[REPUBLIC ACT NO.

7877]
AN ACT DECLARING SEXUAL HARASSMENT UNLAWFUL IN THE EMPLOYMENT,
EDUCATION OR TRAINING ENVIRONMENT, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
 SEC. 3. Work, Education or Training-related
Sexual Harassment Defined.

 Work, education or training-related sexual harassment is committed by an employer,

employee, manager, supervisor, agent of the employer, teacher, instructor, professor, coach,
trainor, or any other person who, having authority, influence or moral ascendancy over
another in a work or training or education environment, demands, requests or otherwise
requires any sexual favor from the other, regardless of whether the demand, request or
requirement for submission is accepted by the object of said Act.
(a) In a work-related or employment environment,
sexual harassment is committed when:
 (1) The sexual favor is made as a condition in the hiring or in the employment, re-
employment or continued employment of said individual, or in granting said individual
favorable compensation, terms, conditions, promotions, or privileges; or the refusal to
grant the sexual favor results in limiting,segregating or classifying the employee which in
any way would discriminate, deprive or diminish employment opportunities or otherwise
adversely affect said employee;
 (2) The above acts would impair the employee’s rights or privileges under existing labor
laws; or
 (3) The above acts would result in an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment for
the employee.
(b) In an education or training environment,
sexual harassment is committed:
 (1) Against one who is under the care, custody or supervision of the offender;
 (2) Against one whose education, training, apprenticeship or tutorship is entrusted to the
offender;
 (3) When the sexual favor is made a condition to the giving of a passing grade, or the
granting of honors and scholarships, or the payment of a stipend, allowance or other benefi
ts, privileges, or considerations; or
 (4) When the sexual advances result in an intimidating, hostile or offensive environment
for the student, trainee or apprentice.
Any person who directs or induces another to commit any act of sexual harassment
as herein defi ned, or who cooperates in the commission thereof by another without
which it would not have been committed, shall also be held liable under this Act.
SEC. 6. Independent Action for Damages. – Nothing in this Act shall preclude
the victim of work, education or training-related sexual harassment from
instituting a separate and independent action for damages and other affirmative
relief.

SEC 7. Penalties. – Any person who violates the provisions of this Act shall,
upon conviction, be penalized by imprisonment of not less than one (1) month
nor more than six (6) months, or a fine of not less than Ten thousand pesos (P
10,000) nor more than Twenty thousand pesos (P 20,000), or both such fine and
imprisonment at the discretion of the court.
 REPUBLIC ACT No. 11313
An Act Defining Gender-Based Sexual Harassment in Streets, Public Spaces, Online, Workplaces, and
Educational or Training Institutions, Providing Protective Measures and Prescribing Penalties Therefor
 Section 3. Definition of Terms. -As used in this Act:

 (a) Catcalling refers to unwanted remarks directed towards a person, commonly done in the
form of wolf-whistling and misogynistic, transphobic, homophobic, and sexist slurs;
 (e) Gender-based online sexual harassment refers to an online conduct targeted at a particular
person that causes or likely to cause another mental, emotional or psychological distress, and
fear of personal safety, sexual harassment acts including unwanted sexual remarks and
comments, threats, uploading or sharing of one’s photos without consent, video and audio
recordings, cyberstalking and online identity theft;
 (f) Gender identity and/or expression refers to the personal sense of identity as characterized,
among others, by manner of clothing, inclinations, and behavior in relation to masculine or
feminine conventions. A person may have a male or female identity with physiological
characteristics of the opposite sex in which case this person is considered transgender:
 (g) Public spaces refer to streets and alleys, public parks, schools, buildings,
malls, bars, restaurants, transportation terminals, public markets, spaces used as
evacuation centers, government offices, public utility vehicles as well as private
vehicles covered by app-based transport network services and other recreational
spaces such as, but not limited to, cinema halls, theaters and spas; and
 (h) Stalking refers to conduct directed at a person involving the repeated visual
or physical proximity, nonconsensual communication, or a combination thereof
that cause or will likely cause a person to fear for one’s own safety or the safety
of others, or to suffer emotional distress.
 GENDER-BASED STREETS AND PUBLIC SPACES
SEXUAL HARASSMENT

