GR 224946; (November, 2021) (Digest)
G.R. No. 224946, November 9, 2021
CHRISTIAN PANTONIAL ACHARON, PETITIONER, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.
FACTS
An Information was filed against petitioner Christian Pantonial Acharon (Christian) for violating Section 5(i) of Republic Act No. 9262 (Anti-Violence Against Women and their Children Act). The accusatory portion alleged that he willfully caused mental or emotional anguish to his wife, AAA, by denying her financial support. The prosecution’s version established that Christian left to work in Brunei shortly after their marriage. He and AAA had borrowed money for his placement fee, with an agreement that he would send monthly payments. Christian sent money irregularly, leaving an unpaid balance, which caused AAA embarrassment and anguish. Evidence was also presented that Christian had a paramour in Brunei, which added to AAA’s emotional distress. The defense claimed Christian faced financial hardships due to a fire and an accident, that AAA told him to stop sending money, and that their communication was intermittent. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted Christian, considering his failure to communicate, having a paramour, and neglect of financial support. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the conviction, ruling that the refusal to give financial support constitutes economic abuse under the law.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in finding Christian guilty of causing psychological or emotional anguish by allegedly failing to financially support AAA and to keep communication lines open.
RULING
The Supreme Court GRANTED the appeal and ACQUITTED Christian. The Court ruled that:
1. Christian’s criminal liability must be adjudged solely based on the allegation in the Information: the denial of financial support. The RTC erred in considering evidence of his having a paramour, as this was not alleged in the charge.
2. The mere failure or inability to provide financial support is not punishable under Section 5(i) of R.A. 9262. The provision penalizes the act of causing mental or emotional anguish through the denial of financial support. The prosecution must prove that the denial was a deliberate, malicious, or abusive act intended to cause psychological suffering, not merely an omission due to financial incapacity or other reasons.
3. The prosecution failed to prove that Christian’s failure to fully pay the loan was a malicious or abusive denial of support intended to inflict emotional anguish. The evidence showed he sent a substantial amount and faced financial setbacks. His failure to pay the full amount, without proof of a malicious intent to cause psychological harm, does not constitute the crime charged.
4. The duty to support under the Family Code is separate from the criminal liability under R.A. 9262. A breach of the civil duty does not automatically amount to the criminal act of violence under the VAWC law, which requires proof of a psychological nexus between the denial and the anguish caused.