LAWS

FOR WOMEN
RA 6725
(April 27, 1989)An Act Strengthening the Prohibition on Discrimination Against Women with Respect to Terms and Conditions
of Employment, Amending for the Purpose Article One Hundred Thirty-Five of the Labor Code, As Amended

RA 6972
(November 23, 1990)An Act Establishing a Day Care Center in Every Barangay Instituting Therein a Total Development and
Protection of Children Program, Appropriating Funds Therefor, and for Other Purposes

RA 7192
(December 11, 1991)An Act Promoting the Integration of Women as Full and Equal Partners of Men in Development and Nation
Building and for Other Purposes

RA 7322
(March 30, 1992)An Act Increasing Maternity Benefits in Favor of Women Workers in the Private Sector, Amending for the
Purpose Section 14-A of Republic Act No. 1161, as Amended and for Other Purposes

RA 7600
(June 17, 1992)An Act Requiring All Government and Private Health Institutions with Obstetrical Services to Adopt Rooming-in
and Breastfeeding Practices and for Other Purposes

RA 7688
(March 3, 1994)An Act Giving Representation to Women in Social Security Commission Amending for the Purpose Section 3(A)
of Republic Act 1161, as Amended

RA 7822
(February 20, 1995)An Act Providing Assistance to Women Engaging in Micro and Cottage Business Enterprises, and for Other
Purposes

RA 8353
(September 30, 1997) this includes marital rapeAn Act Expanding the Definition of the Crime of Rape, Reclassifying the Same
as a Crime Against Persons, Amending for the Purpose Act No. 3815, as Amended, Otherwise Known as the Revised Penal Code,
and for Other Purposes

RA 8369
(October 28, 1997)An Act Establishing Family Courts, granting Them Exclusive Original Jurisdiction Over Child and Family Cases,
Amending Batas Pambansa No. 192, as Amended, Otherwise Known as the Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980, Appropriating
Funds Therefor and for Other Purposes

RA 9262
(March 8, 2004) An Act Defining Violence Against Women and Their Children, Providing Protective Measures for Victims,
Prescribing Penalties Therefor and for Other Purposes

RA 9710
MAGNA CARTE OF WOMEN ACT OF 2009

Page | 1
INDIGENOUS PEOPLE

IPRA
Indigenous People's Rights Act of 1997 (IPRA) (RA 8371) is a legislation that recognize and promote all the rights of Indigenous
Cultural Communities/Indigenous Peoples of the Philippines.
Rights to Ancestral Domain[edit]
Chapter III, section 7 of the Republic Act No. 8371 of 1997 covers the 8 Rights to Ancestral Domain. This chapter focuses on the
identification and protection of the entitlement of the Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICC), and the Indigenous Peoples (IPs)
as the proper owners of their ancestral land. The following rights are listed below:
This was implemented in order to stop the historical injustices experienced by the IPs. Despite the implementation of the law
since the year 1997, the IPs of the Philippines still persistently experience injustices. The IPs are struggling fighting for their
rights because they feel like the government has continued to neglect them.
The main criticism concerning R.A. 8371 is that it is ambiguous. One of the issues it encountered was that it is inconsistent and
conflicting with the Philippines constitution (2).
This has become the case because of the doctrine of jura regalia, which means that "all lands of the public domain belong to
the state" (2). The next problem encountered was that the ancestral domain rights legal characterisation as "private but
communal" differentiated from the Philippines civil law's idea of co-ownership of real property. This meant that areas in
ancestral domains is shared by the members of the community, but that does not mean that they are considered as co-owners
of the said property according to the New Civil Code (2).
Section 57 of chapter VIII of the Republic Act No. 8371 of 1997 which states that:
Natural resources within Ancestral Domains - The ICCs/IPs shall have priority rights in the harvesting, extraction, development
or exploitation of any natural resources within the ancestral domain. A non-member of ICCs/IPs concerned may be allowed to
take part in the development and utilization of the natural resources for a period of not exceeding twenty-five (25) years:
provided, that a formal and written agreement is entered into with the ICCs/IPs concerned or that the community, pursuant to
its own decision making process, has agreed to allow such operation: provided, finally, that the NCIP may exercise visitorial
powers and take appropriate action to safeguard the rights of ICCs/IPs under the same contract (1).

is also viewed as problematic (2) because being given

the right to be prioritised in terms of development, exploitation, extraction, or harvesting of natural resources belonging in
ancestral domains does not necessarily mean that an IP member is given the right of ownership of the said natural resources
(3). Section 57 does not really reject the jura regalia, also known as the Regalian Doctrine or the Doctrine of Discipline
expressed in the 1935, 1973, and 1987 Philippine Constitutions (4). According to the constitutions mentioned, the Regalian
Doctrine expresses that "all lands of the public domain, as well as all natural resources enumerated therein, whether private or
public land, belong to the State." (4). Most argue that the IPRA is flawed because it violates this (4). Instead of protecting the
rights of the IPs, Section 57 strengthens argument that all natural resources found in ancestral domains belong to the State (3).