 Section 4. Gender-Based Streets and Public Spaces Sexual Harassment. -The

crimes of gender-based streets and public spaces sexual harassment are
committed through any unwanted and uninvited sexual actions or remarks against
any person regardless of the motive for committing such action or remarks.
 Gender-based streets and public spaces sexual harassment includes catcalling, wolf-
whistling, unwanted invitations, misogynistic, transphobic, homophobic and sexist slurs,
persistent uninvited comments or gestures on a person’s appearance, relentless requests for
personal details, statement of sexual comments and suggestions, public masturbation or
flashing of private parts, groping, or any advances, whether verbal or physical, that is
unwanted and has threatened one’s sense of personal space and physical safety, and
committed in public spaces such as alleys, roads, sidewalks and parks.
 Acts constitutive of gender-based streets and public spaces sexual harassment are those
performed in buildings, schools, churches, restaurants, malls, public washrooms, bars,
internet shops, public markets, transportation terminals or public utility vehicles.
GENDER-BASED ONLINE SEXUAL HARASSMENT

 Section 12. Gender-Based Online Sexual Harassment. -Gender-based online

sexual harassment includes acts that use information and communications
technology in terrorizing and intimidating victims through physical, psychological,
and emotional threats, unwanted sexual misogynistic, transphobic, homophobic
and sexist remarks and comments online whether publicly or through direct and
private messages, invasion of victim’s privacy through cyberstalking and incessant
messaging, uploading and sharing without the consent of the victim, any form of
media that contains photos, voice, or video with sexual content, any unauthorized
recording and sharing of any of the victim’s photos, videos, or any information
online, impersonating identities of victims online or posting lies about victims to
harm their reputation, or filing, false abuse reports to online platforms to silence
victims.
QUALIFIED GENDER-BASED STREETS, PUBLIC SPACES
AND ONLINE SEXUAL HARASSMENT
 Section 15. Qualified Gender-Based Streets, Public Spaces and Online Sexual Harassment. -The penalty
next higher in degree will be applied in the following cases:
 (a) If the act takes place in a common carrier or PUV, including, but not limited to, jeepneys, taxis, tricycles,
or app-based transport network vehicle services, where the perpetrator is the driver of the vehicle and the
offended party is a passenger;
 (b) If the offended party is a minor, a senior citizen, or a person with disability (PWD), or a breastfeeding
mother nursing her child;
 (c) If the offended party is diagnosed with a mental problem tending to impair consent;
 (d) If the perpetrator is a member of the uniformed services, such as the PNP and the Armed Forces of the
Philippines (AFP), and the act was perpetrated while the perpetrator was in uniform; and
 (e) If the act takes place in the premises of a government agency offering frontline services to the public and
the perpetrator is a government employee.
GENDER-BASED SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN THE
WORKPLACE
 Section 16. Gender-Based Sexual Harassment in the Workplace. -The crime of gender-based
sexual harassment in the workplace includes the following:
 (a) An act or series of acts involving any unwelcome sexual advances, requests or demand for
sexual favors or any act of sexual nature, whether done verbally, physically or through the use of
technology such as text messaging or electronic mail or through any other forms of information
and communication systems, that has or could have a detrimental effect on the conditions of an
individual’s employment or education, job performance or opportunities;
 (b) A conduct of sexual nature and other conduct-based on sex affecting the dignity of a person,
which is unwelcome, unreasonable, and offensive to the recipient, whether done verbally,
physically or through the use of technology such as text messaging or electronic mail or through
any other forms of information and communication systems;
 (c) A conduct that is unwelcome and pervasive and creates an intimidating, hostile or humiliating
environment for the recipient: Provided, That the crime of gender-based sexual harassment may
also be committed between peers and those committed to a superior officer by a subordinate, or
to a teacher by a student, or to
 a trainer by a trainee; and
 (d) Information and communication system refers to a system for generating, sending, receiving,
storing or otherwise processing electronic data messages or electronic documents and includes
the computer system or other similar devices by or in which data are recorded or stored and any
procedure related to the recording or storage of electronic data messages or electronic
documents.
 RELEVANT CASES

