Private affairs

By Atty. Eduardo T. Reyes III

Cheating and marital infidelity: these issues have swirled over social media in the past few days.

Claiming that his girlfriend is cheating on her, a man hatched a plan to document his meet-up with his girlfriend from the time he picked her up somewhere until he handed her his gift in a box with matching confetti and all, but inside was a printed paper containing screenshots of conversations detailing the infidelity.

Opinions from lawyers and ordinary netizens are divided.  Many have come to the aid of the alleged “cheating” girlfriend as she was vilified on social media when she “did not commit any crime” because she is not married anyway. But to others, cheating is cheating and should never be condoned.

What if the parties involved in the infidelity were married? Would it make a difference?

Two recent decisions were handed down by the Supreme Court involving marital infidelity.

The first case involved a married man who bore a child with another out of an extramarital affair. Yet, while a case for violation of RA 9262 or Violence Against Women and Children (VAWC) was filed against him, his wife had a change of heart and executed an affidavit of retraction asking that the case be withdrawn.

It was held that “mere marital infidelity does not amount to a violation of RA 9262.” There must be proof of intention to cause “mental and emotional anguish.” Bearing a child with another woman when the accused’s wife herself has condoned the act negates criminal intent to cause such anguish (XXX264870 v. People, G.R. No. 264870, April 21, 2025). Too, an affidavit of retraction in crimes involving private matters like that in a marriage may be considered (XXX264870 v. People, G.R. No. 264870, April 21, 2025).

While in the second case, a law professor had an affair with his law student who also became his client. When he decided to end their dalliance, and even charged her for legal fees for services rendered, she filed a disbarment complaint against him.

The Supreme Court held that there is no immorality on the part of the lawyer who had an affair with his student when the latter admitted that she conspired with him to keep their illicit relationship a secret. So, apart from coming to court with “unclean hands,” the complainant is not the married man’s wife who is the real victim. (Maria Theresa E. Imperial v. Atty. Pastor Marcelo M. Reyes, Jr., A.C. No. 14228, July 15, 2025).

This implies that while marital infidelity is not condoned, still, the relationship between married persons is “private” and if the wife herself who is the real victim chooses to keep silent, then the State should not pursue any action arising merely out of a married person’s infidelity.

Indeed, these two recent decisions of the Supreme Court underline that even the law acknowledges that some matters are private and are meant to remain private.

These cases are timely especially in the age of social media when every bit of human activity is posted on the internet.

As jurisprudence affirms, the right to privacy includes the right of a married person to grieve in silence all hurts and pains borne of marital infidelity.

(The author is the senior partner of ET Reyes III & Associates (ETRIIILaw)– a law firm based in Iloilo City. He is a litigation attorney, a law professor, MCLE lecturer, bar reviewer and a book author. Among the books he authored is Law on Property and Essentials of Land Registration [2024 Edition] which was on the bestseller’s list in online shops for several months. His website is etriiilaw.com).