PEOPLE VS TAÑO took as well the jewelry box containing other valuables

belonging to Amy's employer.

Doctrine: Dwelling aggravates a felony when the crime

was committed in the residence of the offended party Charged of Robbery with Rape, TC considered Taño’s
and the latter has not given any provocation. It is admission of the robbery and ruled on the rape case,
considered an aggravating circumstance primarily convicting the accused with the complex crime of
because of the sanctity of privacy that the law accords Robbery with Rape, appreciating dwelling as an
to human abode. As one commentator puts it, one's aggravating circumstance and sentencing the accused
dwelling place is a sanctuary worthy of respect; thus, with death penalty.
one who slanders another in the latter's house is more
severely punished than one who offends him
elsewhere. According to Cuello Calon, the commission Issue: Whether dwelling may be appreciated as
of the crime in another's dwelling shows worse aggravating circumstance in this case?
perversity and produces graver alarm. BUT DWELLING
CANNOT BE APPRECIATED IF THE BUILDING WHERE THE
OFFENSE WAS COMMITTED WAS NOT ENTIRELY FOR
Held: No. See Doctrine.
DWELLING PURPOSES.

In the case at bar, the building where the two offenses

Facts: Amy de Guzman was tending a Video Rental Shop
were committed was not entirely for dwelling purposes.
owned by her cousin- employer, Ana Marinay in
The evidence shows that it consisted of two floors: the
Caloocan City. The video rental shop was actually
ground floor, which was being operated as a video
located in the same building where Amy and Ana’s
rental shop, and the upper floor, which was used as a
family are residing - the ground floor with kitchen and
residence. It was in the video rental shop where the
toilet was where the video rental shop was and the 2nd
rape was committed. True, the victim was dragged to
floor was the family and Amy’s residence On the date of
the kitchen and toilet but these two sections were
the incident Alexander Taño, a relative of Ana's
adjacent to and formed parts of the store. Being a
husband, kept on going in and out of the video shop,
commercial shop that caters to the public, the video
and on the last time he went inside said shop, he
rental outlet was open to the public. As such, it is not
jumped over the counter, seized Amy, poked a knife at
attributed the sanctity of privacy that jurisprudence
the left side of her neck, pulled her towards the kitchen
accords to residential abodes. Hence, dwelling cannot
where he forced her to undress, and started raping her.
be appreciated as an aggravating circumstance in the
However, somebody knocked at the door which
crime of rape.
prompted him to stop what he was doing and ordered
Amy to put on her clothes. Thereafter, he ordered her
to proceed upstairs to get some clothes, so he could
bring her out. Before they could reach the upper floor, Dispositive: MODIFIED. Guilty of two separate offenses:
he suddenly pulled Amy down and placed himself on rape and robbery. For the crime of rape, appellant is
top of her. Thereafter, he started mauling her until she hereby SENTENCED to reclusion perpetua and to pay
lost consciousness. Accused-appellant then freely Private Complainant Amy de Guzman P50,000 as
ransacked the place. Leaving Amy unconscious and indemnity ex delicto and P30,000 as moral damages. For
bloody after repeatedly banging her head, first on the the crime of robbery, appellant is sentenced to an
wall, then on the toilet bowl, he took her bracelet, ring indeterminate penalty of two (2) years and four (4)
and wristwatch. He then proceeded upstairs where he months of prision correccional, as minimum, to eight (8)
years of prision mayor, as maximum; and to pay De This has led to concerns and speculations that the high
Guzman P2,487.65 as actual damages. court has abandoned the doctrine.[1] The Gabriela
Women's Party condemned the decision which it
viewed made the Maria Clara doctrine invalid saying the
NOTE: the case also considered ruling that there is no ruling reversal will empower rapists and disagreed with
complex crime of robbery with rape in this case. The the court's assessment of the societal status of
rape on this case was not committed on the occasion of women.[4]
robbery. So separate appreciation of rape and robbery. On February 21, 2018, Supreme Court's spokesperson,
Theodore Te has clarified that it was not the case since
the high court can only abandon a doctrine only during
a full session.[1]

