Digest by Alyssa Chrizelle Miclat
Graphics by Elijah Christiane M. Fajardo
Presented with an issue of first impression where no jurisprudence yet exists that will guide the lower courts on the matter, the Supreme Court gave due course to and granted a father’s petition for protection and custody orders against the mother who allegedly committed violence against their child under Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9262 otherwise known as the “Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004”.
FACTS
Petitioner Randy Michael Knutson, an American citizen, married private respondent Rosalina Sibal, a Filipina. In 2011, they lived in the Philippines. But the couple became estranged after petitioner discovered his wife’s extra-marital affairs.
Their minor daughter, Rhuby Sibal Knutson was left under the care of Rosalina but petitioner continued to support them. Petitioner discovered that Rosalina spent weeks in gambling dens and incurred large debts from casinos. Worse, she left Rhuby under the care of strangers.
Rosalina continued with her vices and illicit affairs. She also neglected and mistreated Rhuby. One time, she pointed a knife at Rhuby and threatened to kill her. She even maltreated her own mother in the presence of Rhuby. She also sent petitioner her naked pictures with a message that he would not see her body again.
Petitioner reported the matter to the police but the authorities explained that they cannot assist him in domestic issues. In 2017, petitioner, on behalf of Rhuby, filed against Rosalina a petition under Republic Act No. 9262 for the issuance of Temporary and Permanent Protection Orders before the RTC.
The RTC dismissed Randy’s petition on the ground that remedies under R.A. No. 9262 are not available to the father because he is not a “woman victim of violence.” It cited Ocampo v. Arcaya-Chua in ruling that a protection order cannot be issued in favor of a husband against his wife.
ISSUE
Whether or not a father may apply for protection and custody orders against a mother who allegedly committed violence against their child/children.
RULING
Yes. A father may apply for protection and custody orders against a mother who allegedly committed violence against their child
R.A. No. 9262 criminalizes acts of violence against women and their children perpetrated by women’s intimate partners, i.e., husband; former husband; or any person who has or had sexual or dating relationship with the woman, or with whom the woman has a common child.
However, the Court in Garcia v. Drilon emphasized that the law does not single out the husband or father as the culprit. The statute used the gender-neutral word “person” as the offender that embraces any person of either sex. It is improper to conclude that the law denies a father of these remedies solely because of his gender or that he is not a “woman victim of violence.”
Furthermore, Section 9(b) of R.A. No. 9262 explicitly allows “parents or guardians of the offended party” to file a petition for protection orders. The statute categorically used the word “parents” that pertains to the father and the mother of the woman or child victim. It did not qualify whom between the parents of the victim may apply for protection orders. When the law does not distinguish, the courts must not distinguish.
The petition also finds support from the suppletory application of Section 5, Rule 3 of Rules of Court, “[a] minor or a person alleged to be incompetent, may sue or be sued with the assistance of his father, mother, guardian, or if he has none, a guardian ad litem.” Thus, the father, as a parent, may assist his child, the victim of violence and abuse, in filing the petition.
Contrary to the RTC’s theory, the ruling in Ocampo is inapplicable. In that case, the respondent judge issued a protection order directing the common law wife to stay away from her common law husband’s house and office. Here, petitioner is not asking for a protection order in his favor but on behalf of their minor child.
The Court reiterated that it refuses to be an instrument of injustice and public mischief perpetrated against vulnerable sectors of the society such as children victims of violence.Thus, the petition for certiorari is granted.
THE BARRISTER 