Comparative Study paper on Republic Act 7877

“Sexual Harassment Law” and Republic Act 11313

“Safe Spaces Act”

For Submission to: Professor Atty. Benedict Kato

Student: Wealthie Kho

July 21, 2020
Introduction:

Modern legal understanding of sexual harassment was first developed in North America during the
1970, the expression came from a book in 1979 called Sexual Harassment of Working Women
whose author is Catherine McKinnon and subsequently appearing in a Canadian newspaper: The
Globe and Mail. The first plaintiffs were African American using key principles of civil rights and
applying them to sex discrimination.
In the Philippines, the first similar directives took the form of Administrative order # 68 in 1992 which
applied only to officials from the Department of Labor, its officials and employees, applicants and
those that transact with the Department of Labor. The administrative order penalized the acts which
constituted sexual harassment and penalized it as a disgraceful and immoral act which classified it
as a grave offense. There was also a creation of a committee which would investigate and act as a
distinct tribunal to receive complaints, in addition tasked with forming recommendations to be
submitted to the Secretary of the Department of Labor and Employment. Subsequently, the
remaining government agencies were directed to integrate the Administrative Order to their own
workplaces. In the private sector,
The Philippine Congress passed Republic ACT 7877 also known as the Anti Sexual Harassment Act
of 1995. Implementing rules and for the private sector.

Graven of the Special Laws:

RA 7877 is a product of legislation and which recognizes the value and dignity of the workers,
employees, applicants of instruction or education. To protect them from acts that are committed
by those who exercises authority, influence or moral ascendancy over them in a work, education
or training environment.
Elements of a Sexual harassment
1. It was committed by an employer, employee – manager, supervisor, agent, teacher,
instructor, professor, coach, trainer, any other person having authority, influence or
moral ascendancy
2. The act occurs on a work or training or education environment.
3. A sexual favor is requested, required or demanded.

RA 11313 Safe Spaces Act

RA 11313 is a product of legislation to preserve the dignity and value of a person. Recognizing
the fundamental equality of men and women. To this end, the state thru this law promotes the
equality, security and safety in public and private areas, in the physical world and online/ virtual
world as well. Public areas would include streets, public spaces, workplaces and educational
and training institutions.
The law introduces gender based sexual harassment, this harassment is the product of mental,
emotional and psychological distress and fear of personal safety.
In a practical sense, the law punishes acts such as catcalling, wolf whistling, misogynistic,
homophobic slurs, unwanted sexual advances, unwanted sexual remarks, threats, uploading or
sharing of one’s photos or videos, online theft stalking or cyberstalking.

The Republic Act punishes 4 different scenarios. Gender based street or public sexual
harassment, Gender based online sexual harassment, Gender based sexual harassment in the
workplace and Gender based sexual harassment in Education and Training institutions.

Gender based online sexual harassment:

1. Acts that use information technology
2. Acts result in terrorizing victims thru physical, psychological and emotional threats.
3. Acts are permitted thru the use of information and communications technology

Gender based Street or Public sexual harassment elements are the following:
1. The act or series of acts involving any unwelcome sexual advance or request or demand
or favor whether verbally, physically or through the use of technology such as text
messaging or electronic mail or thru forms of information or communication systems.
2. The act is considered unwelcome and unreasonable, offensive to the recipient.
3. Results creates an intimidating, hostile or humiliating environment for the victim.

Gender based Sexual Harassment in education and training institutions.

1. That the acts are committed within a school which is public or private.
2. The act is considered unwelcome and unreasonable, offensive to the recipient. That the
crime of gender based may be committed by a peer to a superior officer by a student, to
a teacher by a student, or to a trainer by a trainee.
3. Results creates an intimidating, hostile or humiliating environment for the victim.
Analysis

RA 7877 For a successful prosecution of Sexual Harassment, it requires that the overt act of
demand or request for sexual favor, the creation of an intimidating, hostile and offensive work
environment, the same is a precondition for hiring, reemployment or continued employment and
the denial thereof results in discrimination against the employee. The request for sexual favor
need not be direct and explicitly stated but can necessarily take the form of implied acts of
unwanted affection:
In the decided case of Paiste vs Mamenta. That the accused had committed sexual harassment
from his outrageous acts such as making love notes and other unwanted gestures of affection
despite knowing that the woman was already married, creating an intimidating, hostile and
offensive environment for his female subordinates. He had power, moral ascendancy and
authority which he had exercised over them which is the gravamen of sexual harassment
In the decided case of Domingo V Rayala. In the decided case of Rayala, it was already clarified
that although the law provides a “demand, request or requirement” it is not necessary that such
be expressed in an oral or written form. The acts of the perpetrator are of equal weight and
consideration. The Supreme Court cited the squeezing of shoulders, running of fingers across
the ear, tickling the ear, inappropriate conversations, giving money for school expenses with a
promise for future privileges, and statements with sexual overtones as acts pertaining to an
unspoken request for a sexual favor.

