The Republic Act No.

7877, Otherwise Known as

Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995 in the
Philippines
All forms of sexual harassment in the employment, education and training
environment are declared unlawful as stated in section two of the Republic Act No.
7877, otherwise known as Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995 in the Philippines. For
those convicted of sex crimes, probation with mandated treatment along with some
jail time is a common disposition. The major goal of treatment for sex offenders is the
prevention of sexual offenses in the future.
The request for sexual favor and other forms of erotic propositions are against the law of the land,
especially in the Philippines. Thus, sexual harassment is not allowed under RA 7877, otherwise
known as Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995. Most of us have disagreed with the notions once the
sex offender convicted of the crime that he had committed, he will be prosecuted to the highest
extent of law.
All of us are aware of the consequences once the verdict has been pronounced, passed down or
gaveled by the judge. That Republic Act No. 7877, also known as the Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of
1995, provides criminal sanctions for acts constituting sexual harassment. The law also requires the
employers or the head of the covered institutions to deter the commission of acts of sexual
harassment and to provide for procedures for resolution, settlement or prosecution of acts of sexual
harassment. In Republic Act No. 7877, it is clearly defined and I categorically quote:

(1) In a work-related or employment environment, sexual harassment is committed when:

(a) The sexual favor is made as a condition in the hiring or in the employment, re-employment or
continued employment of said individual, or in granting said individual favorable compensation,
terms of conditions, promotions, or privileges; or the refusal to grant the sexual favor results in
limiting, segregating or classifying the employee which in any way would discriminate, deprive or
diminish employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect said employee;

(b) The above acts would impair the employee's rights or privileges under existing labor laws; or
(c) The above acts would result in an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment for the
employee.

2) In an education or training environment, sexual harassment is committed:
(a) Against one who is under the care, custody or supervision of the offender;
(b) Against one whose education, training, apprenticeship or tutorship is entrusted to the offender;
(c) When the sexual favor is made a condition to the giving of a passing grade, or the granting of
honors and scholarships, or the payment of a stipend, allowance or other benefits, privileges, or
consideration; or
(d) When the sexual advances result in an intimidating, hostile or offensive environment for the
student, trainee or apprentice.

Any person who directs or induces another to commit any act of sexual harassment as herein
defined, or who cooperates in the commission thereof by another without which it would not have
been committed, shall also be held liable under this Act.
All forms of sexual harassment in the employment, education or training environment are declared
unlawful as stated in section 2 of the Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995 in the Philippines. It
affirmed that each person must value the dignity of every individual, enhance the development of
his/her human resources, guarantee full respect for human rights, and uphold the dignity of workers,
employees, applicants for employment, students or those undergoing training, instruction or
education. Towards this end, to reiterate the issue, all forms of sexual harassment in the
employment, education or training environment are hereby declared unlawful. This is what we called
the anti-sexual harassment found in the Republic Act No. 7877 in the Republic of the Philippines.

To animadvert upon the prevailing issue, Section 3 likewise defines sexual harassment as a request
for any forms of sexual favors, accepted or not, from an employer, employee, manager, teacher,
instructor, professor, coach, trainer or other persons who have authority, influence or moral
ascendancy over another. Sexual harassment is committed when such a favor is demanded in return
for employment or promotion, or refusal to grant such a favor results in the impairment of the
employee's rights, privileges or employment opportunities. Like for instance, the issues of gender
inequality are identified perfectly as a major problem in the other country, particularly the Middle
East. One particularly degrading aspect of this is sexual harassment of women on the streets. This
issue came to the forefront in October 2006, when widespread and aggressive sexual harassment of
women transpired in downtown Cairo during the holiday. It said in the reports that a lot of
newspapers examine the efforts of the Egyptian Center for Women's Rights to organize and lead a
successful anti-sexual harassment campaign.

Data and other important documents came from the participant observations of the campaign for
one year, started in November 2006. Findings showed that the organization was successful because
it framed the movement broadly as a safety issue, used innovative protest tactics, and operated
through routine political channels.

Here in the Philippines, the law clearly stated that any person who induces another to commit or
who cooperates in the commission of sexual harassment is also held liable. The employer or the head
of office has the duty to prevent and deter the commission of sexual harassment and to provide
procedures for the investigation, resolution, settlement or prosecution of acts of sexual harassment,
notably through the creation of a Committee on Decorum and Investigation. This does not bar
prosecution in proper courts. The liability of the employer, head of office, educational or training
institution arises when, informed of acts of sexual harassment, no immediate action is taken.

There have been so many cases of sexual harassment in the public schools. Victims are not only
students but also teachers. Some higher education officials are guilty of this. Somebody in the
academe told me about the scenario. She had a friend who was pretty and sexy. When the
superintendent saw her in one of the gatherings of teachers, he asked somebody to get the phone
number of the teacher. Her friend readily gave her number because it was the superintendent who
asked for it. That was a weekend. A few days after that meeting, she received a call from the
superintendent inviting her for dinner. She was told not to bring a chaperone. Sensing something
fishy, she declined the invitation and gave out excuses. Many invitations followed thereafter and as
usual she never accepted any of those propositions. The superintendent, though, did not give up. He
sought the help of the principal. The principal kept on nudging her to accept the invitation even once.
But she was firm in her conviction. The story did not end there. She was given a hard time. When she
could no longer stomach the pressures imposed upon her, she told the principal that if he does not
stop pressuring her, she will file the harassment complaint against him and his boss at the
Ombudsman. He showed the principal a copy of this Republic Act. From then on, the principal and
the superintendent stopped pestering her.
This RA 7877 is very helpful to employees, especially the rank and file. They are helpless if the head
of office victimizes them. For fear of reprisal, some employees give in to the sexual demands of their
bosses. These employees are ignorant of this Republic Act. That's why it is imperative that employees
read the articles in the constitution to know their rights and privileges. They have to know the laws.
It is a misconception that only lawyers or lawmakers should be well-versed of our constitution. Every
citizen has the right to know. As they say, "Ignorance of the law excuses no one."