IN RE: COMMITTEE’S VIEW UNDER ARTICLE 7, PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE

OPTIONAL PROTOCOL IN RESPECT OF COMMUNICATION NO. 18/2008

SUBMITTED BY KAREN TAYAG VERTIDO. (CEDAW/C/46/D/18/2008)

VERTIDO v. THE PHILIPPINES

CEDAW/C/D/18/2008

Facts: Karen Vertido filed rape charges against Jose Bautista Custodio, the president of
the organization she was working for. The case remained at the trial court for eight
years, from 1997 until the judge dismissed the case and acquitted defendant Custodio in
2005. The judge stated that it cannot understand why Vertido did not escape when it
appears that she had ample opportunities to escape her attacker. Vertido sought other
venues for redress. In 2007, Vertido filed a complaint to the committee monitoring the
implementation of the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women
(CEDAW) treaty, under its Optional Protocol. In her complaint, Vertido argued that the
trial court’s decision had no basis in law or fact, but instead was grounded in gender-
based myths and misconceptions about rape and rape victims. Vertido claims that the
court’s actions breached her right to non-discrimination, the right to an effective remedy,
and the freedom from wrongful gender stereotyping, in violation of several articles of the
CEDAW.

CEDAW Committee Decision: The CEDAW Committee held that Vertido’s complaint as
admissible. It also confirmed that the court judge relied on gender-based myths and
stereotypes about rape and rape victims in the decision on Vertido’s case. The
Committee stressed that there should be no assumption in law or practice that a woman
gives her consent where she had not physically resisted unwanted sexual conduct. The
Committee found that in this case, the Philippines (the State) failed to fulfil its obligations
under the CEDAW and violated Vertido’s rights. The Committee recommended that the
State provide Vertido with appropriate compensation, review the definition of rape under
existing law to ensure that lack of consent is an essential element of the crime of rape,
remove any requirement that sexual assault be committed by violence or force, and
require appropriate training for judges, lawyers, and law enforcement officers in
understanding crimes of rape and other sexual offenses. It also made a number of
general recommendations aimed at redressing the systemic nature of many of the
violations. These included taking effective steps to ensure that decisions in sexual
assault cases are impartial and fair and not affected by prejudices or stereotypes.