(Philippine legal context; comprehensive guide)

1. Overview: What the Law Targets

In the Philippines, the non-consensual sharing of intimate videos—often called “revenge porn,” “leaked scandal videos,” or “online sexual abuse”—can trigger multiple criminal statutes at once, depending on:

how the video was obtained (secret recording vs. consensual recording),
how it was distributed (private message, group chat, public upload, paid content),
the relationship of the parties (ex-partner, spouse, dating partner, co-worker),
the victim’s age (minor vs. adult),
the purpose (harassment, humiliation, extortion/blackmail, profit, trafficking),
where and how it was posted (online platforms, messaging apps, “alt” accounts).

The most direct “anchor law” for adults is Republic Act No. 9995 (Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009). If a minor is involved, child sexual abuse material laws apply and penalties become far more severe.

2. Primary Criminal Law for Adults: RA 9995 (Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act)

2.1 What RA 9995 criminalizes

RA 9995 punishes acts involving intimate images/videos in contexts where privacy is expected, including:

Taking photo/video of a person:
- engaged in a sexual act, or
- with their genitalia, buttocks, or female breast exposed, without consent, under circumstances where the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Copying or reproducing such images/videos without consent.
Selling, distributing, publishing, broadcasting, or showing such images/videos without consent.
Showing or causing to be shown such images/videos in public or to other persons without consent.

Critical point: Even if the recording was consensual, sharing it without the subject’s consent can still be punished. Consent to record is not automatically consent to distribute.

2.2 Consent is central—and must cover distribution

RA 9995 is built around lack of consent. In practice, prosecution focuses on whether the subject agreed to:

the recording, and separately,
the distribution/sharing/publication.

Where multiple persons appear in the video, each identifiable subject’s consent matters.

2.3 Penalties (general)

RA 9995 imposes imprisonment and fines. Exact penalty application depends on the proven act (recording vs. distribution, etc.) and how courts apply related laws (including cybercrime enhancements, discussed below).

2.4 Who can be liable

Liability can extend beyond the original uploader. Persons who re-upload, forward, sell, distribute, or publicly show the material may also face criminal exposure under RA 9995, depending on what they did and what can be proven.

3. When the Distribution Is Online: RA 10175 (Cybercrime Prevention Act)

RA 10175 becomes relevant when the offense is committed through information and communications technology (ICT)—social media, messaging apps, websites, cloud drives, email, and similar.

3.1 “Penalty one degree higher” concept

A key feature of RA 10175 is that certain crimes penalized under the Revised Penal Code and special laws, when committed through ICT, may be punished more severely (commonly described as “one degree higher,” subject to prosecutorial and judicial application).

In practical charging, prosecutors may allege:

RA 9995 (the core offense), and
RA 10175 (as an online/ICT enhancement).

3.2 Related cybercrime offenses that may arise

Even when RA 9995 is the main charge, other cybercrime-related counts can appear, depending on conduct, such as:

computer-related identity misuse (e.g., using another person’s account or creating fake accounts to upload),
illegal access (hacking into accounts to obtain the video),
data interference (tampering/deleting to conceal),
cyber libel (if defamatory captions/accusations accompany the upload).

4. If the Victim Is a Woman and the Offender Is an интимate partner: RA 9262 (VAWC)

Republic Act No. 9262 (Violence Against Women and Their Children) is often used when:

the victim is a woman (including a former partner), and
the offender is her spouse, ex-spouse, boyfriend/girlfriend (dating relationship), former dating partner, or a person with whom she has a common child.

4.1 Why RA 9262 matters in “leak” cases

Posting or threatening to post intimate videos can fall under psychological violence and other abusive acts, especially when used to:

humiliate,
control,
intimidate,
harass,
punish,
coerce reconciliation or compliance.

4.2 Protection orders (fast, practical remedies)

RA 9262 uniquely provides protection orders (Barangay Protection Order, Temporary Protection Order, Permanent Protection Order), which can include directives to stop contact/harassment and support related relief. While protection orders are not “criminal charges,” they are often pursued alongside criminal complaints.

5. Gender-Based Online Sexual Harassment: RA 11313 (Safe Spaces Act)

Republic Act No. 11313 (Safe Spaces Act) recognizes gender-based online sexual harassment, which can include acts such as:

sharing or threatening to share sexual content without consent,
sexual harassment via messages, public posts, or online conduct,
using online platforms to shame or sexually target a person.

This law may be invoked alongside RA 9995, particularly where the behavior is part of a pattern of harassment and public sexual shaming.

6. If Any Person in the Video Is a Minor: Child Sexual Abuse Material Laws (Severe Penalties)

When a minor is involved, the legal landscape changes dramatically. Consent is not a defense, and even possession can be criminal.

Key statutes include:

RA 9775 (Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009), and
RA 11930 (Anti-Online Sexual Abuse or Exploitation of Children and Anti-Child Sexual Abuse or Exploitation Materials Act).

6.1 What becomes criminal in minor cases

Depending on facts, criminal exposure can include:

producing child sexual abuse material,
distributing/selling/uploading,
possessing or knowingly accessing,
facilitating through platforms, payment systems, or recruitment.

6.2 Practical warning about evidence handling

Because mere possession can be criminal in child cases, evidence preservation should be handled carefully: document links, messages, usernames, timestamps, and report promptly rather than repeatedly storing or forwarding the files.

