Scribd
Upload
71 views1 page

Escandor vs. Carpio Morales

LABOR LAW

Uploaded by

segismundo.romeojr
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
71 views1 page

Escandor vs. Carpio Morales

LABOR LAW

Uploaded by

segismundo.romeojr
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Case No.

3
ESCANDOR VS. CARPIO MORALES
Cindy Sheila Cobarde-Gamallo was a Contractual Employee of the NEDA Regional
Office No. 7 for the UNICEF-assisted Fifth Country Program for Children. Meanwhile,
Jose Romeo C. Escandor was a public officer and the Regional Director of ENDA
Regional Office No. 7.
Escandor was charged with violating Republic Act No. 7877, otherwise known as the
Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995. Allegedly, he committed several acts of sexual
harassment from July 1999 until November 2003, when Gamallo resigned from her job.
These acts include but are not limited to: touching her without her consent, such as
grabbing her hands or thigh, embracing her and kissing her on the forehead; telling her
that if it were possible, he would have prevented her marriage with her husband; asking
her on dates; sending her sexually suggestive messages; telling her that he was in love
with her; giving her gifts of chocolates, wine, and a bracelet on Christmas; and grabbing
her on a stairway and kissing her on the lips during an office Christmas party in 2002.
In his defense, Escandor testified that he never committed any of the acts that Gamallo
accused him of doing. He asserted that the case was a plan hatched by several
employees to oust him and his wife from the office.
The Sandiganbayan found Escandor guilty of sexual harassment. It gave credence to
Gamallo’s testimony, noting that “there is nothing in the records that would indicate that
Gamallo is dishonest or untruthful.” Escandor was sentenced to six months of
imprisonment, as well as a fine of Php20,000.00. Escandor filed a Motion for
Reconsideration, but his motion was denied by the Sandingbayan, leading to the
creation of this petition.
Issue: Whether Escandor is guilty of sexual harassment under Republic Act No. 7877
(Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995).
Yes, the Court found that Escandor abused his position of power over Gamallo,
satisfying the elements of sexual harassment as defined under Republic Act No. 7877.
According to the Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995, three requirements must be met
before someone can be convicted fo sexual harassment. Firstly, the accused must have
authority, influence, or moral ascendancy over the victim. Secondly, the authority,
influence, or moral ascendancy must be in a work, training, or education-related
environment. Finally, the accused must make a demand, request, or requirement of a
sexual favor from the victim.
This case fulfills all three requirements to convict Escandor for sexual harassment.
Though Escandor was not her immediate superior, he nonetheless had authority over
Gamallo at their workplace. This fulfills the first two requirements. His actions, such as
asking her out on dates and sending her unsolicited text messages alluding to sex,
amounted to a request for sexual favors, fulfilling the third requirement.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy