Garcia
v. Drilon | G.R. No. L-20089 || December 26, 1964 || Perlas-Bernabe,
J. |
Article II, Section 14 of the 1987 Constitution states:
- The
State recognizes the role of women in nation-building, and shall ensure the
fundamental equality before the law of women and men.
Parties of the Case
- Jesus
Garcia as petitioner
- Ray
Drilon, presiding judge of RTC 41 in Bacolod City as public respondent and
Rosalie Garcia as private respondent in behalf of her children of minor age.
RA 9262 – Act Defining Violence Against
Women and Their Children
Historical Facts of the Case
- 93% of the population in the Philippines adhere to
Christianity, however, a big portion of husbands and partners in the
country maltreat their spouses or female-partners and their children
with violence against the spirit of
their professed faith
- The National Commission on the Role of Filipino Women
(NCRFW) reports that for 2002-2003 around 90% of all the reports of forms
of abuse and violence are committed by men as husbands, intimate partners
or live-in partners.
- Aftet 9 years, in 2004, the Congress then passed RA 9262 or
(Violence Against Women and Their Children Law in short).
o
It is a landmark legislation that defines
violence against women and their children (VAWC) and criminalizes such acts of
VAWC whether the women’s intimate partners are their husbands, ex-husbands, or
anyone who has a sexual relationship or with whom the woman has a common child.
o
Barangay officials are expected to issue
protection orders and the courts have the power to compel barangay government
officials, law-enforcement agencies and social services to aid the woman and
her children and respond to their complaints.
- The
case before the Court involves a husband assailing the constitutionality
of RA 9262 for being violative of
the equal protection and due process clauses, and an undue delegation of
judicial power to barangay officials.
Procedural Facts
Pre-suit
- Rosalie Garcia and Jesus Garcia married at 2002; the former was 34 years old while the
latter was 11 years her senior.
- They have 3 children, two of them are 3 years old and one
(17 yrs. old) daughter who was the natural child of Jesus but whom Rosalie
adopted.
- Rosalie described herself as a dutiful and faithful wife
while her husband was known to lose his temper from time to time and was
dominant in the relationship,
demanding absolute obedience from Rosalie and her children.
- This
also took a toll on Rosalie’s law studies and she did not get to see her
friends anymore
- Similarly, Jesus threatened to resort to
violence to anyone who laid eyes on her.
- Things eventually turned out sour as Jesus was discovered having an
affair with a Robinson’s bank manager (Jesus would even brag to their
household help about it) and when Rosalie confronted him about it, he
claimed that he was just “using the woman because of their accounts in the
bank”
o
This led to multiple quarrels and fights on
different occassions that usually left Rosalie emotionally and physically
abused.
§ Rosalie was bruised and incurred hematoma
§ Jesus once hit Rosalie in the lips causing
the latter to bleed
§ Jesus beat her daughter, e.g. hitting her
in the chest and slapping her faced, alleging the said daughter read his
messages with his paramour.
§ When Rosalie wanted to leave Jesus, her
daughter begged that she stayed out of fear that she would be beaten up.
§ Aware of petitioner’s cruelty, one of her
other children, now 6 yrs old, promised to beat up his father when he is old
enough.
- With all the emotional and psychological turmoil, Rosalie
attempted to commit suicide, but was found by her son and rushed to
the hospital, while her husband, the petitioner, did not even bother to
visit or even comfort his wife.
o
It
was established that Rosalie is currently taking anti-depressants and
undergoing therapy.
- Thereafter, Rosalie filed charges before the alleged
paramour
(aforementioned bank manager) of her husband, leading to her husband
packing his things and leaving the family.
- It has been established that Jesus controls 3 corporations
involving deep well construction and is able to garner a salary of P60k
per month on top of his hundreds of thousands of benefits from the
corporation. The household expenses which amounting not less than P200k
are paid by the company through the use of credit cards.
- While Rosalie wants to legally separate from her husband,
she fears that Jesus will take the children and deprive her of financial
support.
RTC Bacolod
- Pvt. Respondent Rosalie Garcia filed before the RTC of
Bacolod City for the issuance of a Temporary Protection Order (TPO)
against her husband Jesus Garcia (herein petitioner) for violating RA
9262,
o claiming that she and her children have
been victims of constant abuse (physical, emotional, psychological, and
economic violence) from Jesus Garcia with threats of deprivation of custody of
her children and of financial support.
All the while, petitioner is alleged to have been committing marital
infidelity.
- RTC ruled in favor of Rosalie and found reasonable ground
to believe that there is imminent danger of violence against Rosalie by
herein petitioner, thus issuing the TPO effective for 30 days.
o
It
ordered Jesus to remove all his belongings in the conjugal dwelling otherwise
police officers will interfere
o
It
granted assistance to Rosalie for visiting the dwelling and provided her and
her children security by police officers
o
Ordered
Jesus to stay away from Rosalie, her children, the household help for around
1000 meters; not to annoy or harass Rosalie
o Jesus to surrender his firearms; PNP to bar
his license for said firearms that are registered with them.
o Jesus to pay financial support and not to
dissolve their conjugal business
o
Jesus
to provide financial and accounting records of all corporations owned by both
parties, under the pain of indirect contempt from the court
o
Jesus
is to post a bond of P5M
- Amended the TPO to include: Rosalie rights to use conjugal
vehicles; Jesus to provide 150k for
monthly support and 50k for rental expenses; Rosalie rights to dwell in
their Paranaque house
- Petitioner Jesus then filed for an Opposition to the Urgent
Ex-Parte Motion for Renewal of TPO assailing that:
o
TPO
did not follow 3 day notice rule
o
Did
not contain notice of hearing.