The doctrine became a part of the Supreme Court of the

Philippines' jurisprudence sometime in 1960 following
the People v. Taño case. The high court through Justice SC: 'Maria Clara' doctrine alone not sufficient for rape
Alejo Labrador has asserted a "well known fact" that conviction
women, especially Filipinos "would not admit that they Ina Reformina, ABS-CBN News
have been abused unless that abuse had actually
happened."[1] The court said that women's natural Posted at Feb 20 2018 09:57 PM | Updated as of Feb 21
instict is to protect their honor.[2]The case involved 2018 06:26 AM
three armed robbers who the court found liable
for taking turns in raping a woman.[3] Gone were the days when a rape victim's testimony is
sufficient to convict the alleged rapist, solely because of
About 58 years later since the doctrine entered the high the belief that a typical Filipina, a "Maria Clara," would
court's jurisprudence, the Third Division of the Supreme not testify that she had been raped if it did not actually
Court reverse a ruling on January 17, 2018 by a Davao happen.
court on two people convicted of rape.[1] The 2018
decision was released in late-February.[4] The case The Supreme Court (SC), in a decision on January 17
involves an alleged rape that happened in 2009 and the penned by Associate Justice Samuel Martires, acquitted
two accused were sentenced of reclusión perpetua, or two men previously convicted of rape by a trial court,
and affirmed by the appellate court, because the
forty years of imprisonment, in 2012. The decision was
affirmed by the Court of Appeals in 2016. [5] testimony of alleged victim, alias "AAA," a housemaid,
proved incredible.
The court described the doctrine as causing a "travesty
of justice" by putting the accused at an "unfair The so-called ‘Maria Clara’ or “women’s honor”
disadvantage"[1], criticizing the doctrine for assuming doctrine became part of Philippine jurisprudence in the
that no Filipina woman of "decent repute" would falsely 1960’s in the case involving the conviction of three
claim that she was abused. It urged for the acceptance armed robbers who toork turns raping Herminigilda
of the "realities of a woman’s dynamic role" in Domingo.
Philippine society today so one can "evaluate the The high court then "hinged on the impression that no
testimony of a private complainant of rape young Filipina of decent repute would publicly admit
without gender bias or cultural misconception". It also that she has been sexually abused, unless that is the
stated that the discrepancies in the alleged victim's truth, for it is her natural instinct to protect her honor."
testimonies has casted doubt if the rape incident did
happen or not.[3] In the recent case involving an appeal by Juvy D.
Amarela and Junard G. Racho, where the two allegedly
raped "AAA" in two separate instances, one after the
other, in Davao City in February 2009, the high court "[T]he version in AAA's affidavit-complaint is remotely
said "today, we simply cannot be stuck to the Maria different from her court testimony. At the first instance,
Clara stereotype of a demure and reserved Filipino AAA claims that she was pulled away from the vicinity
woman" so as to "evaluate the testimony of a private of the stage; later, in court, she says that she was on her
complainant of rape without gender bias or cultural way to the restroom when she was grabbed. By this
misconception." alone, we are hesitant to believe AAA's retraction
because it goes into whether it was even possible for
The high court explained that the times have changed,
Amarela to abduct AAA against her will," the SC said.
and with it the Filipina.
As for Racho, the high court said that "[s]ince we doubt
"We, should stay away from such mindset and accept AAA's account on how she was raped by Amarela, we
the realities of a woman's dynamic role in society today; have to consider her testimony against Racho under the
she who has over the years transformed into a strong
same light."
and confidently intelligent and beautiful person, willing
to fight for her rights. Racho was instructed by his mother to accompany
"AAA," after the supposed rape by Amarela, to her
"It is important to weed out these unnecessary notions aunt's house against his will. "AAA" alleged that instead
because an accused may be convicted solely on the of performing the task, Racho took her to a shanty and
testimony of the victim, provided of course, that the
raped her.
testimony is credible, natural, convincing, and
consistent with human nature and the normal course of The high court said it was inclined to believe Racho's
things," the high court said in its decision, as it stressed narration that he and "AAA" parted ways when she
that for a conviction of rape to rise, the victim's insisted she wanted to go home instead of going to her
