A five-year gender equality score card for the Philippine Supreme Court under its first woman chief justice: Opportunities seized and missed
On 24 August 2012, the Honourable Maria Lourdes Sereno was appointed Chief Justice of the Philippine Supreme Court, the first woman to hold such position since its establishment in 1901. Several cases involving important women’s issues decided during her term were reviewed in this work, inspired by...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | text |
| Published: |
Animo Repository
2020
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/faculty_research/3684 https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/context/faculty_research/article/4686/type/native/viewcontent/09695958.2019.1646655 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | De La Salle University |
| Summary: | On 24 August 2012, the Honourable Maria Lourdes Sereno was appointed Chief Justice of the Philippine Supreme Court, the first woman to hold such position since its establishment in 1901. Several cases involving important women’s issues decided during her term were reviewed in this work, inspired by the possibility that a young, brilliant and hardworking woman of humble beginnings sitting at the helm could make a difference. Indeed, the Chief Justice manifested commendable grit in registering meaningful dissent in Imbong v. Ochoa, where she championed women’s bodily autonomy, and when she wrote a provocative concurrence in Vinuya v. Romulo, where she gave hope to women who suffered wartime atrocities. However, she missed an opportunity to put the rape shield law into good use in deciding People v. Batuhan and Lacturan. Her concurrence was also disappointing in Garcia v. Drilon, where she favoured rational basis review over intermediate level of scrutiny for gender-based classification, in People v. Jumawan where a conviction for marital rape was based on romantic paternalism, in People v. Palotes where additional compensatory damages were not considered for a rape victim who bore a child, in People v. Tionloc where acquittal was based on rape myths, and in People v. Caoili where the Court refused to call rape by its ugly name. © 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. |
|---|