G.R. No. 201414. April 18, 2018.
Pedro Perez, Petitioner, vs. People of the Philippines, Respondent.

FACTS

Petitioner Pedro Perez was charged with violating Section 5(b) of Republic Act No. 7610 (the Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act). The Information alleged that on November 7, 1998, in Quezon City, Perez, with lewd design, committed sexual abuse upon AAA, a 12-year-old minor, by inserting his finger into her vagina and mashing her breast against her will. During trial, AAA testified that Perez followed her into a kitchen, kissed her nape, and then committed the acts while telling her to keep silent. She stated it was painful and she was too afraid to fight back effectively. The medico-legal report confirmed a deep healed hymenal laceration and ecchymosis (bruising) on her right breast, which the examining physician stated was consistent with the alleged abuse.
Perez denied the accusation, presenting an alibi that he was elsewhere at the time. He and his witnesses also claimed AAA had a romantic interest in him, suggesting her complaint was fabricated after he did not reciprocate. The Regional Trial Court found Perez guilty beyond reasonable doubt, a decision affirmed by the Court of Appeals. Perez elevated the case to the Supreme Court via a petition for review on certiorari.

ISSUE

Whether the acts committed by Perez constitute child abuse under Section 5(b) of Republic Act No. 7610.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the conviction. The Court explained that for a conviction under Section 5(b) of R.A. 7610, the prosecution must prove: (1) the accused committed an act of sexual abuse; (2) the act was done with lascivious conduct; and (3) the victim is a child below 18 years of age. The law defines “child abuse” to include psychological and physical abuse, neglect, cruelty, sexual abuse, and emotional maltreatment. The acts of inserting a finger into the vagina and mashing the breasts of a 12-year-old girl are unequivocally lascivious conduct constituting sexual abuse.
The Court rejected Perez’s defenses. His alibi was weak and uncorroborated. The claim of a romantic motive was irrelevant and did not disprove the commission of the act, which was credibly and consistently narrated by the minor victim. The medico-legal findings, while noting the injuries could also occur in a consensual context, corroborated AAA’s testimony given the specific details of force and lack of consent she provided. The Court emphasized that the testimony of a child victim, when credible, is sufficient to sustain a conviction. All elements of the crime were thus proven beyond reasonable doubt.