narration and testimony must be believable beyond aunt's house, since her home was in another town.
reasonable doubt," the SC said.
"To begin with, Racho did not even want to bring 'AAA'
VICTIM'S TESTIMONY NOT CREDIBLE to her aunt's house nearby. If he had the intention to
have sex with 'AAA,' Racho would not have declined her
In the case of "AAA," the high court ruled that her mother's instruction. His reason for leaving 'AAA' to go
testimony cast a doubt on its very credibility and she home alone is supported by the fact that he was able to
was not telling the truth in her narration. The following immediately come home right after he left with 'AAA,'"
circumstances were pointed out in the decision: (1)
the SC said.
AAA's version of the story in her complaint-affidavit
differed materially from her testimony in court; (2) Further, the high court noted that 'AAA's' lacerations
"AAA" could not have easily identified Amarela because were only at the 9 o'clock and 3 o'clock positions of the
the crime scene was dark and she only saw him for the hymen, and not in various directions which could have
first time; (3) her testimony lacked material details on established non-consensual sex, according to studies.
how she was brought under the stage against her will;
and (4) the medical findings did not corroborate "Considering the locality of these lacerations ('AAA's'
physical injuries and are inconclusive of any signs of case), we cannot completely rule out the probability
that 'AAA' voluntarily had sex that night. Moreover, the
forced entry.
absence o f bruises on AAA's thighs - when she said she
AAA's complaint-affidavit indicated that Amarela pulled was punched there twice-reinforces the theory that
her away from the beauty contest stage to the daycare 'AAA' may have had consensual intercourse," the SC
center, where the rape occurred. However, in court, said.
"AAA" testified that Amarela grabbed her when she was
Rape is essentially a crime committed through force or
on the way to the comfort room.
intimidation, against the victim's will, the high court
stressed.
The high court pointed out that it was the prosecution's assuming that Filipino women’s position in society has
duty to properly evaluate the evidence against Amarela improved and are no longer prone to abuse by men.
or Racho, and what actually happened could not be
ascertained based on the testimony alone of "AAA." “There is no reality-based connection to be drawn
linking women’s transformed social status or even
Gabriela fears SC ruling on ‘Maria Clara’ doctrine could willingness to fight for their own rights to making
lead to more rape cases women immune to rape and other sexual attacks. The
reasoning that the Supreme Court used flies in the face
MANILA, Philippines — Party-list group Gabriela of actual rise of reported and unreported rapes, sexual
expressed apprehension that the ruling of the Supreme harassment, bullying, trafficking, and other crimes
Court’s Third Division on the “Maria Clara” or the against women,” Salvador said.
women’s honor doctrine may not be sufficient for rape
conviction and could even “open the floodgates to Meanwhile, Bayan Muna party-list Rep. Carlos Zarate
many more rape (cases).” lamented that the country’s justice system remains
heavily reliant on testimonial evidence rather than on
“They can now go on a rampage with the knowledge
forensic evidence.
that the courts will most likely dismiss the rape case,”
the group said. “In most cases, it’s the victim who’s just talking,” he
said.
During a news conference on Wednesday, Gabriela Rep.
Emerenciana “Emmi” de Jesus said the ruling had put Zarate added that in a number of rape cases it would
the burden of proof on the rape victim. take a while before the victims come out and complain
because of the trauma suffered. He also said that minor
According to the group, the division’s ruling “essentially inconsistencies in their testimonies are expected
renders invalid the “women’s honor doctrine” that puts because it was naturally hard for the victims to recount
credence on the victim’s testimonies, based on the fact
their experience in the witness stand.
that admitting the rape itself is a very difficult decision
for Filipino women in a social setup that puts the shame The Third Division acquitted Juvy Amarela and Junard
on raped women and silently condones the attacker.” Racho of rape. They were convicted by a Davao court
and were sentenced to suffer reclusion peprpetua or up
“This Supreme Court ruling will surely add a very heavy
to 40 years imprisonment for the alleged crime
layer of hardships and even higher financial and social committed in 2009. The decision was affirmed by the
strain especially on poor women victims, while
Court of Appeals.
practically giving perpetrators an easy way out,”
Gabriela added.

