I. Introduction

Repeated harassment through text messages, chat applications, social media direct messages, emails, or calls is a common modern form of nuisance, intimidation, and emotional disturbance. In the Philippines, one legal remedy often considered for this kind of conduct is a criminal complaint for Unjust Vexation under the Revised Penal Code.

Unjust vexation is frequently invoked when the conduct is offensive, annoying, disturbing, or oppressive, but does not neatly fit into a more specific crime such as grave threats, light threats, slander by deed, coercion, stalking under a special law, cyber libel, violence against women, or acts covered by the Safe Spaces Act.

In simple terms, unjust vexation punishes conduct that unjustly annoys, irritates, disturbs, or causes distress to another person without lawful justification.

When the harassment is done repeatedly through messages, the legal question becomes: Do the messages merely annoy the recipient, or do they amount to a punishable criminal act? In many cases, repeated unwanted messages may support a complaint for unjust vexation, especially when they are persistent, intrusive, offensive, or intended to disturb the peace of the recipient.

This article discusses the Philippine legal context, elements, examples, evidence, procedure, defenses, penalties, and related legal remedies.

II. Legal Basis of Unjust Vexation

Unjust vexation is punished under Article 287 of the Revised Penal Code, which covers light coercions and other unjust vexations.

The law is broad. It does not provide a precise list of acts that constitute unjust vexation. Because of this, courts look at the facts of each case.

The offense is generally understood as covering acts that cause annoyance, irritation, torment, distress, disturbance, or vexation to another person, without lawful or justifiable reason.

The key idea is not necessarily physical injury or property damage. The wrong lies in the unjust disturbance of another person’s peace, comfort, privacy, or mental tranquility.

III. Meaning of “Vexation”

“Vexation” means annoyance, irritation, distress, or disturbance. In criminal law, unjust vexation covers conduct that is unjust, unreasonable, and intended or naturally likely to annoy or disturb another person.

It is a flexible offense. It can include many forms of misconduct, such as:

repeated unwanted communications;
offensive or insulting messages;
persistent calling or messaging despite being told to stop;
sending disturbing messages at odd hours;
repeatedly contacting someone’s family, friends, or workplace;
creating emotional distress through persistent online harassment;
sending messages meant to embarrass, intimidate, or pressure someone;
non-threatening but oppressive conduct intended to bother another person.

The act does not always need to involve explicit threats. A person can commit unjust vexation even without saying, “I will hurt you,” if the repeated communications are unjustly annoying, disturbing, or oppressive.

IV. Repeated Harassment Messages as Unjust Vexation

Repeated harassment messages may fall under unjust vexation when the sender’s conduct causes unjust annoyance, distress, or disturbance to the recipient.

Examples may include:

Repeated unwanted text messages after being told to stop

A person repeatedly sends messages to another despite clear requests to stop. The messages may not contain threats, but their persistence causes stress, fear, or disturbance.
Repeated insulting or degrading messages

A person sends messages attacking another’s character, appearance, family, work, relationship, or personal life. Depending on the content, this may be unjust vexation, cyber libel, gender-based harassment, or another offense.
Persistent romantic or sexual messages

A person repeatedly sends unwanted romantic, sexual, or suggestive messages. Depending on the facts, this may be unjust vexation, gender-based sexual harassment under the Safe Spaces Act, or a related offense.
Repeated calls and messages at inconvenient hours

Continuous calls or messages late at night or during work hours may constitute unjust vexation when they disturb peace and privacy without lawful reason.
Harassment through multiple accounts

Blocking the sender does not always end the problem. If the sender creates new numbers or social media accounts to continue messaging, the persistence may strengthen a complaint.
Messages sent to pressure, shame, or emotionally manipulate

Repeated messages designed to force a person to respond, reconcile, pay, apologize, withdraw a complaint, or do something against their will may constitute unjust vexation or possibly coercion, threats, or another offense.
Group chat or public harassment

If the messages are sent publicly or in a group chat, the case may involve unjust vexation, cyber libel, oral defamation, intriguing against honor, or other offenses depending on the words used and the audience.

