Addendum:

Class legislation discriminating against some and favoring others is prohibited. But
classification on a reasonable basis, and to made arbitrarily or capriciously, is permitted. The
trues governing classification are briefly as follows:

1. the classification must be based on substantial distinctions which make real

differences;
2. it must be germane to the purposes of the law;
3. it must not be limited to existing conditions only, and must apply equally to each
member of the class. (Malcolm, Philippine Constitutional law, 2d ed., page 343.)

When RA 9262 or The Anti-Violence against Women and Children was enacted, it was
questioned before the Supreme Court that, among others, RA 9262 is discriminatory, unjust and
violative of the equal protection clause of the Constitution. However, the Supreme Court held
that there was a valid classification. The SC in its decision held that the unequal power
relationship between women and men; the fact that women are more likely than men to be
victims of violence; and the widespread gender bias and prejudice against women all make for
for real differences justifying classification under the law as it is based on substantial
distinctions.

The distinction between men and women is likewise germane to the purpose of the law which
is to address violence committed against women and children spelled in the Declaration of
Policy where the State values the dignity of women and children and guarantees full respect for
human right as well as recognizes the need to protect the family and its members particularly
women and children, from violence and threats in their personal safety and security.

The application of RA 9262 is also not limited to existing conditions when it was promulgated
but to future conditions as well for as long as the safety and security of women and children are
threatened by violence and abuse. It also applies equally to all women and children who suffer
violence and abuse

(Garcia vs. Drilon, G.R. 179267, June 25, 2013. 699 SCRA 352).

This is not so in the instant case where the so-called “National Day Against Discrimination”
focuses only on a particular class. Moreover, the proposed bill is not germane to the purposes of
law since it does not provide full protection for everyone that values dignity of every human
person and guarantees full respect for human rights.