The January 17 ruling penned by Associate Justice

Samuel Martires said, “We simply cannot be stuck to
the Maria Clara stereotype of a demure and reserved
Filipino woman. We should stay away from such SC on rape acquittal: Stay away from ‘Maria Clara’
mindset and accept the realities of a woman’s dynamic mindset
role in society today; she who has over the years
transformed into a strong and confidently intelligent By: Tetch Torres-Tupas- Reporter / @T2TupasINQ
and beautiful person, willing to fight for her rights.”
INQUIRER.net / 01:13 PM February 20, 2018
Gabriela secretary-general Joms Salvador noted that the
In acquitting two men convicted of rape, the Supreme
Third Division’s description of the doctrine as non-
Court, in a decision made public Tuesday, said the
sequiturcould equally describe the “absurd basis” for
public “should stay away” from the ‘Maria Clara’ unrealistic and beyond human experience,” the High
stereotype or the demure and reserved type of Filipina. Court added.

“Today, we simply cannot be stuck to the Maria Clara The Supreme Court also noted that medical
stereotype of a demure and reserved Filipino woman. examination on the victim also failed to indicate any
We, should stay away from such mindset and accept the physical injuries or that she was raped by the two
realities of a woman’s dynamic role in society today; accused.
she who has over the years transformed into a strong
and confidently intelligent and beautiful person, willing While medico legal findings are not controlling, the High
to fight for her rights,” the Supreme Court said in a Court cited a study showing the “most common
decision penned by Associate Justice Samuel Martires. laceration sites” for rape victims.

“In the instant case…considering the locality of these

lacerations, we cannot completely rule out the
probability that [the victim] voluntarily had sex that
The High Court acquitted Juvy Amarela and Junard night. Moreover, the absence of bruises when she said
Racho of rape. Both were convicted by a Davao court she was punched reinforces the theory that [the victim]
and were sentenced to suffer reclusion perpetua or up may have had consensual intercourse,” the Supreme
to 40 years imprisonment. The decision was affirmed by Court said.
the Court of Appeals.
“We have hinged on the impression that no young
ADVERTISEMENT Filipina of decent repute would publicly admit that she
The incident happened in 2009. The victim was has been sexually abused, unless that is the truth, for it
watching a beauty pageant when she felt the need to go is her natural instinct to protect her honor (Woman’s
to the toilet. On her way, she said Amarela pulled her Honor Doctrine),” the High Court said.
under a 2-feet high makeshift stage where she was However, in this day and age, the Supreme Court added
punched and raped. that such ‘misconception’ “would not only put the
The victim said Amarela stopped and fled after three accused at an unfair disadvantage, but creates a
men came. The men took her to a hut but she said she travesty of justice.”
managed to escape and hid in a neighboring house and
then was taken to Racho’s house.