YOUTH
1. Briefing Paper on the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006 (R.A.9344)
The enactment in 2006 of the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act (also known as Republic Act 9344) was a progressive step
towards a more restorative and child-oriented juvenile justice system. It is in consonance with the United Nations Convention
on the Right of the Child (UN CRC) when promoting the childs reintegration and constructive role in society.

The old and stigmatizing terminologies as youthful offender was changed in accordance with international laws and
guidelines to child in conflict with law(CICL) to avoid labeling which only contributes to the development of a consistent
pattern of undesirable behavior.

Page | 2
RA 9344 acknowledges the fact that most of the CICL have no proof of age by presuming minority until otherwise proven.

The Act says that children 15 years of age and under are exempt from criminal liability and those above 15 (plus one day) and
below 18 years of age are exempt unless they act with discernment -which is defined as the mental capacity to understand the
difference between right and wrong and its consequences. A CICL who is 15 years or younger may be held civilly liable and has
to undergo an intervention program, same as children that are above 15 years and below 18 years and acted without
discernment. Children above 15 and below 18 years old who have committed a crime with discernment punishable with not
more than 12 years of imprisonment shall undergo diversion. Detention should only be considered as a last resort and only for
the shortest appropriate period. It should always be in youth detention homes.

If a child is under 18 years old during the time of commission and found guilty of the crime the judgments will not be
pronouncedyet and the sentence will be suspended but not without limits.

RA 9344 decriminalizes offences, which discriminates only against a child as curfew violations, truancy and parental
disobedience and exempts children from crimes of vagrancy, prostitution, mendicancy and sniffing rugby.

The implementation of the law relies in many aspects on the local government units. They also are mandated to formulate a
Comprehensive Juvenile Intervention Program.

To be in accordance with the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), to which the Republic of the Philippines has acceded
to by signature and ratification, the principles of the best interest of the child (Art 3), non-discrimination (Art 2), the right
to life and maximum survival and development (Art 6) and respect for the childs evolving capacities (Art 5) have to be
followed when setting the age of criminal liability.

Similarly, Rule 4 of the Beijing Rules by the Committee on the Rights of the Child urges that the absolute minimum age should
be 12 years and to further increase it to a higher age level and not to lower it. The Committee argues that there should be a
close relationship between the responsibility for criminal behavior and social rights as marital status and civil majority. It also
recommends not setting a lower level for serious offences than for other crimes.

RA 9344 leads to the conclusion that it is considerable compliant with the CRC if implemented correctly.

2. The Child and Youth Welfare Code

Presidential Decree No. 603 is also known as The Child and Youth Welfare Code. It was enacted for the protection of the rights
of children and the youth.

LABORERS
A. Labor Code of the Philippines
The Labor Code of the Philippines is the legal code governing employment practices and labor relations in the Philippines. It
was enacted on Labor day, May 1, 1974 by President of the Philippines and then-Martial Law dictator Ferdinand Marcos in the
exercise of his then extant legislative powers.
The Labor Code sets the rules for hiring and firing of private employees; the conditions of work including maximum work
hours and overtime; employee benefits such as holiday pay, thirteenth-month pay and retirement pay; and the guidelines in
the organization and membership in labor unions as well as in collective bargaining.

Page | 3
The Labor Code contains several provisions which are beneficial to labor. It prohibits termination of employment of Private
employees except for just or authorized causes as prescribed in Article 282 to 284 of the Code. The right to self-organization of
a union is expressly recognized, as is the right of a union to insist on a closed shop.
Strikes are also authorized for as long as they comply with the strict requirements under the Code, and workers who organize
or participate in illegal strikes may be subject to dismissal. Moreover, Philippine jurisprudence has long applied a rule that any
doubts in the interpretation of law, especially the Labor Code, will be resolved in favor of labor and against management.
awyers Around the World Fighting for Workers Rights

The International Commission for Labor Rights, ICLR, is a 501(c)(3) non-profit that is based in New York, and coordinates the pro
bono work of a global network of lawyers and labor experts committed to advancing workers' rights through legal research,
advocacy, cross-border collaboration, and the cutting-edge use of international and domestic legal mechanisms. ICLR's legal
network also responds to urgent appeals for independent reporting on gross labor rights violations.

The network was founded in 2001 at the request of more than 50 national trade unions and global federations, and the
coordinating secretariat in New York was set up in 2005. The network aspires to be a resource for trade unions and workers
around the world.

Page | 4