V. Elements of Unjust Vexation

Philippine jurisprudence generally treats unjust vexation as a broad offense. While the exact formulation may vary, the following points are usually important:

1. There is an act committed by the accused

There must be a positive act, conduct, or behavior. In harassment-message cases, the act may consist of sending texts, chats, emails, voice notes, images, calls, or repeated contact attempts.

2. The act causes annoyance, irritation, torment, distress, or disturbance

The recipient must show that the conduct disturbed their peace, privacy, emotional comfort, or mental tranquility. The annoyance does not need to rise to the level of physical harm.

3. The act is unjust, unreasonable, or without lawful justification

Not every annoying message is criminal. The conduct must be unjust. For example, a legitimate demand for payment, a lawful notice, or a single civil disagreement may not automatically be unjust vexation. But repeated, abusive, insulting, excessive, or malicious messaging may become punishable.

4. The act does not necessarily fall under a more specific crime

Unjust vexation is often used when the conduct is wrongful but does not squarely fit a more specific offense. However, if the messages contain threats, sexual harassment, defamatory statements, extortion, identity theft, or violence-related conduct, other laws may apply.

VI. Is Intent Required?

Unjust vexation generally focuses on the effect of the act and whether the act was unjust. However, intent may still matter.

The complainant does not always need to prove a highly specific criminal intent such as intent to injure. It may be enough to show that the accused deliberately engaged in conduct that naturally and unjustly caused annoyance or distress.

For repeated harassment messages, intent may be inferred from circumstances such as:

the number of messages sent;
the timing of the messages;
the tone and content;
whether the recipient told the sender to stop;
whether the sender continued after being blocked;
whether new accounts or numbers were used;
whether the sender contacted the recipient’s relatives, friends, or employer;
whether the messages were meant to shame, pressure, provoke, or frighten.

A clear “stop messaging me” notice is useful evidence because continued messaging after that point may show persistence, malice, or lack of lawful justification.

VII. One Message vs. Repeated Messages

A single message can theoretically be unjust vexation if it is sufficiently offensive, disturbing, or oppressive. However, repeated messages usually make the case stronger because repetition shows persistence and a pattern of harassment.

The more repetitive and intrusive the conduct, the easier it may be to prove that the sender was not merely communicating but was unjustly disturbing the recipient.

Relevant factors include:

frequency of messages;
duration of the harassment;
number of platforms used;
whether messages were sent at night or during work;
whether the sender used multiple accounts;
whether the sender ignored warnings to stop;
whether the messages affected the recipient’s sleep, work, studies, relationships, or safety.

VIII. The Importance of Context

The same message may be harmless in one context and vexatious in another.

For example, “Please call me” may be ordinary if sent once. But if sent 200 times in one night after the sender was told to stop, it may become harassment.

Likewise, a demand to pay a debt may be lawful when made properly. But if the person sends abusive messages every hour, contacts the debtor’s family, threatens public humiliation, or uses degrading language, the conduct may become criminal or otherwise actionable.

The surrounding facts matter.

Courts and prosecutors may consider:

the relationship between the parties;
prior conflict or history of abuse;
whether there was a legitimate reason to communicate;
whether the messages were excessive;
whether the recipient clearly withdrew consent to further communication;
the emotional and practical impact on the recipient;
whether the sender’s conduct served any lawful purpose.

IX. Cyber or Electronic Dimension

Unjust vexation under the Revised Penal Code may apply even when the acts are done through digital means, such as:

SMS;
Facebook Messenger;
Instagram direct messages;
TikTok messages;
Viber;
WhatsApp;
Telegram;
email;
online forums;
gaming chat;
repeated missed calls;
voice messages;
anonymous or dummy accounts.

When a crime under the Revised Penal Code is committed through information and communications technology, the Cybercrime Prevention Act may become relevant. In some situations, use of ICT may affect how the offense is treated, filed, investigated, or penalized.

However, legal characterization can be technical. Not every annoying online message automatically becomes a cybercrime. The content, manner, and applicable statute must be examined.

X. Related Offenses and Laws

Unjust vexation is not the only possible remedy. Repeated harassment messages may also involve other crimes or special laws depending on the facts.