7. Extortion, Blackmail, and Threats: Revised Penal Code (RPC) and Related Laws

A common pattern is “pay/comply or I will leak it.” Depending on how the threat and demand are framed, prosecutors may consider:

Grave threats / light threats (threatening to commit a wrong, including exposure/harm),
Grave coercion (forcing someone to do or not do something through threats/intimidation),
Robbery/extortion-type theories (when money/property is demanded through intimidation),
Unjust vexation or other harassment-type offenses (depending on facts and charging practice).

If the offender uses the video to force sexual acts or continued sexual access, additional sexual-violence statutes may become relevant based on the conduct.

8. Defamation-Adjacent Exposure: Libel / Cyber Libel (When Captions or Accusations Are Added)

If the uploader posts the video together with statements imputing a crime, vice, defect, or disgrace—especially naming the victim—prosecutors sometimes add:

libel (RPC), or
cyber libel (RA 10175), if posted online.

Whether libel is appropriate depends heavily on the words used, identifiability, and intent; but it commonly appears in “exposé” style posts.

9. Data Privacy Angle: RA 10173 (Data Privacy Act)

The Data Privacy Act may apply when:

personal data is processed unlawfully (e.g., identity details, contact information, school/workplace, address),
doxxing accompanies the leak,
the material is tied to identifiable information and used for harassment or exploitation.

The National Privacy Commission process is separate from criminal prosecution, but facts supporting privacy violations can strengthen the overall legal response.

10. Liability for “Sharing” and “Forwarding” (Not Just Uploading)

A frequent misconception is that only the person who originally posted is liable. In reality:

Re-uploaders, sellers, and distributors can face criminal exposure, especially where intent and participation in distribution can be proven.
Group chat forwarding can be treated as a form of distribution, depending on context, proof, and prosecutorial theory.

The risk increases when the sharing is:

repeated,
done for ridicule/harassment,
done for profit,
done with captions identifying or humiliating the victim.

11. Evidence and Proof: What Typically Matters in Prosecution

Successful cases usually rest on preserved, authentic, traceable proof, such as:

screenshots of posts/messages (including URL, date/time, username),
screen recordings showing navigation from profile to the content,
copies of conversations where threats or admissions appear,
metadata, file hashes, or platform-provided records (when obtainable),
witness affidavits (who saw the post, received the video, or heard threats),
documentation tying the suspect to accounts/devices (subscriber info, device linkage, admissions).

Philippine practice often relies on coordination with:

NBI Anti-Cybercrime Division or
PNP Anti-Cybercrime Group, and prosecutorial requests for platform preservation and disclosure under applicable rules.

12. Procedure: Where Complaints Are Commonly Filed

Criminal complaints are typically filed through:

the Office of the City/Provincial Prosecutor (for inquest/preliminary investigation), often with cybercrime unit support, and/or
specialized cybercrime law enforcement (NBI/PNP) for technical documentation and trace requests.

Parallel remedies may include:

protection orders (in RA 9262 cases),
workplace/school administrative complaints (where relevant),
platform takedown and preservation requests.

13. Common Charging Combinations (Adult Victim)

Depending on facts, a single incident may produce a “bundle” such as:

RA 9995 (non-consensual distribution)
RA 10175 (ICT-related enhancement and/or related cyber offenses)
RA 9262 (if qualified relationship and woman victim; psychological violence; threats)
RA 11313 (online sexual harassment)
RPC threats/coercion/extortion theories (if blackmail or intimidation exists)
Cyber libel/libel (if defamatory captions accompany dissemination)
Data Privacy Act (if doxxing/unlawful processing is involved)

14. Defenses and Issues Courts Commonly Examine

While outcomes depend on evidence, courts and prosecutors typically scrutinize:

Consent (Was there consent to record? Was there consent to share? Was consent proven? Was it specific?)
Expectation of privacy (Was the setting private? Was the content intimate as defined by law?)
Identity/attribution (Can the suspect be reliably linked to the upload/account/device?)
Intent/knowledge (Did the accused knowingly distribute? Did they know it was intimate/private?)
Authenticity (Is the video real, altered, deepfaked, or misattributed?)
Minor involvement (Any indication of a minor escalates the case to child-protection statutes)

15. Civil Liability and Damages (Alongside Criminal Cases)

Beyond criminal prosecution, victims may pursue civil damages (often attached to the criminal action or filed separately), based on:

violation of privacy,
moral damages for humiliation and distress,
exemplary damages in appropriate cases,
other remedies recognized under civil law and relevant special statutes.

16. Practical Legal Classification: “Revenge Porn” Is Not a Single Statute Name

Philippine law does not rely on a single crime called “revenge porn.” Instead, it prosecutes the conduct through overlapping statutes, with RA 9995 as the core for adults and child sexual abuse material laws for minors, plus cybercrime enhancements and relationship/harassment statutes where applicable.

17. Key Takeaways

RA 9995 is the central criminal statute for non-consensual intimate video distribution involving adults.
Online dissemination can trigger RA 10175 and heavier penalties or additional cybercrime counts.
When the offender is an intimate partner and the victim is a woman, RA 9262 can apply and provides powerful protective remedies.
RA 11313 may apply to online sexual harassment patterns.
If any person depicted is a minor, child sexual abuse material laws apply and penalties escalate sharply; even possession can be criminal.
Forwarding, re-uploading, selling, and public sharing can expose additional persons to liability, depending on proof and circumstances.