20 Definitions and Dimensions of Discrimination against women.” It also stressed that stereotyping affects women’ right to fair and just trail and that the judiciary must take caution not to create inflexible standards of what women or girls should be or ---have done when confined with a situation of rape based merely on preconceived notions of what defines a rape victim. The majority determined that the final trial judge had expected certain stereotypical behaviour from the author and formed a negative view of her credibility because she had not behaved accordingly. It went on to say that the trial judge’s decision contained several references to stereotypes about male and female sexuality being more supportive for the credibility of the alleged perpetrator than for the credibility of the victim. Having found violations of articles 2(c), 2(f) and 5(a), the CEDAW Committee called on the Philippines to provide appropriate compensation to Ms. Vertido. 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 and stereotypes. UN Human Rights Committee in the case of X vs. Columbia (on the scope of ‘discrimination’ under ICCPR) “The Prohibition against discrimination under Article 26 (of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) comprises also discrimination based on sexual orientation.” Toonen vs. Australia (discrimination on the basis of SOGI)45 The Committee on Human Rights in the case of Toonen vs. Australia found that adult consensual sexual activity in private is covered by the concept of “privacy”, and that Toonen was affected by the continued existence of the Tasmanian laws, which continuously and directly interfered with his privacy, 45 UN Human Rights Committee decision of Toonen v Australia, Communication No. 488/1992, U.N. Doc CCPR/C/50/D/488/1992 (1994). despite their lack of recent enforcement. The Committee noted that “the criminalization of homosexual practices cannot be considered a reasonable means or proportionate measure to achieve the aim of preventing the spread of AIDS/ HIV,” further noting that “the Australian Government observes that statutes criminalizing homosexual activity tend to impede public health programmes by driving underground many of the people at the risk of infection.” The Committee found that the Sections did not meet the “reasonableness” test in the circumstances of the case, and that they arbitrarily interfered with Toonen’s right under article 17, paragraph 1. As regards the guidance sought by the Australian government as to whether sexual orientation may be considered an “other status” for the purposes of article 26, the Committee found the reference to “sex” in article 26 is to be taken as including sexual orientation. V. Discrimination in Philippine Jurisprudence Stipulation Against Marriage In Zialcita vs. Philippine Airlines, Inc., (20 February 1977),46 a case decided by the Office of the President, the provision in a contract between an airline company and a flight attendant which states that “flight attendant-applicants must be single and that they shall be automatically separated from employment in the event they subsequently get married” was declared as a null and void. It was ruled that the provision is contrary to Art. 136 of the Labor Code which prohibits discrimination merely by reason of marriage and of the protection-to-labor clause in the Constitution. Upholding women’s right to work and the right against discrimination based on marriage, the Supreme Court in the case of PT & T vs. NLRC (23 May 1997)47 likewise decided in favor of an employee who was terminated from work for having concealed the fact that she was married in violation of company policy against hiring married women. In deciding the 46 Case No. RO4-3-398-76. 47 G.R. No. 118978. CHR Gender Ombud Guidelines