(Prescription periods, when they start running, how they’re interrupted, and how the rules differ across criminal, administrative, labor, and civil routes.)

1) Why “statute of limitations” is tricky in Philippine sexual-harassment cases

In the Philippines, “sexual harassment” is not just one offense with one deadline. The prescriptive period depends on what law the conduct falls under and what case you file:

Criminal cases (filed with the prosecutor; may lead to jail/fines)
Administrative cases (workplace/school/government discipline; may lead to dismissal/suspension)
Labor cases (NLRC/DOLE processes; may award reinstatement/backwages, etc.)
Civil cases (damages; protection of rights)

A single incident may support multiple actions at once, each with its own time limit.

2) The main Philippine laws that come up—and how prescription is determined

A. Workplace/Education sexual harassment (traditional “power-based” harassment)

RA 7877 (Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995) This generally covers harassment in a work, education, or training environment when there is authority, influence, or moral ascendancy (e.g., supervisor–employee, teacher–student), typically involving demanding/soliciting sexual favor or conduct tied to employment/grades/training benefits or creating an intimidating/hostile environment.
RA 11313 (Safe Spaces Act) This broadened the framework and also addresses gender-based sexual harassment in workplaces and educational institutions (not limited to the classic “demand for sexual favor” scenario), as well as in public spaces and online.

Key point for time limits: These laws are special laws (not in the Revised Penal Code), so their criminal prescription is usually governed by Act No. 3326, unless the special law itself provides a different rule.

B. Public spaces and online harassment

RA 11313 (Safe Spaces Act) covers gender-based sexual harassment in:

Streets and public spaces
Public utility vehicles (PUVs)
Online spaces (gender-based online sexual harassment)
Workplaces and educational/training institutions (as above)

Again, for criminal timing rules, you generally look to Act No. 3326, with the exact prescriptive period depending on the penalty for the specific offense level.

C. Conduct prosecuted under the Revised Penal Code (RPC), not labeled “sexual harassment,” but often related

Depending on the facts, some acts are filed under the RPC, such as:

Acts of lasciviousness
Grave coercion / unjust vexation (older charging patterns; current practice may vary)
Slandering by deed, libel/cyberlibel in some cases involving humiliating acts/posts (with cybercrime overlays)
Other related offenses depending on circumstances

Key point for time limits: If the charge is under the RPC, prescription is governed by the RPC’s own rules (not Act 3326).

3) Criminal prescription under special laws: Act No. 3326 (the usual rule for RA 7877 and RA 11313)

A. The basic prescriptive periods (Act 3326)

For offenses punished by special laws, prescription is commonly summarized this way (based on the maximum penalty prescribed):

12 years if punishable by imprisonment more than 6 years
8 years if punishable by imprisonment more than 1 year up to 6 years
5 years if punishable by imprisonment more than 1 month up to 1 year
1 year if punishable by imprisonment 1 month or less, or fine only (this can be fact-sensitive, because penalty structures vary)

B. When the prescriptive period starts to run (Act 3326)

General rule: from the day the offense is committed.

If the offense was not known at the time of commission, prescription may run from the day of discovery and the institution of proceedings can affect the computation. In practice, lawyers analyze:

when the act occurred,
when it was discovered,
and when a complaint was filed that can interrupt prescription.

C. Interruption / tolling concepts (Act 3326)

Typically, prescription may be affected by:

Filing a complaint (the “right” kind of filing in the “right” forum matters in some contexts)
The accused being outside the Philippines (which can suspend running in certain analyses)
Other procedural steps depending on the case path

Because interruption rules can turn on technical details (e.g., where and how the complaint was filed), it’s common to treat earliest filing date as strategically important.

4) Criminal prescription under RA 7877 (Anti-Sexual Harassment Act): a practical way to think about it

RA 7877’s penalty is commonly described as up to 6 months imprisonment and/or a fine (the statute sets ranges). If the maximum imprisonment is up to 6 months, that typically places it in the “more than 1 month up to 1 year” bracket under Act 3326 → often treated as 5 years criminal prescription.

Practical implication: Many RA 7877 criminal complaints are analyzed with a 5-year prescriptive period in mind, counted from the relevant start point under Act 3326 (often the act date; sometimes discovery issues are argued).

5) Criminal prescription under the Safe Spaces Act (RA 11313): you must match the exact offense and penalty level

RA 11313 includes multiple categories (public spaces, PUVs, online, workplace/school), and penalties can vary significantly by:

the specific act (catcalling vs. stalking vs. threats vs. online dissemination, etc.)
repetition or escalation
aggravating circumstances in the law/IRR framework

Therefore: The prescriptive period under Act 3326 could be 1 year, 5 years, 8 years, or 12 years, depending on the maximum penalty for the specific charge.

Practical implication: Two “Safe Spaces” complaints may look similar socially, but legally fall into different penalty brackets and therefore different prescription timelines.

6) Criminal prescription under the Revised Penal Code: the Article 90 framework

If the conduct is charged under the RPC, prescription follows the penalty-based periods under the Code (commonly summarized):

20 years for offenses punishable by reclusion temporal (and generally the most serious felonies)
15 years for other afflictive penalties
10 years for offenses punishable by correctional penalties (e.g., prisión correccional range offenses)
5 years for offenses punishable by arresto mayor
2 months for light offenses
1 year for libel (with special handling in practice; cyber-related variants can change strategy)

When it starts running: generally from the day of commission, subject to RPC doctrines on interruption and procedural steps.

