This article explains your options—criminal, civil, administrative, protective, and platform-based—when someone threatens to share your intimate photos or videos without consent (“sextortion,” “revenge porn,” or non-consensual intimate imagery). It is written for a general audience and reflects Philippine law and practice as commonly understood.

1) What conduct is covered?

Threats to distribute private, intimate images are actionable even if no image is ultimately posted. Liability may arise when a person:

Demands money, more images, sex, or any act in exchange for not posting (“sextortion”);
Coerces you to stay in a relationship or obey (“do this or I’ll leak it”);
Harasses you online by repeatedly threatening to circulate your images; or
Uses stolen, surreptitiously taken, or consensually obtained images and weaponizes them later.

“Private images” generally include depictions of nudity, sexual activity, or intimate body parts taken in circumstances where you had a reasonable expectation of privacy (e.g., a bedroom, shower, a private message thread). Even if an image was originally shared consensually with a partner, subsequent distribution or threats to distribute without consent can still be punishable.

2) Criminal remedies

A. Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism (R.A. 9995)

Criminalizes taking, copying, selling, distributing, publishing, or broadcasting any image or video of a person’s private area or sexual act without consent, when the person has an expectation of privacy.
Applies even if the material was originally recorded with consent; subsequent sharing without consent is punishable.
“Threatening to publish” may be prosecuted together with grave threats or grave coercion (below) and, if done online, attracts higher penalties under the Cybercrime Prevention Act.

Key ideas: consent is specific and revocable for each act of distribution; exceptions are narrow (e.g., law enforcement, court evidence).

B. Revised Penal Code (RPC) offenses commonly paired with image threats

Grave threats (Art. 282): threatening another with a wrong amounting to a crime (e.g., “I’ll upload your nudes”) to demand money or impose any condition.
Light threats (Art. 283): threat with a wrong not amounting to a crime.
Grave coercion (Art. 286): preventing another from doing something not prohibited by law (or compelling them to do something against their will) by violence, threats, or intimidation (e.g., forcing sexual acts or continued relationship under threat of leak).
Unjust vexation and stalking/harassment may be considered depending on the facts.

C. Cybercrime Prevention Act (R.A. 10175)

If threats or distribution are committed through ICT (social media, messaging apps, email, cloud), the underlying crimes (e.g., grave threats, voyeurism, coercion) are penalized one degree higher.
Grants search, seizure, and preservation tools for e-evidence; establishes specialized cybercrime courts; and provides for extraterritorial jurisdiction in defined situations (e.g., Filipino victim, or acts producing substantial effect in the Philippines).

D. Safe Spaces Act (R.A. 11313) – Gender-Based Online Sexual Harassment

Penalizes gender-based online sexual harassment, including threats to publish intimate content; doxxing; repeated unwanted sexual comments; and sending indecent materials.
Imposes duties on employers, schools, and online platforms to act on complaints.

E. Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children (R.A. 9262)

When the offender is a current/former spouse, partner, dating partner, or one with whom the victim has a common child, threats to leak intimate images can constitute psychological violence or economic abuse, even if committed online or by text/app.
Enables protection orders (see §4) and criminal prosecution.

F. Child-protection laws (if the victim is a minor)

Anti-Child Pornography Act (R.A. 9775) and the OSAEC Law (R.A. 11930) cover producing, possessing, distributing, or threatening to distribute sexualized images of minors (under 18), including grooming and livestream abuse.
Strict penalties and mandatory reporting; ISPs and platforms have blocking and preservation obligations.

G. Data Privacy Act (R.A. 10173)

Unauthorized processing or disclosure of personal and sensitive personal information, including intimate images, can be criminal and administrative.
Useful when the actor is a platform, employer, school, service provider, or a private entity mishandling your data.