1. Grave Threats or Light Threats

If the messages contain threats to kill, injure, expose secrets, damage property, or commit a wrong, the case may involve grave threats or light threats, not merely unjust vexation.

Examples:

“I will hurt you.”
“I know where you live.”
“You will regret this.”
“I will destroy your car.”
“I will post your private photos.”

Threat cases are generally more serious than unjust vexation.

2. Coercion

If the messages are intended to force the recipient to do something against their will, such as meet, pay, apologize, withdraw a complaint, return to a relationship, or resign from work, the case may involve coercion.

3. Cyber Libel

If the messages contain defamatory imputations and are published or communicated to third persons through online means, the case may involve cyber libel.

Private one-on-one messages usually raise different issues from public posts or group messages. Libel generally requires publication to someone other than the person defamed.

4. Slander by Deed or Oral Defamation

If the harassment includes spoken insults, public shaming, or humiliating acts outside digital messaging, oral defamation or slander by deed may be considered.

5. Safe Spaces Act

The Safe Spaces Act penalizes certain forms of gender-based sexual harassment in streets, public spaces, online spaces, workplaces, educational institutions, and similar settings.

Repeated unwanted sexual comments, misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic, or sexist messages may fall under this law, depending on the facts.

Online sexual harassment, rape threats, unwanted sexual remarks, and similar gender-based conduct may be more properly addressed under the Safe Spaces Act than under ordinary unjust vexation.

6. Violence Against Women and Their Children Act

If the complainant is a woman and the sender is a spouse, former spouse, person with whom she has or had a sexual or dating relationship, or person with whom she has a common child, repeated harassment messages may fall under Republic Act No. 9262, the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act.

Psychological violence under this law may include repeated verbal and emotional abuse, harassment, intimidation, stalking, public ridicule, or controlling behavior.

This remedy can be especially important in cases involving ex-partners, domestic abuse, threats, emotional manipulation, and repeated unwanted contact.

7. Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act

If the messages involve threats to send, publish, or distribute private sexual images or videos, other laws may apply, including laws against photo or video voyeurism, cybercrime, grave threats, coercion, or violence against women.

8. Data Privacy Issues

If the harasser uses, shares, or publishes personal information, phone numbers, addresses, photos, workplace details, or private records without authority, data privacy remedies may be relevant.

9. Civil Action for Damages

Aside from criminal liability, the victim may consider a civil action for damages if the harassment caused emotional distress, reputational harm, loss of income, medical costs, or other injury.

XI. When Unjust Vexation Is the Proper Charge

Unjust vexation is often considered when:

the messages are repeated and unwanted;
the messages are annoying, offensive, or distressing;
there are no direct threats;
there is no clear defamatory publication to third persons;
there is no sexual or gender-based element covered by a special law;
the sender has no lawful reason to continue messaging;
the conduct is oppressive but does not fit a more specific crime.

It is a “catch-all” offense, but that does not mean it should be used carelessly. Prosecutors may dismiss a complaint if the facts are too vague, if the messages are trivial, or if a more appropriate charge exists.

XII. Evidence Needed

Strong evidence is crucial. A complaint based on repeated harassment messages should be supported by clear documentation.

Useful evidence includes:

1. Screenshots of messages

Screenshots should show:

sender’s name, number, username, or account;
date and time;
complete message thread;
profile details if relevant;
message content;
context before and after the harassment.

Avoid cropping too much. Cropped screenshots may be challenged as incomplete or misleading.

2. Screen recordings

A screen recording scrolling through the conversation may help show authenticity and continuity.

3. Exported chat logs

Some platforms allow exporting chat history. This may help preserve metadata and chronology.

4. Phone records and call logs

For repeated calls, missed calls, or unknown-number harassment, call logs are useful.

5. Proof that the number or account belongs to the accused

This is often one of the most important issues.

Evidence may include:

the account profile showing the accused’s photo or name;
prior messages where the sender identifies themselves;
admissions by the accused;
shared contacts;
payment records or transactions linked to the number;
witnesses who recognize the number or account;
screenshots from the accused’s public profile;
phone number used in prior known communications.