7) Administrative prescription (workplace, school, and government): separate clock, separate rules

Even if criminal prescription has run (or you don’t want to file criminally), administrative routes may remain viable, but they also can have deadlines—and the deadlines vary depending on where you file.

A. Private sector workplace (company HR / CODI under RA 7877 & RA 11313 frameworks)

Employers are expected to have internal mechanisms (often a Committee on Decorum and Investigation (CODI) or equivalent).

Some employers impose internal reporting deadlines in company policy (e.g., “report within X days”).
Whether those internal deadlines are enforceable depends on fairness, due process, and consistency with labor standards, and may be contested if used to defeat legitimate complaints.

Practical implication: Even if a company policy has a short “reporting window,” complainants often still explore other venues (DOLE/NLRC/civil/criminal) if internal processes fail.

B. Government employees (Civil Service / Ombudsman tracks)

For public officers/employees, administrative liability often runs through:

Civil Service Commission (CSC) rules (agency discipline under CSC framework) and/or
Office of the Ombudsman (especially if the respondent is a public official and the misconduct is grave)

These systems have their own prescriptive rules that can differ depending on:

the classification of the offense (grave/less grave/light),
whether it is considered continuing,
and the specific procedural framework applicable at the time.

Practical implication: Administrative prescription in government settings is highly technical and can be outcome-determinative, so the safest approach is to document dates and file promptly in the appropriate forum(s).

C. Schools/universities

Educational institutions often have:

student discipline codes,
faculty administrative procedures,
and Safe Spaces-compliant mechanisms.

Deadlines can appear in school codes, but fairness/due process considerations matter, and other remedies may remain even if a school process is delayed.

8) Labor and employment claims: different deadlines from criminal law

If the harassment is work-related, it may support labor claims such as:

constructive dismissal (resignation due to intolerable conditions),
illegal dismissal (if victim is terminated/forced out),
money claims tied to employment consequences,
damages-related theories in certain contexts.

Time limits commonly discussed in labor practice include:

Money claims under the Labor Code are generally subject to a 3-year prescriptive period (counted from accrual).
Certain causes like illegal dismissal/constructive dismissal are often treated with a 4-year prescriptive period in jurisprudential practice (the exact framing depends on the claim and evolving case law).

Practical implication: A person might still have an NLRC/DOLE pathway even when a particular criminal theory is time-barred—or vice versa.

9) Civil actions for damages: another separate clock

A victim may pursue civil remedies such as:

Civil Code damages (e.g., moral, exemplary, nominal damages depending on facts),
quasi-delict (tort-based theory) in some situations,
other civil remedies tied to constitutional and civil rights.

Commonly encountered civil prescription periods include:

4 years for quasi-delict (tort), counted from the day the cause of action accrues
6 years for certain obligations (e.g., oral contracts)
10 years for written contracts (Which one applies depends on the legal theory and the facts.)

Practical implication: Civil options are not a “backup criminal case”; they require fitting the facts into civil causes of action and meeting the right prescriptive period.

10) How to compute deadlines in real life: a checklist

When analyzing limitation periods, the practical workflow is:

Identify all possible legal classifications of the act
- RA 7877? RA 11313? RPC offense? Cyber-related offense?
List every relevant date
- date(s) of incident(s)
- date of discovery (especially for online acts, hidden recordings, anonymous accounts)
- date of last incident (for patterns/series)
- date of resignation/termination (for labor accrual)
Check whether the act is treated as a single incident, a series, or continuing conduct
Determine the maximum penalty for the specific charge (special law → Act 3326 brackets)
Confirm what filings interrupt or affect prescription in your chosen route
File early in the correct venue (or in parallel venues if appropriate), because wrong-forum timing fights are common.

11) “Continuing” or repeated harassment: why it matters for limitations

Many harassment cases involve patterns: repeated messages, repeated unwanted touching, repeated coercive requests, repeated public humiliation. Legal characterization can affect:

whether each incident has its own prescriptive clock,
whether the “last act” anchors computation,
how evidence is evaluated.

Practical implication: Even if older incidents may be time-barred for one route, later incidents can keep a case viable—and older incidents can still matter as context, pattern evidence, or aggravation depending on the forum.

12) Practical (non-legal-advice) steps that help preserve options before time runs

Write down a timeline of incidents with dates, places, witnesses
Preserve evidence: screenshots with metadata, URLs, chat exports, emails, CCTV requests, clinic/psych records if any
Report through channels that create records (HR/CODI, school office, barangay desk where appropriate, PNP Women and Children Protection Desk, prosecutor’s office)
If safety is an issue, prioritize immediate protection and support (trusted contacts, crisis support, workplace adjustments)

13) Key takeaways

There is no single statute of limitations for “sexual harassment” in the Philippines.
RA 7877 and RA 11313 are special laws; criminal prescription is usually analyzed under Act No. 3326, and the prescriptive period depends on the maximum penalty for the specific offense.
If the facts fit an RPC offense, the RPC prescription rules apply instead.
Administrative, labor, and civil actions have separate prescriptive periods and may remain viable even if one route is time-barred.
Because interruption and start-of-count rules can be technical, the earliest correct filing date is often crucial.

14) Important note

This is general legal information in Philippine context and is not a substitute for advice from a qualified lawyer who can apply the correct prescriptive period to the exact charge, penalty, dates, and forum involved. If you share the scenario details (what happened, where, dates, relationship/authority, and whether it’s public/online/workplace/school), a tailored limitation-period map can be outlined across all plausible routes.