- Petitioner also requested that TPO be modified to remove:
(a) remove one vehicle and be returned to his corporation and (b) reduce
the bond to a more manageable level of 100k instead, and he later on added
that he get visitation rights to the children.
- Court then renewed the TPO, while compelling Petitioner to
new modifications prayed by Rosalie.
- Rosalie then filed another application for the issuance of
TPO ex parte alleging that Jesus has continously deprived them of
financial support and comply with the conditions set in the TPO, while
committing new acts of harassment against them:
1. Rosalie then points out that Jesus filed a replevin suit
against himself to gain the vehicles (vans) back in behalf of one of the
aforementioned corporation, even if he was not
president anymore of said
§ Replevin suit – a suit to recover
possession of items of Personal Property that was unlawfully taken from
complainant.
§ Said writ of replevin was served by
policemen with long firearms scaring their two youngest children.
2. There were attempts to kidnap their son while being driven to
school, thus traumatizing him from going back to school. Jesus was alleged to
have grabbed their 17-year old daughter and threatened her, leading the charges
being filed on the former for violation of
“Special Protection of Children Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and
Discrimination Act."
3. Rosalie also points out that Jesus instigated the filing of
cases by their household help against Rosalie for kidnapping and illegal
detention.
§ This happened only after Rosalie filed
charges of qualified theft against the household help who she caught to be in
the possession of her personal belongings (it was found in the maid’s bag)
- RTC then ruled in favor of Rosalie and issued a TPO
effective for 30 days; thereafter it was extended to 10 more days and
required that Jesus give a show cause order w/in 5 days giving reason as
to why the TPO should not be renewed, extended or modified.
- Jesus did not comply for the required comment commenting on
pvt. respondent’s motion to extend; he states that doing so is an exercise
in futility.
Court of Appeals
- Petitioner, Jesus Garcia, then filed before the CA a
petition for prohibition praying for injunction, and TRO on the grounds
(1) challenging the constitionality of RA 9262 and (2) validity of the
modified TPO for being an “unwarranted product of an invalid law.”
o
CA
granted the TRO for 60 days against the enforcement of the TPO
o However, it later on dismissed the petition
for failure to raise the constitutional issues and for its direct attack of the
law of RA 9262, seeking to annul the protection orders of the Court.
Case at bar – Supreme Court
- The case before the Court involves a husband assailing the
constitutionality of RA 9262 for being
violative of the equal protection and due process clauses, and an
undue delegation of judicial power to barangay officials.
Issues and Holding
1. Whether the court of appeals committed
serious error in failing to conclude that R.A. 9262 is discriminatory, unjust,
and violative of the equal protection clause. [No]
- In the Senate delibiration of the R.A. 9262 the issue of
equality was already discussed. The Senate believes if we broaden the
scope to include even the men, assuming they can at all be abused by the
women or their spouses, then it would not equalize the already
difficult situation for women…
o
Whether
we like it or not, no matter how empowered the women are, we are not given
equal opportunities especially in the domestic environment where the macho
Filipino man would always feel that he is stronger, more superior to the
Filipino woman.
- Given with such deliberation the court dare not venture
into the real motivations and wisdom of the members of Congress in
limiting the protection against violence and abuse under R.A. 9262 to
women and children only.
o
Congress
has made its choice and it is not the Court’s prerogative to supplant this
judgment. The choice may be perceived as erroneous but even then, the remedy
against it is to seek its amendment or repeal by the legislative. By the
principle of separation of powers, it is the legislative that determines the
necessity, adequacy, wisdom and expediency of any law. Court would only step in
when there is a violation of the Constitution. However, none was sufficiently
shown in this case.
- Plus the Court believes that the guaranty of equal
protection of the laws is not a guaranty of equality in the application of
the laws upon all citizens of the state. It is not, therefore, a
requirement, in order to avoid the constitutional prohibition against
inequality, that every man, woman and child should be affected alike by a
statute. The Constitution does not require that things which are different
in fact be treated in law as though they were the same.
- The court also notes that based from various research from
United Nations and Philippine Commission on Women, there is historical
evidence of a “gender-based violence” where societal norms and traditions
dictate people to think.
PETITION
DISMISSED.
LEONEN , J., concurring:
- Nevertheless, in a future case more deserving of our
attention, we should be open to realities which may challenge the dominant
conception that violence in intimate relationships only happens to women
and children. This may be predominantly true, but even those in marginal
cases deserve fundamental constitutional and statutory protection. We
should be careful that in correcting historical and cultural injustices,
we may typecast all women as victims, stereotype all men as tormentors or
make invisible the possibility that in some intimate relationships, men
may also want to seek succor against acts defined in Section 5 of Republic
Act No. 9262 1 0 in an expeditious manner.
o
Social and cultural expectations on
masculinity and male dominance urge men to keep quiet about being a victim,
adding to the unique experience of male victims of domestic abuse. This leads
to latent depression among boys and men. In a sense, patriarchy while
privileging men also victimizes them.
Comments
Post a Comment