This is to be differentiated from the ruling in Aquino v Acosta. Where the plaintiff had alleged
the Judge of having kissed and embraced her and put his arm on his shoulder. The high court
ruled that busses on her cheeks were simply, friendly and innocent, bereft of malice and lewd
design. That the acts had occurred during times of festivities such as Valentine’s day and
birthdays. In sum no sexual harassment had occurred. Furthermore, in Domingo V Rayala, the
acts of Commissioner Rayala created a hostile work environment as exhibited from the plaintiff
complaint to the officemate and filing for transfer to another work unit. These acts show that a
hostile and intimidating work environment had been created by respondent.

The limitations of this law RA7877 was perhaps most evident in venue or locations where
the law protected potential victims. RA 7877 would be able to protect the victims from a
Educational, Workspace or Training environment.

Republic Act 11313 Safe Spaces law seeks to address the deficiency of the RA 7877,
which punishes the offense when it is committed only in a workplace, educational or training
environment. That the offender must be analogous to a manager, employer, supervisor or
someone which holds moral ascendancy, influence or authority over the victim. In contrast,
Republic Act 11313 seeks to protect the victim from being harassed in any of the public spaces
such as streets, schools, transportation, government, public utility or cinema halls, theatres or
spas. Quite simply, whether the law does protects the individual not only in the workplace,
educational or training environment, now it extends further whether you are in a public or private
space. It provides you a safe space around your body that can be entered only with the consent
of the individual. In the physical world, RA 11313 is more than just a sexual harassment law, it
significantly broadens the crime of sexual harassment, any act involving unwelcome sexual
advances or thru the use of technology that could have a detrimental effect on the conditions of
a human employment, performance and opportunities. Any conduct of a sexual nature or other
conduct based on sex affecting the dignity of a person which is unwelcome, unreasonable and
offensive. Any conduct that is unwelcome and pervasive creates an intimidating, hostile or
humiliating environment for the recipient. So long as the action would result in an unwelcome,
unreasonable and offensive, intimidating or hostile may be subject of a complaint. Rather than
focus on one’s authority over another to exact a sexual favor, the law now puts into focus
outside sexual favors and acts. Its purpose is preventing a form of discrimination, where it does
not involve explicit sexual behavior or advances but includes slurs, unwanted comments and
remarks, stereo typing, the goal which is to ridicule based on a person’s culture belief, race,
sexual orientation.

RA 7877 defines sexual harassment as one perpetrated by an employer, employee- manager,

supervisor, agent of employer, teacher, instructor having the attributes of authority, influence, or
moral ascendancy over another in a work or training or education environment who demands for
a sexual favor. Only the persons in authority may be brought to court. In the safe spaces act, it
covers sexist, homophobic remark which intends to humiliate or marginalize. There is no
requirement that the act be done by a superior.

Since RA7877 was enacted during the 1990s where the internet was in its infancy. The
web was something associated with spiders. Most people saw computers as nothing more than
a glorified typewriter, consuming a space of a small closet, there was no provision of law which
governs the behavior on the internet. Fast forward twenty years and a notable portion of the
population is using the internet with devices the size of a CRUNCH candy bar, the computing
power 100x more powerful than their ancient predecessors in the 90s. Due to the popularity,
RA11313 provides express provisions to deal with harassment that are made online.
Classifying online as a safe space for individuals that must be respected. Among those that can
be held punishable are the use of information and communications technology to frighten
victims thru physical, psychological and emotional threats, unwanted sexual misogynistic,
transphobic, homophobic and sexist remarks and comments made online whether this is thru a
public post or thru private messages, invasion of victim’s privacy thru cyberstalking, recording or
sharing of victim photos, videos or information (sex scandal, sex videos ) Impersonating victim
identities, posting lies about the victim. (cyber libel).

The law imposes a duty a person of authority, influence, or moral ascendancy in the workplace
to prevent, deter, or punish acts of gender-based sexual harassment in the workplace. This duty
entails disseminating to all persons or posting in a conspicuous place a copy of the applicable
law in the workplace, providing measures to prevent gender-based sexual harassment in the
workplace, creating an independent internal mechanism or a committee on decorum and
investigation to investigate and address complaints, and providing and disseminating a code of
conduct or workplace policy. To ensure compliance, the Department of Labor and Employment
shall conduct random inspections every year.

Acts of gender-based sexual harassment are punishable by administrative sanctions, without

prejudice to other applicable laws. Employers that fail to comply with their duties, including
taking action on reported acts of gender-based sexual harassment committed in the workplace,
are subject to fines.

Conclusion:
In modern society, discrimination can take many forms, popularly it can be depicted as one
more powerful in position, authority taking advantage of another. It is not improbable or at the
realm of impossibility that a situation where the opposite may occur. This is just one of the
deficiencies of law that the legislature seeks to address with the Safe Spaces Act.
As such, Safe Spaces Act is more than just an expansion of the sexual harassment law. It
seeks to prevents discrimination of persons. It seeks not only to punish those who abuse their
authority but those who abuse others per se.

References:
https://psa.gov.ph/content/q-sexual-harassment-cases
https://www.divinalaw.com/on-sexual-harassment/
https://www.chanrobles.com/scdecisions/jurisprudence2003/oct2003/am_p_03_1697.php
https://www.manilatimes.net/2018/04/19/legal-advice/dearpao/scope-of-law-on-sexual-harassment-
of-students/393420/
https://rappler.com/nation/ateneo-de-manila-university-students-file-sexual-harassment-case-vs-
professor