6. Proof that the recipient told the sender to stop

A clear message such as “Please stop messaging me” or “Do not contact me again” may be helpful. Continued messaging after such notice can support the claim that the conduct was unjust and intentional.

7. Witnesses

Witnesses may include people who saw the messages, observed the emotional distress, helped block the sender, or received related messages from the harasser.

8. Incident log

The complainant should prepare a timeline showing:

date and time of each incident;
platform used;
summary of message content;
effect on the complainant;
actions taken, such as blocking or reporting.

9. Medical, psychological, or work-related records

If the harassment caused anxiety, sleep loss, panic, work disruption, or medical consultation, records may help prove harm. These are not always required, but they can strengthen the case.

XIII. Preserving Digital Evidence

Victims should preserve evidence carefully.

Recommended steps:

Do not delete the messages.
Take screenshots showing dates and sender details.
Record the screen while opening the conversation.
Save URLs, usernames, phone numbers, and profile links.
Back up evidence to cloud storage or another device.
Keep the original device when possible.
Avoid editing screenshots.
Do not engage in retaliatory insults or threats.
Record when the sender was told to stop.
If the sender deletes messages, preserve notifications, backups, or screenshots taken earlier.

Digital evidence may be challenged, so authenticity matters.

XIV. Where to File a Complaint

A person who receives repeated harassment messages may consider reporting to:

the local police station;
the Women and Children Protection Desk, if applicable;
the barangay, for disputes covered by barangay conciliation;
the prosecutor’s office;
the National Bureau of Investigation Cybercrime Division, for cyber-related cases;
the Philippine National Police Anti-Cybercrime Group, for online harassment;
the platform itself, such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, or email provider.

The proper venue depends on the parties, the location, the nature of the offense, and whether barangay conciliation is required.

XV. Barangay Conciliation

For some minor offenses between individuals in the same city or municipality, barangay conciliation may be required before filing in court or with the prosecutor.

Unjust vexation is generally a light offense, so barangay conciliation may arise if the parties are covered by the Katarungang Pambarangay system.

However, exceptions may apply, such as when:

the parties live in different cities or municipalities;
the offense carries a penalty exceeding the barangay conciliation threshold;
urgent legal action is needed;
the case involves certain special laws;
the complaint involves a public officer in relation to official duties;
the accused is not within the same locality;
the case falls under exceptions recognized by law.

If barangay conciliation applies, the complainant may need a Certificate to File Action before proceeding.

XVI. Filing an Affidavit-Complaint

A typical complaint for unjust vexation may include:

Full name and address of complainant.
Full name and address of respondent, if known.
Relationship between the parties.
Chronological narration of events.
Description of the repeated messages.
Statement that the messages were unwanted.
Statement that the respondent was told to stop, if applicable.
Effect on the complainant.
Explanation of why the conduct was unjust.
Attachments such as screenshots, call logs, recordings, and witness affidavits.

The affidavit should be factual, clear, and organized. Emotional language is understandable, but the stronger affidavit is one that carefully explains what happened, when it happened, how often, and why it caused unjust disturbance.

XVII. Sample Structure of a Complaint Narrative

A complaint may be narrated like this:

“Beginning on or about [date], respondent repeatedly sent me unwanted messages through [platform/number]. Despite my clear instruction on [date] for respondent to stop contacting me, respondent continued sending messages on [dates and times]. The messages were insulting, disturbing, and caused me anxiety and loss of sleep. Respondent had no lawful reason to repeatedly contact me. I felt harassed and disturbed by the repeated messages. Copies of the messages are attached.”

This should be customized to the facts. False statements in an affidavit can create legal consequences.

XVIII. Penalty for Unjust Vexation

Unjust vexation is generally treated as a light offense under Article 287 of the Revised Penal Code. The penalty may involve arresto menor or a fine, depending on the applicable form and circumstances.

Because penalties may be affected by amendments, special laws, or cyber-related provisions, it is important to consult the current text of the law and applicable rules before filing.

Even if the penalty is relatively light, a criminal complaint may still be serious because it creates a formal record, requires legal proceedings, and may affect the accused’s reputation, employment, or other matters.