Racho’s mother then asked her son to take the victim to

her aunt. However, the victim Woman's honor a fallacy? SC acquits men of rape over
was instead brought to a shanty where she was ‘unrealistic’ account
punched and again raped. The Supreme Court does not apply the woman's honor
In acquitting the two, the Supreme Court said the doctrine that presumes raped women to be telling the
testimony given by the victim in court was different truth
from her affidavit. The High Court also questioned how Published 1:04 PM, February 20, 2018
the victim was able to identify Amarela when she
herself admitted that the area where the rape Updated 4:15 PM, February 20, 2018
supposedly happened was dark and was surrounded by
RAPE. The Supreme Court acquits two men accused of
trees.
raping a woman within hours of each other citing the
“Her claim that she was forcibly brought under a 'unrealistic' account of the victim. Photo by LeAnne
makeshift stage, stripped naked and then raped seems Jazul/Rappler
MANILA, Philippines – Inconsistencies in the account of inserted his penis inside her vagina and made a push
a woman victim were the basis of the Supreme Court and pull movement.”
(SC) to acquit two men accused of raping her on the
same day within hours of each other. She shouted for help and was later rescued by 3 men.
Amarela fled at that point. The woman said the 3 men
In its acquittal of the two men, the SC did not apply a brought her to a hut, and fearing their bad intentions,
decades-old doctrine called the women’s honor. Under she fled and went to the house of one Godo Dumandan,
the doctrine, women are believed not to lie about being who brought her to the Racho home.
raped because “women, especially Filipinos, would not
admit that they have been abused unless that abuse Racho’s mother instructed him to take the woman to
had actually happened.” victim to her aunt’s home. The woman said that’s when
Racho brought her to a shanty and raped her once
The doctrine further said: “This is due to (women’s) again. (READ: That thingy called rape culture)
natural instinct to protect their honor. We cannot
believe that the offended party would have positively Inconsistencies
stated that intercourse took place unless it did actually The woman’s “inconsistent” testimonies led the SC to
took place.” conclude that the prosecution “has failed to prove (the
Associate Justice Samuel Martires wrote the decision of men’s) guilt beyond reasonable doubt.”
acquittal saying the doctrine “borders on the fallacy of In the first alleged rape, the SC said the woman’s claim
non-sequitur.” that she was raped under a two-foot makeshift stage
“We simply cannot be stuck to the Maria Clara “seems unrealistic and beyond human experience.”
stereotype of a demure and reserved Filipino woman. The woman said in her affidavit complaint that Amarela
We should stay away from such mindset and accept the pulled her away from the stage of the beauty contest
realities of a woman’s dynamic role in society today; and into the day care. On the stand, she said Amarela
she who has over the years transformed into a strong pulled her while she was on her way to the bathroom,
and confidently intelligent and beautiful person, willing so that no other people could have seen what was
to fight for her rights,” Martires wrote. happening.
Third Division members Associate Justices Presbitero The woman also admitted the place was dark, and that
Velasco Jr, Lucas Bersamin, Marvic Leonen and she did not see Amarela’s face while he was raping her.
Alexander Gesmundo concurred. The decision was She said, however, that she saw Amarela’s face as he
promulgated on January 17. was pulling her towards the day care center. Amarela
Raped twice on the same day denied even being with the woman on that night.

Juvy Amarela and Junard Racho were convicted of rape The woman said Amarela raped her under a 2-foot
by the Davao Regional Trial Court (RTC), later affirmed maekshift stage. “(The woman) failed to mention how
by the Court of Appeals, for sexually assaulting a exactly Amarela pulled her to the makeshift stage
housekeeper on February 10, 2009 only hours apart. without any sign of struggle or resistance,” the SC said.

The woman’s story goes: she was watching a beauty “Her claim that she was forcibly brought under a
makeshift stage, stripped naked, and then raped seems
contest at 6 pm and on her way to a public bathroom
when Amarela pulled her towards a day care center. unrealistic and beyond human experience,” the SC said.

