Spur of the moment

A LAW EACH DAY [KEEPS TROUBLE AWAY] By Jose C. Sison (The Philippine Star) |
Updated November 22, 2017 - 12:00am

Under Republic Act 7610 passed on June 17, 1992, the laying of hands on a person
below 18 years of age or those above 18 but are unable to fully take care of, or protect
themselves because of physical or mental disability or condition, may be liable for the
crime of child abuse pursuant to Section 10 thereof. But is mere laying of hands
considered child abuse? What must be proven in order to render a person laying his
hands on a child liable for child abuse? This is explained in this case of Phil.

Phil is the loving and protective father of Jessica and Abby both still minors, begotten
with his wife Maite. The family is residing at the city in the Bicol Region. Also residing in
the city is Ivan who has two sons Gio and Tony. Apparently, they were not good
neighbors.

One time during a procession in the city, Jessica and Abby were watching by the side of
the street. Participating in the procession was Gio and his older brother Tony. As they
passed by the place of Jessica and Abby, a confrontation ensued among the minors.

According to the prosecution, Jessica threw stones at Gio and called him “sissy” then
Phil confronted Gio and Tony and called them names like “strangers” and “animals.”
Afterwards Phil struck Gio at the back with his hand and slapped him on the face then
proceeded to the brothers’ house and challenged Ivan their father to a fight. But Ivan did
not come out and just brought Gio later to the police station to report the incident
Subsequently Ivan brought his son to a hospital for medical examination showing
contusions in the scapular and zygomatic area.

On the other hand, Phil denied having physically abused or maltreated Gio. He
explained that he only talked to Gio and Tony after Jessica and Abby had told him about
Gio and Tony’s throwing stones at his daughters and about Gio’s burning of Abby’s hair
with the candle which was corroborated by Jessica. He said that he was merely
concerned for the safety of his daughters.

After trial however, the RTC found Phil guilty of child abuse under R.A. 7610 and
sentenced him to imprisonment of six years and one day to eight years. This ruling was
affirmed by the Court of Appeals which however reduced his imprisonment to four years
two months and one day to six years, eight months and one day.

The Supreme Court, on further appeal by Phil, affirmed the findings of facts of the RTC
and the CA that Phil struck Gio at the back with his hand and slapped him on the face.
But the SC said that Phil’s acts do not constitute child abuse pursuant to Section 10 (a)
of R.A. 7610. It has not been established beyond reasonable doubt that his
laying of hands on Gio had been intended to debase the intrinsic worth and
dignity of Gio as a human being or that he thereby intended to humiliate or
embarrass him. His laying of hands on Gio was done on the spur of the
moment and in anger, indicative of his being then overwhelmed by his
fatherly concern for the personal safety of his own minor daughters who
had just suffered harm at the hands of Gio and Tony. With the loss of his
self-control, he lacked that specific intent to debase, degrade or demean
the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human being that is very
essential in the crime of child abuse.

Considering however that Gio suffered physical injury requiring five to seven days
medical attention, Phil is still liable for slight physical injuries with a penalty of one to 30
days imprisonment. But since he committed the crime out of passion and obfuscation
due to loss of reason and self-control that diminishes his exercise of will power, he shall
suffer the penalty of imprisonment for 10 days only and to pay P5,000 moral damages
(Bongalon vs. People, G.R. 169533, March 20, 2013).