VAWC law clarification

Situation:
Wife initiated physical violence to husband, then the latter, in order to "control" the aggression of his wife holds her, but still the wife continued her rampage inflecting pain to her husband. Husband lost his temper and inflicted pain to his wife but still the wife retaliated, and again the husband gave another slap on her face inflicting 'black eye' on her.

Wife filed VAWC to husband. What should be the remedy of husband? Thanks.

Maybe not really remedy... but how could the husband legally answer the case that he exerted "maximum tolerance" not to hurt her while trying to deal with the physical blows of the wife.

As per experience and lesson learned, husband should not have hurt the wife physically and observed maximum tolerance. If husband hasn't hurt the wife, he could have his injuries, if there are, medically checked or undergo trauma test on an authorized "public hospital" near their residence within 72hrs and have a medical certificate. If He wishes to file charges on his violent wife he could file complaint for physical injuries to the nearest police station.

If husband was already been reported as the aggressor of the said violence even though he just defended himself then his best remedy is settlement in the Barangay level where the wife first filed her complaint. He should do all necessary "SUYO" to his wife inorder the complaint will not be elevated to the fiscals level. If not settled, then better save lots of funds for attorneys fees, bail and funds for living outside their house if ever wife filed BPO.

In my opinion, VAWC does not protect the lady. The law is designed to protect the weaker party. From the facts, it does not show expressly that the lady is in a weaker party in fact she is situated in a situation where she could advance her basis in VAWC. She finds refuge in this law as it was in fact he was deceived to be protected as such. Accordingly and in most cases, the Fiscal has the final say if there is a probable cause to file VAWC. I think the Fiscal will dismiss it as there is no showing that there are no abuses present attending to the facts of the case.

Though it is apparent that there is physical injury to the lady. She must have a recourse in law. She must be indemnified or she can file physical injury against the husband.

the law is designed precisely to protect women and their children. that's why the law is titled Anti Violence Against Women and their Children Act. best remedy, have it settled with the brgy level. otherwise, get a good lawyer to answer the complaint filed by your wife.

if you want a free legal representation, go to the PAO office

attyman wrote:the law is designed precisely to protect women and their children. that's why the law is titled Anti Violence Against Women and their Children Act. best remedy, have it settled with the brgy level. otherwise, get a good lawyer to answer the complaint filed by your wife.

I agree.

Kung nafile na po sa Fiscal yan, you have no other choice but to get a lawyer to defend your case.

Thank you very much for your the inputs. Indeed, the Brgy Officials mentioned that such law was intended to protect women just like the labor law to protect the labor sector. As to them, whatever happened they (officials) and the courts (if filed) would still look at the injury caused to the woman and it would be near impossible for he man to prove the "maximum tolerance/self-defense" exerted as it would be his burden to prove that such injury was caused in self defense, specially that at the onset of the fight the husband has still time and capacity to get away from his wife or leave the premises considering his physical advantage.