The woman said Amarela punched her abdomen, and The SC also noted that the woman “had no pertinent
boxed her upper thigh, rendering her too weak to fight physical findings/or physical injuries” despite claims she
the man as he “placed himself on top of her and was beaten.
Medico-legal not enough In May 2017, the SC acquitted a rape convict due to
insufficient evidence that the sex was not consensual,
The woman’s medico-legal report found complete saying that abrasions and contusions could also be
lacerations at two positions of her hymen. The SC cited suffered during consensual sex. The man said the
a study that says vaginal lacerations are injuries found
woman was his girlfriend.
in both consensual and non-consensual sex.
Before that, the SC also acquitted a rape convict
“The absence of bruises on the woman’s thighs – where because the woman kept silent as two men raped her.
she said she was punched there twice – reinforces the The woman said it was due to fear that the men might
theory that the woman may have had consensual
stab her.
intercourse,” the SC said.
The SC acknowledged that decisions of the trial court
In the case of Racho, he admitted to taking the woman are usually given deference because the judges there
to her aunt’s home upon his mother’s instruction but were the ones who got to observe the demeanor of the
denied raping her. victims and defendants. In this case, the SC said they
“Instead of reporting the incident to the police, the are forced to do away with that principle and
woman insisted that she be brought to her aunt’s house appreciate instead facts which could have been
nearby. This is way beyond human experience. If the misappreciated.
woman had already told other people what happened,
there was no reason for her not to report the incident
to the proper authorities,” the SC said.

Racho said that the woman changed her mind as they

were going to her aunt's hourse. Instead, she wanted to
be brought to her own home.

Racho said that he didn’t want to go too far so he left Women’s honor’ doctrine still holds, says UP law prof
her, and he went back home. Published February 20, 2018 10:32pm
The SC said Racho could have made an alibi of not being By NICOLE-ANNE C. LAGRIMAS, GMA News
with the woman at all that night; the court said the
mother could have also supported a cover story. A criminal law professor on Tuesday said the "women's
honor" doctrine still holds even as a division of the
“The best defense for him was alibi which he thought he Supreme Court (SC) veered away from it as it acquitted
did not have to raise, given that he was telling the truth two rape convicts due to questions on the integrity of
when he left the woman by herself to go home. To our their accuser's testimony.
mind, these are badges of truth which persuade us that
Racho might be telling the truth,” the SC said. Augusto Arreza, a professor at the University of the
Philippines' College of Law, said the SC Third Division's
“Henceforth, we are constrained to reverse the RTC and remarks that the "Maria Clara" mindset is no longer
the CA rulings due to the presence of lingering doubts applicable in the present day "does not have anything
which are inconsistent with the requirement of guilt to do with the decision."
beyond reasonable doubt as quantum of evidence to
convict an accused in a criminal case,” the SC said. He interpreted this portion of the ruling as an "obiter
dictum," Latin for "by the way," or an expression of an
Amarela and Racho are ordered released from jail opinion with no binding force.
“unless they are being held for other lawful cause.”
Arreza said the ruling came about after a "dissection" of Women's group Gabriela has criticized this part of
the testimony of the complainant to ascertain its Martires' decision, saying that it "flies in the face of
credibility. actual rise of reported and unreported rapes, sexual
harassment, bullying, trafficking, and other crimes
"You have to remember the doctrine is based on the
against women."
presumption that the testimony of the offended party,
the victim, is credible. If the testimony is not credible, It also said that its reason for overturning the rape
you don't even have to apply the 'women's honor' conviction will "open the floodgates to many more
doctrine," he said in a phone interview. rapes, emboldening perpetrators who will abuse more
women with impunity, as they can now go on rampage
The doctrine in question refers to the jurisprudence- with the knowledge that courts will most likely dismiss
backed notion that a woman will not say she has been rape cases."
sexually abused unless it is true out of a "natural
instinct" to "protect her honor." Rights group Amnesty International said that the
decision will make it more difficult for rape victims to
Earlier sought for confirmation, SC spokesperson
come forward. — BM, GMA News
Theodore Te said the ruling "speaks for itself."