XIX. Prescription Period

Light offenses generally have short prescriptive periods. This means the complainant should act promptly. Delay may result in the offense prescribing, preventing prosecution.

For repeated harassment, the computation may depend on the dates of the acts and whether each message is treated separately or as part of a continuing pattern. Because prescription can be technical, it is best to seek legal advice as soon as possible.

XX. Common Defenses

A respondent accused of unjust vexation may raise several defenses.

1. The messages were legitimate

The respondent may claim there was a lawful reason to communicate, such as collecting a debt, discussing a child, coordinating work, or sending necessary notices.

2. The messages were not excessive

The respondent may argue that the number, timing, or tone of the messages was not enough to be criminal.

3. The complainant consented to communication

If the parties were actively communicating, the respondent may claim the messages were part of a mutual exchange. This defense becomes weaker if the complainant clearly told the sender to stop.

4. The accused was not the sender

Identity is a common issue in online harassment cases. The accused may deny owning the number or account.

5. The messages were misinterpreted

The respondent may claim the messages were jokes, ordinary conversation, or taken out of context.

6. The complaint is retaliatory

The respondent may argue that the case was filed due to a personal grudge, breakup, business dispute, employment dispute, or family conflict.

7. A more specific offense applies

Sometimes the respondent may argue that the complaint for unjust vexation is improper because the facts, if true, belong to a different offense. This may not always defeat the case, but it can affect how prosecutors evaluate it.

XXI. Practical Factors Prosecutors May Consider

In deciding whether to proceed, authorities may consider:

Are the messages clearly attributable to the respondent?
How many messages were sent?
Over what period?
Were they sent after the complainant told the sender to stop?
Were the messages insulting, threatening, sexual, humiliating, or manipulative?
Did the respondent use multiple accounts or numbers?
Did the harassment affect the complainant’s peace, work, sleep, or safety?
Is there a lawful reason for the messages?
Is another offense more appropriate?
Is the complaint supported by complete screenshots or reliable digital evidence?

The stronger cases usually involve persistence, clear unwanted contact, and evidence that the respondent ignored boundaries.

XXII. Difference Between Annoyance and Criminal Vexation

Not every annoying message is a crime.

Examples that may be insufficient by themselves:

a single rude message;
one emotional message during an argument;
a lawful demand letter;
ordinary follow-up about a debt or obligation;
a message sent by mistake;
a civil disagreement;
communication necessary for co-parenting or work.

Examples more likely to support unjust vexation:

dozens of unwanted messages after being told to stop;
repeated insults over several days or weeks;
late-night repeated calls meant to disturb sleep;
using new accounts after being blocked;
harassing the recipient’s family or workplace;
messages clearly intended to embarrass, pressure, or torment;
persistent unwanted contact without lawful purpose.

The distinction is often factual.

XXIII. Relationship to Debt Collection Harassment

Many harassment-message cases arise from debt disputes. A creditor has the right to collect a valid debt, but collection must be lawful and reasonable.

Unjust vexation or other liability may arise if the collector:

sends excessive messages at unreasonable hours;
insults or humiliates the debtor;
threatens harm;
contacts family, friends, coworkers, or employers to shame the debtor;
posts the debtor’s information online;
uses abusive or obscene language;
pretends to be a lawyer, police officer, or court employee;
threatens criminal charges without basis;
uses personal data improperly.

A legitimate debt does not give anyone the right to harass.

XXIV. Relationship to Ex-Partner Harassment

Repeated messages from an ex-partner may be especially serious.

If the parties had a dating, sexual, marital, or common-child relationship, the facts may fall under VAWC if the victim is a woman and the conduct causes psychological violence, emotional distress, intimidation, or harassment.

Examples:

repeated messages begging, threatening, or forcing reconciliation;
threats to expose private information;
insults and degradation;
monitoring or stalking through messages;
contacting family and friends;
threatening self-harm to manipulate the victim;
repeated accusations and verbal abuse;
controlling behavior.

In this context, unjust vexation may be only one possible remedy. VAWC, protection orders, cybercrime remedies, and barangay or court intervention may also be relevant.