 The Office of the Ombudsman has ordered the six-month

suspension without pay of lawyer Alfegar Triambulo,
inspector general of Philippine National Police-Internal
Affairs Service (PNP-IAS) in connection with a sexual
harassment complaint filed by his subordinate, a certain
Genevieve Lipura.
 In her complaint-affidavit filed before the ombudsman on Sept. 5, 2022, Lipura said she has been with the IAS
for almost 20 years, starting as Planning Officer 1 with salary grade 11 until she was promoted as human resource
management officer (HRMO) with salary grade 18 in 2010.
 Lipura, however, said that since Triambulo assumed office as the inspector-general of the IAS in 2016, she had
been transferred to various units with job description not related to being an HRMO.
 Lipura alleged that all her transfers of assignment did not have her consent and despite the fact that she was under
a plantilla or station specific employment.
 Lipura said that when she was demoted to become a computer operator with salary grade 9, this prompted her to
personally talk to Triambulo at a restaurant in Quezon City.
 Lipura claimed that during their meeting, Triambulo quipped that whenever he had a girlfriend, he was careful
not to get her pregnant.
 Lipura alleged that Triambulo also instructed his driver to go ahead without him and suggested that he and Lipura
go somewhere else.
 Lipura said that she refused Triambulo’s invitation and while the latter was driving her to the PNP Headquarters
in Camp Crame, the IAS chief still kept on urging her to come with him somewhere, even saying that she can just
take a bath afterward.
 Lipura claimed that before she got out of the car, Triambulo asked for a kiss, which she also refused, saying that
she has a husband and a child.
MA. LOURDES T. DOMINGO vs. ROGELIO I. RAYALA

 Sexual harassment is an imposition of misplaced "superiority" which is enough to dampen an employee’s spirit
and her capacity for advancement. It affects her sense of judgment; it changes her life.1

