G.R. Nos. 136899-904; October 9, 2002
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Ernesto dela Cerna, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Six separate complaints for rape were filed against accused-appellant Ernesto dela Cerna by his daughter, Irene dela Cerna. The rapes were alleged to have occurred on January 15, 1989, December 26, 1993, March 3, 1996, August 25, 1996, February 10, 1997, and March 5, 1997. Irene testified that the sexual abuse began when she was seven years old. She recounted specific instances where her father, taking advantage of her mother’s absence, would call her into a room, undress her, and have carnal knowledge through force and intimidation. She did not shout for help due to fear, as she had witnessed her father’s violence and he had warned her not to tell anyone. The abuse was eventually revealed to friends and reported to the Department of Social Welfare and Development. A medical examination revealed old healed hymenal lacerations. During trial, the defense presented an affidavit of desistance executed by Irene, wherein she stated she was no longer interested in pursuing the cases, had forgiven her father, and claimed her earlier testimony was not of her own free will. She explained on the stand that she signed it out of pity for her mother and siblings who were suffering financially. The trial court convicted accused-appellant of six counts of rape, imposing the death penalty for four counts and reclusion perpetua for two counts.

ISSUE

The main issue is whether the affidavit of desistance executed by the victim creates reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the accused-appellant for the crime of rape.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalties and damages. The affidavit of desistance was found to have no persuasive value and did not create reasonable doubt. The Court noted that such affidavits are unreliable, especially when executed as an afterthought. A scrutiny of the affidavit revealed that the victim never retracted her allegation of rape; she merely stated she had forgiven her father and wanted family harmony. Her explanation for signing it—financial hardship faced by her family—was consistent with her earlier firm resolve to have her father punished. The Court found her testimony credible, straightforward, and consistent. However, the Court reduced the penalty from death to reclusion perpetua for all six counts because the prosecution failed to satisfactorily prove the victim’s minority at the time of the rapes alleged in four informations, which was necessary to impose the death penalty. The Court modified the award of damages, ordering accused-appellant to pay, for each count of rape: P50,000 as civil indemnity, P50,000 as moral damages, and P25,000 as exemplary damages.