G.R. No. 239313 . February 15, 2022
CESAR M. CALINGASAN, PETITIONER, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

Petitioner Cesar M. Calingasan was charged with violating Section 5(i) in relation to Section 6(f) of Republic Act No. 9262 (Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004). The Information alleged that from 2004 up to the present in Quezon City, Calingasan, being the husband of AAA, willfully committed an act of economic abuse against AAA and their child BBB, a minor, by abandoning them and leaving them with no material and financial support, causing mental and emotional anguish. Calingasan pleaded not guilty. The parties stipulated that Calingasan and AAA are husband and wife and have a son, BBB.
The prosecution evidence established that Calingasan and AAA were married in 1995 and had a son in 1997. Their marriage was marred by frequent quarrels. In October 1998, Calingasan left the conjugal home, promising financial support from his earnings as a seafarer (US$939/month), but failed to provide any support. AAA lost contact with him and later learned he had migrated to Canada and started a business. AAA, working as a seafarer, solely supported herself and BBB, paying for all expenses, including approximately P500,000 in school fees. When AAA became sick in 2010 and could no longer work, her savings were depleted, and she had to beg from relatives. She contacted Calingasan via email to demand financial help (P160,000/year for support and P6,000/month allowance), but he claimed his business in Canada went bankrupt and he could not help. She presented receipts for various expenses.
The defense interposed denial. Calingasan claimed he supported his family from 1998 to 2005 through bank remittances and door-to-door services. In 2009, he was convicted of sexual assault in British Columbia, Canada, leading to incarceration and loss of employment. Upon release in 2010, he had difficulty finding jobs and became dependent on his family. He informed AAA he could not send money. He asserted he is a Canadian citizen and returned to the Philippines in 2011 for his father’s wake, after which the case was filed and a hold departure order issued. He claimed the case was initiated because AAA wanted to extract money, citing her attempt to get P2,000,000 from his brother and her unpaid installment property in Bataan. His brother, Danilo Calingasan, testified that he offered AAA postdated checks of P7,500/month until BBB’s graduation in exchange for withdrawing the complaint, but she demanded a lump sum of P1,400,000 instead, and later asked him to buy her condominium unit for P300,000.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted Calingasan, sentencing him to an indeterminate penalty of 2 years, 4 months, and 1 day of prision correccional as minimum to 6 years and 1 day of prision mayor as maximum, plus a P100,000 fine and mandatory psychological counseling. The RTC gave full credence to AAA’s testimony and found Calingasan’s claim of financial incapacity uncorroborated. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to 2 years, 4 months, and 1 day of prision correccional as minimum to 9 years and 4 months of prision mayor as maximum.

ISSUE

Whether or not Calingasan is guilty of violating Section 5(i) of R.A. 9262.

RULING

Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the CA Decision with modification, deleting the penalty of imprisonment and imposing only a fine. The Court held that all elements of violation of Section 5(i) of R.A. 9262 were proven beyond reasonable doubt: (1) the offended party is a woman and/or her child; (2) the woman and/or her child has suffered mental or emotional anguish; and (3) the mental or emotional anguish is caused by acts of the offender constituting economic abuse. The Court found that AAA and BBB suffered mental and emotional anguish due to Calingasan’s act of withholding financial support, which constitutes economic abuse under the law. The Court rejected Calingasan’s defense of good faith and financial incapacity, noting his self-serving testimony lacked corroboration and that good faith is immaterial in violations of special laws like R.A. 9262. However, applying the principle of lex mitior, the Court modified the penalty. Since R.A. 9262 was amended by R.A. 11648 (which took effect on July 6, 2022) to impose only a fine for the first offense of economic abuse under Section 5(i), and the amendment is favorable to the accused, it was applied retroactively. Thus, Calingasan was sentenced to pay a fine of P100,000 to P300,000, without imprisonment. The Court also ordered him to pay AAA P160,000 per year as child support from the filing of the Information until BBB reaches the age of majority or becomes emancipated, plus legal interest, and to undergo mandatory psychological counseling.