 Ma. Lourdes T. Domingo (Domingo), then Stenographic Reporter III at the NLRC, filed a Complaint for
sexual harassment against Rayala before Secretary Bienvenido Laguesma of the Department of Labor and
Employment (DOLE).
 To support the Complaint, Domingo executed an Affidavit narrating the incidences of sexual harassment
complained of, thus:
4. Sa simula ay pabulong na sinasabihan lang ako ni Chairman Rayala ng mga salitang "Lot, gumaganda ka yata?“
5. Sa ibang mga pagkakataon nilalapitan na ako ni Chairman at hahawakan ang aking balikat sabay pisil sa mga
ito habang ako ay nagta-type at habang nagbibigay siya ng diktasyon. Sa mga pagkakataong ito, kinakabahan ako.
Natatakot na baka mangyari sa akin ang mga napapabalitang insidente na nangyari na noon tungkol sa mga
sekretarya niyang nagbitiw gawa ng mga mahahalay na panghihipo ni Chairman.
 6. Noong ika-10 ng Setyembre, 1998, nang ako ay nasa 8 th Floor, may
nagsabi sa akin na kailangan akong bumaba sa 7 th Floor kung nasaan
ang aming opisina dahil sa may koreksyon daw na gagawin sa mga
papel na tinayp ko. Bumaba naman ako para gawin ito. Habang
ginagawa ko ito, lumabas si Chairman Rayala sa silid ni Mr. Alex
Lopez. Inutusan ako ni Chairman na sumunod sa kaniyang silid. Nang
nasa silid na kami, sinabi niya sa akin:
 Chairman: Lot, I like you a lot. Naiiba ka sa lahat.
 At pagkatapos ako ay kaniyang inusisa tungkol sa mga personal na bagay sa aking buhay. Ang ilan dito
ay tungkol sa aking mga magulang, kapatid, pag-aaral at kung may boyfriend na raw ba ako.
 Chairman: May boyfriend ka na ba?
 Lourdes: Dati nagkaroon po.
 Chairman: Nasaan na siya?
 Lourdes: Nag-asawa na ho.
 Chairman: Bakit hindi kayo nagkatuluyan?
 Lourdes: Nainip po.
 Chairman: Pagkatapos mo ng kurso mo ay kumuha ka ng Law at ako ang bahala sa iyo, hanggang ako
pa ang Chairman dito.
 Pagkatapos ay kumuha siya ng pera sa kaniyang amerikana at inaabot sa akin.
 Chairman: Kuhanin mo ito.
 Lourdes: Huwag na ho hindi ko kailangan.
 Chairman: Hindi sige, kuhanin mo. Ayusin mo ang dapat ayusin.
 Tinanggap ko po ang pera ng may pag-aalinlangan. Natatakot at kinakabahan
na kapag hindi ko tinanggap ang pera ay baka siya magagalit kasabay na rito
ang pagtapon sa akin kung saan-saan opisina o kaya ay tanggalin ako sa
posisyon.
 Chairman: Paglabas mo itago mo ang pera. Ayaw ko ng may makaka-alam
nito. Just the two of us.
 Lourdes: Bakit naman, Sir?
 Chairman: Basta. Maraming tsismosa diyan sa labas. But I don’t give them a
damn. Hindi ako mamatay sa kanila.
 7. Noong huling linggo ng Setyembre, 1998, ay may tinanong din sa akin si Chairman Rayala na
hindi ko masikmura, at sa aking palagay at tahasang pambabastos sa akin.
 Chairman: Lot, may ka live-in ka ba?
 Lourdes: Sir, wala po.
 Chairman: Bakit malaki ang balakang mo?
 Lourdes: Kayo, Sir ha! Masama sa amin ang may ka live-in.
 Chairman: Bakit, ano ba ang relihiyon ninyo?
 Lourdes: Catholic, Sir. Kailangan ikasal muna.
 Chairman: Bakit ako, hindi kasal.
 Lourdes: Sir, di magpakasal kayo.
 Chairman: Huh. Ibahin na nga natin ang usapan.
 Palakad-lakad siya sa aking likuran habang nag-didikta.
Huminto siya pagkatapos, at nilagay niya ang kanang kamay
niya sa aking kanang balikat at pinisil-pisil ito pagkatapos ay
pinagapang niya ito sa kanang bahagi ng aking leeg, at
pinagapang hanggang kanang tenga at saka kiniliti. Dito ko
inalis ang kaniyang kamay sa pamamagitan ng aking kaliwang
kamay. At saka ko sinabi:
 Lourdes: Sir, yung kamay ninyo alisin niyo!
 Yet, even if we were to test Rayala’s acts strictly by the standards set in
Section 3, RA 7877, he would still be administratively liable. It is true that
this provision calls for a "demand, request or requirement of a sexual
favor." But it is not necessary that the demand, request or requirement of a
sexual favor be articulated in a categorical oral or written statement. It may
be discerned, with equal certitude, from the acts of the offender. Holding
and squeezing
 Domingo’s shoulders, running his fingers across her neck and tickling her
ear, having inappropriate conversations with her, giving her money
allegedly for school expenses with a promise of future privileges, and
making statements with unmistakable sexual overtones – all these acts of
Rayala resound with deafening clarity the unspoken request for a sexual
favor.
 Likewise, contrary to Rayala’s claim, it is not essential that the demand,
request or requirement be made as a condition for continued employment or