He also said the ruling must be read in relation with a

Constitutional provision that states a doctrine made by SC says it did not abandon Maria Clara doctrine
the court en banc can only be modified or reversed by
By Bea Kirstein T. Manalaysay. Philippine Canadian
the court en banc, with all its 15 members voting.
Inquirer on February 21, 2018
The Third Division is composed of five justices.
Supreme Court of the Philippines (PNA photo)
On January 17, the high tribunal through the Third
The High Court clarified through its spokesperson
Division acquitted Juvy Amarela and Junard Racho after
it found discrepancies in the circumstances of the Theodore Te that it has not “abandoned” the “Maria
alleged rape in 2009 as narrated by the complainant in Clara” doctrine.
her testimony. In a tweet, the Supreme Court (SC) spokesman said on
It reversed and set aside the damning ruling of a Davao February 21, “Only SC En Banc can abandon a doctrine
City regional trial court in 2012, as well as the Court of under Art. VIII, sec. 4(3). This case was decided by the
Appeals decision that upheld it in 2016. 3rd Division.”

Notably, the decision penned by Associate Justice Te was citing the article that states “No doctrine or
Samuel Martires said the tribunal can no longer abide principle of law laid down by the court in a decision
by the 58-year-old "women's honor" doctrine as it rendered en banc or in division may be modified or
cannot be "stuck to the Maria Clara stereotype a reversed except by the court sitting en banc.”
demure and reserved Filipino woman." This is after Gabriela Secretary General Joms Salvador
“We should stay away from such a mindset and accept on February 20 slammed an SC decision acquitting two
the realities of a woman’s dynamic role in society today; alleged rapists. She said that this will “open floodgates
she who has over the years transformed into a strong to many more rapes.”
and confidently intelligent and beautiful person, willing In a 20-page decision by the SC Third Division, Juvy
to fight for her rights,” it said. Amarela and Junard Racho were acquitted from a rape
It said this "misconception" "puts the accused at an case.
unfair advantage" and "creates a travesty of justice."
“We have hinged on the impression that no young stand for the victims whose rights are being trampled,
Filipina of decent repute would publicly admit that she calling for justice due to the crime done to her.
was sexually abused, unless that is the truth, for it is her
natural instinct to protect her honor to protect her Actually, she said, although there are many women
organizations, but some people tend to look down at
honor. However, this misconception, particularly in this
day and age, not only puts the accused at an unfair them; and as subject of entertainment because of
disadvantage, but creates a travesty of justice,” the patriarchal culture. As long as this system is not broken,
then men and other sectors of society will look at
High Court held.
women with low dignity, and subject for abuse.”
The decision added, “Today, we simply cannot be stuck
to the Maria Clara stereotype of a demure and reserved Dagatan likewise reported that their office receives five
Filipino woman. We should stay away from such to six cases per week regarding abuse to women. Most
mindset and accept the realities of a woman’s dynamic of them are victims of abuse in the hacienda for two
role in society today; she who has over the years years already but revealed only now.
transformed into a strong and confidently intelligent She likewise emphasized that women have great role in
and beautiful person, willing to fight for her rights.” our society. They should be respected.
Maria Clara is a character from Jose Rizal’s famous Disregarding the Maria Clara Doctrine is not respecting
novels “Noli Me Tangere” and “El Filibusterismo,” the women, Dagatan asserted.*
portrayed as a reserved Filipina. The Maria Clara
doctrine also called “women’s honor” was entered into
jurisprudence in a rape case in 1960.

GABRIELA REACTS VS SC JUNKING OF MA CLARA

DOCTRINE

Submitted by Edith Colmo on Thu, 02/22/2018 - 08:43

Clarissa Dagatan, chairperson of Gabriela-Negros

Occidental reacts on the declaration of Supreme Court
not to rely immediately on the accusation of a woman
as rape victim because no Filipino woman will admit
that she was raped to defend her dignity. The SC
reportedly disregarded the Maria Clara doctrine for this
reason.

Dagatan in a radio interview admitted that mere

testimony of the rape victim is not enough because it
still needs evidence like doctor’s medical certificate. She
also said, rape victims must come out and assert for
their rights, as they are protected by the law, Violence
Against Women (VAW).

She also said, although the Supreme Court disregards

the Maria Clara Doctrine, Gabriela will still continue to