3) Civil remedies

You may file a civil action separately or alongside criminal cases to claim damages:

Civil Code Articles 19, 20, 21 (Abuse of Rights, Torts): liability for willful or negligent acts contrary to morals, good customs, or public policy (e.g., threatening to post nudes).
Article 26: protects privacy, dignity, and peace of mind; actionable when one intrudes into privacy or humiliates a person.
Article 32: damages for violations of constitutional rights (privacy, free speech) by public officers—and in some instances by private persons acting with state involvement.
Moral and exemplary damages, plus attorney’s fees, may be awarded.
Injunctions and temporary restraining orders (TROs): to stop threatened publication, compel take-downs, and bar further harassment.

4) Protective orders and urgent relief

VAWC Protection Orders (BPO/TPO/PPO): for intimate partner scenarios; can prohibit contact, harassment, and online threats, and order device/account surrender or distance requirements.
Safe Spaces Act mechanisms: schools and employers must receive complaints, investigate, and impose administrative sanctions; they must protect complainants from retaliation and adopt reporting and take-down protocols.
Writ of Habeas Data (Supreme Court special remedy): available against public officials or private data collectors to compel deletion, rectification, or destruction of unlawfully obtained intimate images and to bar further processing/disclosure. Useful for urgent take-down and preservation orders.
Writ of Amparo: mainly protects life and liberty; rarely used for pure privacy threats, but may be relevant if threats escalate to credible danger.

5) Platform and ecosystem remedies

Immediate reporting to social networks, messaging apps, cloud drives, and porn sites using their non-consensual intimate imagery (NCII) or “revenge porn” reporting channels.
Many platforms support hash-matching to prevent re-uploads once an image is removed.
For minors or child-appearing content, platforms are obligated to report and remove quickly; ISPs may block access.
Notice-and-takedown letters to site operators, web hosts, and domain registrars can be effective, especially when sent by counsel referencing Philippine law and (if applicable) the platform’s own NCII policy.

6) Evidence: preserving and proving your case

Capture the threat: screenshots of chats, posts, profiles (include handles/IDs), and turn on message export where possible.
Preserve metadata: download original files; avoid altering filenames or timestamps; save links and URLs; record date/time (Philippine time).
Chain of custody: send copies (not originals) to law enforcement; keep a simple log of what you collected, when, and how.
Do not pay extortion—this encourages escalation and complicates prosecution.
Medical/psychological documentation: if anxiety, depression, or similar effects occur, professional evaluation supports moral damages and VAWC psychological violence claims.
Witnesses: keep records of anyone who saw the threats or to whom the offender boasted.

7) Where and how to file

PNP Anti-Cybercrime Group (ACG) or NBI Cybercrime Division: for criminal complaints; they can assist with subpoenas to platforms, IP tracing, and digital forensics.
City/Provincial Prosecutor: file a criminal complaint-affidavit with evidence; prosecutors may recommend inquest or filing in court.
Barangay: some disputes (not VAWC and not offenses requiring inquest) may pass through Katarungang Pambarangay; however, cyber-threats coupled with violence, VAWC, or complex crimes are generally not subject to barangay conciliation.
Family Court: VAWC protection orders.
Regional Trial Court (Cybercrime Court): criminal cases under R.A. 10175, injunction/TRO requests, damages suits.
National Privacy Commission (NPC): complaints against entities mishandling your data; seeks compliance orders, fines, and take-downs.

Jurisdiction & venue (practical notes):

For cyber offenses, venue often lies where any element occurred or where the offended party resides (particularly for online harassment and VAWC). Consult counsel for strategic filing.

8) Special scenarios

Consensual “sexting” turned coercion: initial consent to create an image is not consent to distribute it. Subsequent threats can be charged (voyeurism + threats/coercion; Safe Spaces Act; VAWC if intimate partner).
Hidden cameras / spy devices: covered by anti-voyeurism and other laws even if no image is published; threats aggravate liability.
Ex-partners: VAWC often applies (psychological violence), enabling swift protection orders and criminal action alongside cybercrime charges.
Workplace or school: Safe Spaces Act requires policies, committees, confidentiality, and sanctions. You can pursue internal action in parallel with criminal/civil remedies.
Minors: never negotiate with offenders; go straight to law enforcement. Possession of sexualized images of minors is itself a serious offense.
Cross-border offenders: cybercrime units may rely on mutual legal assistance, platform cooperation, and the extraterritorial reach of R.A. 10175 in appropriate cases.