for promotion to a higher position. It is enough that the respondent’s acts
result in creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive environment for the
employee.45 That the acts of Rayala generated an intimidating and hostile
environment for Domingo is clearly shown by the common factual finding
of the Investigating Committee, the OP and the CA that Domingo reported
the matter to an officemate and, after the last incident, filed for a leave of
absence and requested transfer to another unit.
JOSE ROMEO C. ESCANDOR VS. PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES,
 At the core of sexual harassment in the workplace, as
penalized by Republic Act No. 7877, otherwise known as
the Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995, is abuse of
power by a superior over a subordinate.1 Sexual
harassment engenders three-fold liability: criminal, to
address the wrong committed against society itself; civil,
to address the private wrong against the offended party;
and administrative, to protect the public service.
 Mrs. Cindy Sheila Cobarde- Gamallo, then a Contractual Employee of the NEDA
Regional Office No. 7 for the UNICEF-assisted Fifth Country Program for Children
(CPC V), and, thus, the accused's subordinate, thereby exercising authority, influence
or moral ascendancy over said Mrs. Cindy Sheila Cobarde-Gamallo in her working
place, namely by: telling her that he has fallen in love with her and has been attracted
to her for a long time already, maliciously grabbing her hands, embracing her and
planting a kiss on her forehead; telling her that if it were possible, he would have
prevented her marriage with her husband; asking her for a date; groping her thigh;
sending her winpop messages showing his amorous concern for her; on the office
Christmas party of 2002, by grabbing her on a stairway and kissing her on the lips;
giving her gifts of chocolates, wine and a bracelet on that same Christmas, and
consistently throughout this time, sending her text messages suggestive of sex; which
acts of the accused resulted to an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment as
these caused discomfort and humiliation on his subordinate, Ms. Cindy Sheila
Cobarde-Gamallo, adversely affecting her and her family, thus constituting sexual
harassment.
 In her Complaint-Affidavit,8 Gamallo averred that the first incident
of sexual harassment happened one afternoon in July 1999, when
Escandor called her in his office.9 There, Escandor apologized for
his temper the previous day when he got angry at Gamallo for the
delay in the payment of her salary. Escandor, who was standing near
his computer, then asked Gamallo to approach him. When she did,
he "grabbed her hand, embraced her, and kissed her on the
forehead."10
9. One day sometime in 2000 RD Escandor called me to his office. . . .
Then he said that I deserved to be happy, that I am beautiful and smart
and that many men admired me. . . . To my great horror, he told me he
had been attracted to me for a long time and if it was only possible, he
would have prevented me from marrying Mark. ... He said he liked the
way I walked . . . He declared I was the kind of woman he wanted. . .
10. In the afternoon of the same day, ... he gently said he loved me and
he could no longer hold back his attraction to me. . . . Suddenly, I felt
his hand on my thigh.11
 However, Escandor's alleged advances did not stop. He
incessantly sent Gamallo unsolicited messages through
Winpop, an intra-office messaging system, such as "Hello,"
"How are you today," "I miss you," "You look beautiful,"
 "You look nice in your dress," and "I love you more every
day."15 When Gamallo did not reply to these messages,
 Escandor threatened her that she would be removed from the
meeting list.16
 Sexual harassment as defined and penalized under Republic Act No.
7877 requires three elements for an accused to be convicted: (1) that the
employer, employee, manager, supervisor, agent of the employer,
teacher, instructor, professor, coach, trainor, or any other person has
authority, influence, or moral-ascendancy over another; (2) the authority,
influence, or moral ascendancy exists in a work-related, training-related,
or education-related environment, and (3) the employer, employee,
manager, supervisor, agent of the employer, teacher, instructor, professor,
coach, trainor, or any other person who has authority, influence, or
moral-ascendancy over another makes a demand, request, or requirement
of a sexual favor. 85