XXV. Relationship to Workplace Harassment

If the harassment messages come from a coworker, supervisor, client, or subordinate, the matter may involve both criminal and administrative remedies.

Possible remedies include:

unjust vexation complaint;
Safe Spaces Act complaint;
company grievance procedure;
administrative complaint for workplace misconduct;
labor complaint, depending on the facts;
civil action for damages;
cybercrime complaint if applicable.

Employers may have a duty to address harassment in the workplace, especially when the conduct is sexual, discriminatory, threatening, or work-related.

XXVI. Online Sexual Harassment

Unwanted sexual messages should be treated seriously. Depending on the content, repeated sexual harassment messages may involve:

gender-based online sexual harassment;
unjust vexation;
acts of lasciviousness-related conduct if there are physical acts;
cybercrime-related liability;
VAWC, if relationship requirements are present;
child protection laws, if the victim is a minor;
trafficking or exploitation laws, if coercion or sexual exploitation is involved.

Examples of messages that may raise special-law issues:

unsolicited sexual comments;
repeated requests for sexual photos;
threats to release intimate images;
rape threats;
sexist, homophobic, transphobic, or misogynistic abuse;
sending unwanted sexual images;
sexual blackmail.

In such cases, unjust vexation may understate the seriousness of the conduct.

XXVII. If the Victim Is a Minor

If the recipient is a minor, the matter may involve child protection laws, cybercrime laws, sexual exploitation laws, or child abuse laws, depending on the facts.

Repeated messages to a minor, especially sexual, manipulative, threatening, or exploitative messages, should be reported promptly to appropriate authorities. Parents or guardians should preserve evidence and seek assistance from law enforcement, school officials, or child protection authorities.

XXVIII. Protection and Safety Steps

A victim may consider the following practical steps:

Tell the sender clearly to stop, if safe.
Stop engaging after giving a clear boundary.
Preserve all messages and call logs.
Block the sender after preserving evidence.
Report the account to the platform.
Inform trusted family, friends, or workplace security if safety is a concern.
Avoid retaliatory threats or insults.
Consult a lawyer or the Public Attorney’s Office if qualified.
Report to law enforcement if threats, sexual harassment, stalking, or extortion are involved.
Seek a protection order if the case involves domestic or relationship violence.

XXIX. Demand Letter or Cease-and-Desist Letter

Before filing a criminal complaint, some victims send a cease-and-desist letter. This may be useful when the goal is to stop the harassment without immediate prosecution.

A letter may state:

the conduct complained of;
that the messages are unwanted;
demand to stop contacting the recipient;
warning that legal action may follow;
instruction not to contact family, friends, workplace, or associates.

However, if there are threats, violence, sexual exploitation, or danger, immediate reporting may be better than sending a letter.

XXX. Civil, Criminal, and Administrative Remedies Can Coexist

A single pattern of repeated harassment messages may give rise to multiple remedies:

criminal complaint for unjust vexation;
criminal complaint for threats, coercion, cyber libel, or special-law violations;
barangay proceedings;
protection order;
civil action for damages;
workplace administrative complaint;
school disciplinary complaint;
platform reporting;
data privacy complaint.

The proper remedy depends on the facts and the complainant’s goal: stopping the harassment, punishment, protection, damages, workplace discipline, or removal of online content.

XXXI. Common Mistakes by Complainants

Victims should avoid these mistakes:

Deleting messages before saving evidence.
Taking incomplete screenshots.
Failing to show dates, times, or sender identity.
Engaging in mutual insults that weaken the complaint.
Waiting too long before acting.
Filing the wrong charge without considering more appropriate laws.
Failing to prove that the account belongs to the accused.
Posting about the accused publicly and risking counterclaims.
Ignoring threats as “just messages.”
Assuming that blocking alone solves the legal problem.

XXXII. Common Mistakes by Accused Persons

A person accused of harassment should avoid:

Continuing to message the complainant.
Using new accounts after being blocked.
Contacting the complainant’s family or workplace.
Posting about the complainant online.
Deleting evidence in a way that may look suspicious.
Threatening countersuits without basis.
Ignoring summons, barangay notices, or subpoenas.
Admitting facts carelessly in chat.
Trying to pressure the complainant to withdraw.
Treating a “minor” offense as harmless.