9) Defenses commonly raised (and why they often fail)

“But they sent it to me.” Consent to receive or even to record does not equal consent to publish or reuse.
Public figure / public interest. Privacy in intimate body parts and sexual acts remains protected; “newsworthiness” rarely defeats liability for NCII.
Altered/AI-generated images. If used to threaten, harass, or coerce, liability may still attach (threats, coercion, online sexual harassment, defamation, unfair practices), even if the image is fabricated.

10) Remedies checklist (step-by-step)

Secure safety first. If the threat involves stalking or physical harm, call local police and consider protective orders.
Preserve evidence. Full-screen screenshots, exports, URLs, metadata, and a simple timeline.
Report on-platform. Use NCII/harassment reporting tools; request hash-blocking.
File with authorities. PNP-ACG/NBI-CCD; prepare a complaint-affidavit citing anti-voyeurism, threats/coercion, cybercrime, and (if applicable) VAWC/Safe Spaces.
Seek court relief. Apply for TRO/injunction; consider VAWC protection orders; request orders for preservation and takedown.
Consider a civil suit. Claim moral/exemplary damages under the Civil Code, plus attorney’s fees.
Invoke data-privacy remedies. If an entity mishandled your images, file with the NPC for compliance orders and penalties.
Protect accounts. Change passwords; enable MFA; revoke device sessions; alert contacts not to engage/respond to the offender.

11) Practical advocacy points

Speed matters. Early reporting improves the odds of traceability, preservation, and takedown.
One narrative, multiple bases. It’s common to combine charges: e.g., Anti-Photo/Video Voyeurism + Grave Threats + Cybercrime Act (ICT qualifying circumstance), plus VAWC if applicable.
Psychological impact is real. Document it; it’s relevant to both criminal elements (psychological violence) and damages.
Platform compliance is uneven. Lawyer letters citing violations of privacy, anti-voyeurism, and online harassment policies can accelerate removal.
Avoid paying or negotiating. Payment rarely ends the abuse and can compound extortion.

12) Limitations and timelines (high-level)

Prescription (time limits to file criminal cases) varies by penalty; cyber-qualified offenses generally have longer prescriptive periods than light offenses. File as soon as practicable.
Civil actions for torts typically have multi-year windows but should be pursued promptly, especially when injunctive relief is needed.
Evidence decay (deleted accounts, rotating numbers, ephemeral messages) is common; act quickly to preserve.

13) FAQs

Q: I willingly sent the photo. Do I still have a case? A: Yes. Consent to create or share privately does not authorize public distribution. Threats to publish are independently punishable.

Q: The offender is anonymous. Can I still file? A: Yes. Investigators can issue preservation requests, subpoenas to platforms, and use forensics to identify users.

Q: The image hasn’t been posted yet—only threats. A: Threats are actionable (grave threats/coercion; Safe Spaces Act; VAWC), and courts can issue injunctions to prevent posting.

Q: What if I’m male/LGBTQ+? A: Remedies apply regardless of gender. VAWC is relationship-specific; otherwise, Anti-Voyeurism, Cybercrime Act, Safe Spaces Act, and civil/tort remedies cover all genders.

14) Final notes

You can pursue criminal, civil, administrative, and protective remedies simultaneously.
Craft your case around: (1) non-consent, (2) expectation of privacy, (3) threat or coercion, (4) use of ICT (if online), and (5) relationship context (for VAWC).
Engage counsel where possible—especially for urgent takedowns, multi-platform preservation, and cross-border elements.

This article provides general legal information, not legal advice for your specific situation. If you’re in immediate danger or facing active extortion, contact law enforcement and consider urgent court relief.