In the Philippines, where divorce remains legally unavailable and the sanctity of marriage is protected by the Constitution, the emotional devastation caused by infidelity often leads aggrieved spouses to seek legal recourse. While "emotional distress" is not a standalone crime, the Philippine legal system provides specific avenues—both criminal and civil—to hold a third party (the mistress or "concubine") accountable for the psychological suffering they cause.
1. The Legal Basis: Civil Code Provisions
The primary foundation for claiming damages due to emotional distress against a third party is found in the Civil Code of the Philippines. Unlike criminal cases, these are civil actions aimed at obtaining financial compensation for the "moral damages" suffered.
- Article 19: "Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith."
- Article 20: "Every person who, contrary to law, wilfully or negligently causes damage to another, shall indemnify the latter for the same."
- Article 21 (The "Moral Seduced" Provision): "Any person who wilfully causes loss or injury to another in a manner that is contrary to morals, good customs or public policy shall compensate the latter for the damage."
- Article 26: This article specifically protects personal dignity and peace of mind, stating that "Every person shall respect the dignity, personality, privacy and peace of mind of his neighbors and other persons." It lists "alienating the affections of the husband or wife" as an actionable meddling with family relations.
2. Criminal vs. Civil Recourse
While the goal may be to address emotional distress, the strategy usually involves one of two paths:
A. Criminal Charges (Adultery or Concubinage)
Under the Revised Penal Code, a spouse can file criminal charges.
Adultery (Art. 333): Filed by a husband against his wife and her lover.
Concubinage (Art. 334): Filed by a wife against her husband and his mistress.
Note: Concubinage is harder to prove, as it requires evidence that the husband kept the mistress in the conjugal dwelling, had sexual intercourse under scandalous circumstances, or cohabited with her in any other place.
Consequence: If convicted, the mistress faces imprisonment (destierro or prision correccional), and the court can award civil indemnity (moral damages) as part of the criminal judgment.
B. Civil Action for Damages
A spouse can file an independent civil action for Moral Damages under Article 21 and 26 of the Civil Code. This does not require the "scandalous circumstances" of concubinage, but it does require proving that the mistress intentionally interfered with the marriage and caused specific psychological harm.
3. RA 9262: Psychological Violence
The Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004 (RA 9262) is a powerful tool for wives. Infidelity is recognized as a form of psychological violence.
- Section 5(i) penalizes causing mental or emotional anguish, including through "marital infidelity."
- While the primary respondent is the husband, the mistress can sometimes be impleaded as an accomplice or conspirator if her actions were specifically designed to cause the wife's emotional breakdown.
4. Elements Required for a Successful Claim
To successfully sue a mistress for emotional distress (Moral Damages), the plaintiff must generally prove:
- The Existence of a Valid Marriage: A certified marriage contract from the PSA.
- The Act of Infidelity: Evidence of the illicit relationship (photos, messages, witness testimonies, or public displays of the affair).
- Intentional Harm: Evidence that the mistress knew the man was married and continued the relationship despite the harm caused to the family.
- Actual Injury: Proof of emotional distress, such as psychiatric evaluations, medical records for depression/anxiety, or testimony regarding social humiliation and sleepless nights.
- Proximate Cause: A direct link showing the distress was caused by the affair and the mistress's conduct, not by other external factors.
5. Jurisprudence: Significant Rulings
The Philippine Supreme Court has historically upheld the right of a spouse to claim damages from a third party. In cases like Ledesma v. Court of Appeals, the court emphasized that the "meddling" or "alienation of affection" by a third party is a violation of the family's peace of mind, justifying the award of moral and exemplary damages.
6. Limitations and Challenges
- The "Clean Hands" Doctrine: If the complaining spouse also had an affair or consented to the arrangement, the court may deny the claim.
- Pardon: Under the Revised Penal Code, if the offended spouse has "consented" or "pardoned" the offenders, they can no longer file criminal charges.
- Burden of Proof: In criminal cases, "proof beyond reasonable doubt" is required. In civil cases for emotional distress, "preponderance of evidence" (more likely than not) is the standard.
Summary Table: Avenues for Redress
| Legal Basis | Type of Case | Primary Goal | Required Proof |
|---|---|---|---|
| Art. 334 RPC | Criminal (Concubinage) | Imprisonment of mistress/husband | Cohabitation or scandalous sex |
| Art. 21/26 Civil Code | Civil (Moral Damages) | Financial compensation | Violation of peace of mind/morals |
| RA 9262 | Criminal (VAWC) | Protection Orders/Imprisonment | Marital infidelity causing anguish |
Final Note
Filing for emotional distress against a mistress in the Philippines is a complex process that intersects criminal law and civil torts. While the legal system offers protection for the "aggrieved spouse," the process requires significant documentary and testimonial evidence to prove that the mistress’s actions were the direct cause of the psychological trauma.