G.R. No. 262122, October 23, 2023
Rowena B. Plasan, Petitioner, vs. People of the Philippines, Respondent.

FACTS

Petitioner Rowena B. Plasan was charged with violation of Section 10(a) of Republic Act No. 7610 (Special Protection of Children Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act). The Information alleged that on August 2, 2013, she willfully committed emotional abuse upon AAA262122, a 16-year-old, by uttering words in the presence of others implying that AAA was no longer a virgin and had undergone an abortion, causing psychological maltreatment. AAA, upon hearing the remarks, felt ashamed and angry and refrained from leaving her house. Rowena pleaded not guilty and denied the allegations, presenting an alibi that she was at her workplace during the incident, which was corroborated by a co-worker. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted Rowena, sentencing her to imprisonment and ordering her to pay moral damages. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty by applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law. Rowena filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari before the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

1. Whether Rowena may be punished under R.A. No. 7610 for acts that allegedly fall under the Revised Penal Code.
2. Whether Section 10(a) of R.A. No. 7610 requires proof of specific intent to debase, degrade, or demean the intrinsic worth of the child victim.
3. Whether the Court of Appeals correctly applied the penalty.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the petition and AFFIRMED the conviction with MODIFICATION.
1. On the Applicability of R.A. No. 7610: The Court ruled that Rowena may be punished under Section 10(a) of R.A. No. 7610 even if the acts complained of could also fall under the Revised Penal Code. Citing San Juan v. People, the Court clarified that the legislature intended Section 10(a) to encompass acts under Article 59 of P.D. No. 603, whether or not covered by the Revised Penal Code, and to increase penalties for acts committed against children.
2. On the Required Intent: The Court held that the specific intent to debase, degrade, or demean the intrinsic worth of a child is required only when the offense is based on Section 3(b)(2) of R.A. No. 7610, which pertains to acts “by deeds or words which debase, degrade or demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human being.” In this case, the Information alleged violations under Section 10(a) in relation to Section 3(b)(1), which covers “psychological and physical abuse, neglect, cruelty, sexual abuse and emotional maltreatment.” For such acts, the law does not require proof of specific intent; it is sufficient that the acts caused emotional or psychological harm to the child. The prosecution established that Rowena’s public utterances caused AAA to feel ashamed, angry, and unwilling to leave her house, constituting emotional abuse.
3. On the Correct Penalty: The Court modified the penalty imposed by the CA. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law and considering that the prescribed penalty under Section 10(a) is prision mayor in its minimum period (6 years and 1 day to 8 years), the Court set the indeterminate sentence at four years, nine months, and 11 days of prision correccional in its maximum period as minimum, to six years and nine months of prision mayor in its minimum period as maximum. The Court also reduced the moral damages from PHP 25,000.00 to PHP 20,000.00, with interest at 6% per annum from finality until full payment.
DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
Petitioner Rowena B. Plasan is GUILTY of violation of Section 10(a), in relation to Section 3(b)(1) of R.A. No. 7610. She is SENTENCED to suffer imprisonment for a period of four years, nine months, and 11 days as minimum, to six years and nine months as maximum. She is ORDERED to PAY AAA262122 PHP 20,000.00 as moral damages, with interest at 6% per annum from finality until full payment.