric treatment.

The SC said the case serves as a warning to perpetrators of online violence that they cannot evade liability by disclaiming ownership of a social media account.

“More significantly, it affirms that violence against women and children, whether committed through electronic means or otherwise, has no place in our society,” it said. — BM, GMA News