The safest course is usually to stop contact and seek legal advice.

XXXIII. Sample Evidence Checklist

A complainant may prepare the following:

Evidence	Purpose
Screenshots of messages	Show content, date, time, sender
Screen recording	Show continuity and authenticity
Call logs	Prove repeated calls
Profile screenshots	Link account to sender
Prior conversations	Establish identity and context
“Stop messaging me” screenshot	Show lack of consent
Witness affidavits	Support effect and authenticity
Incident timeline	Organize repeated acts
Medical or counseling records	Show emotional harm
Barangay blotter or police report	Show prompt reporting

XXXIV. Sample Timeline Format

Date	Time	Platform	Conduct	Effect
Jan. 5	10:30 PM	SMS	Sent 15 messages after being told to stop	Lost sleep
Jan. 6	8:00 AM	Messenger	Sent insults and accusations	Anxiety before work
Jan. 7	11:45 PM	Unknown number	Repeated missed calls	Fear and disturbance
Jan. 8	2:00 PM	Facebook	Messaged complainant’s sibling	Embarrassment and distress

A clear timeline can make the complaint easier to understand.

XXXV. Sample Cease-and-Desist Message

This is a simple example:

Please stop contacting me through text, calls, social media, email, or any other means. Your repeated messages are unwanted and are causing me distress. Do not contact my family, friends, workplace, or associates. If you continue, I will consider taking appropriate legal action.

This should be sent only if safe. In dangerous situations, it may be better to consult counsel or report directly.

XXXVI. Sample Affidavit Paragraph

I am executing this affidavit to complain against [name] for repeatedly sending me unwanted and harassing messages. Beginning [date], respondent sent me numerous messages through [platform/number]. The messages were unwanted, insulting, and disturbing. On [date], I clearly told respondent to stop contacting me, but respondent continued sending messages on [dates]. The repeated messages caused me anxiety, distress, and disturbance of my peace. Respondent had no lawful reason to continue contacting me. Screenshots and records of the messages are attached.

This is only a sample and should be adjusted to the facts.

XXXVII. Practical Assessment: Is There a Case?

A useful way to assess a possible unjust vexation complaint is to ask:

Were the messages unwanted?
Were they repeated?
Did the recipient tell the sender to stop?
Did the sender continue anyway?
Were the messages insulting, disturbing, oppressive, or malicious?
Did they cause distress or disruption?
Is there proof of sender identity?
Is there a lawful reason for the messages?
Is a more specific offense available?
Was the complaint filed promptly?

The stronger the answers to the first seven questions, the stronger the possible complaint.

XXXVIII. Limits of Unjust Vexation

Unjust vexation is useful but limited.

It may not be the best remedy when:

there are serious threats;
the harassment is sexual or gender-based;
the accused is an intimate partner covered by VAWC;
defamatory statements were publicly posted;
private images were threatened or released;
extortion or blackmail is involved;
the victim is a child;
the conduct involves identity theft, hacking, or doxxing;
the facts support a more serious cybercrime.

In these situations, unjust vexation may still be relevant, but it should not be the only legal theory considered.

XXXIX. Conclusion

Repeated harassment messages can amount to unjust vexation in the Philippines when they unjustly annoy, disturb, distress, or torment the recipient without lawful justification. The offense is broad and fact-sensitive. Repetition, persistence after being told to stop, offensive content, late-night disturbance, use of multiple accounts, and emotional impact all strengthen a complaint.

However, unjust vexation is not always the most appropriate remedy. Depending on the content and context of the messages, the case may involve threats, coercion, cyber libel, gender-based online sexual harassment, VAWC, data privacy violations, child protection laws, or civil damages.

For victims, the most important steps are to preserve evidence, document the pattern, avoid retaliation, identify the sender, and act promptly. For accused persons, the most important step is to stop contact immediately and seek legal advice.

Unjust vexation remains an important legal remedy because it protects a person’s peace, privacy, dignity, and emotional security from conduct that may not be physically violent but is nonetheless wrongful, intrusive, and punishable.