JESUS JESU S C. GA GARC RCIA IA vs.TH THE E HO HONO NORA RABL BLE E RA RAY Y AL ALAN AN T. DR DRIL ILON ON,, Presid Pre siding ing Jud Judge, ge, Reg Region iona a Tri Tria a Cou Cour!" r!"Bra Bran#$ n#$ %&, Ba# Ba#oo ood d Ci! Ci!', ', and ROSALIE JAYPE"GARCIA, (or $erse( and in )e$a( o( *inor #$idren, na*e'+ JO"ANN, JOSEPH EDUARD, JESSE ANTHONE, a surna*ed GARCIA G.R. No. &-/0June /1, /2&3
CONCURRING OPINIONS LEONARDO"DE CASTRO, J.+ ISSUE: Constitutionality of RA 9262
WON R.A. NO. 9262 IS DISCRIMINATORY, UNJUST, AND VIOATIV! O" T#! !$UA %ROT!CTION CAUS!. FACTS:
Petitioner Jesus Garcia (husband) appears to have inflicted violence aainst privat pri vatee re respo sponde ndents nts.. Pet Petiti itione onerr ad! ad!itt itted ed hav havin in an aff affair air "i "ith th a ban ban## !anaer. $e callousl% boasted about their se&ual relations to the household help. $is infidelit% e!otionall% "ounded private respondent. 'heir uarrels left her "ith bruises and he!ato!a. Petitioner also unconscionabl% beat up their dauhter Jo*ann "ho! he bla!ed for suealin on hi!. +ll these drove respondent Rosalie Garcia("ife) to despair causin her to atte!pt suicide on ,ece!ber - /001 b % slittin her "rist. Instead of ta#in her to the hospital petitioner left the house. $e never visited her "hen she "as confined for seven () da%s. $e even told his !other*in*la" that respondent should 2ust accept his e&tra!arital affair since he is not cohabitin "ith his para!our and has not sired a child "ith her. 'he private respondent "as deter!ined to separate fro! petitioner. 3ut she "as afraid he "ould ta#e a"a% their children and deprive her of financial support. $e "arned her that if she pursued leal battle she "ould not et a sinle centavo fro! hi!. +fter she confronted hi! of his affair he forbade her to hold office. 'his deprived her of access to full infor!ation about their businesses.
'hus the R'C found reasonable round to believe there "as i!!inent daner of violence aainst respondent and her children and issued a series of 'e!porar% Protection Orders ('PO) orderin petitioner a!on other thins to surrender all his firear!s includin a .455 caliber firear! and a 6alther PP7. %&tition&' ()all&n*&s t)& (onstitutionality of RA 9262 fo' +. a-in* a *&n&'/0as& (lassifi(ation, t)us, 1'oiin* '&&i&s only to 3i&s43o&n an not to )us0ans4&n. 2. #& (lais t)at &&n t)& titl& of t)& la3, 5An A(t D&finin* Viol&n(& A*ainst Wo&n an T)&i' C)il'&n5 is al'&ay s&/is('iinato'y 0&(aus& it &ans iol&n(& 0y &n a*ainst 3o&n. 7. T)& la3 also o&s not in(lu& iol&n(& (oitt& 0y 3o&n a*ainst ()il'&n an ot)&' 3o&n. 8. #& as t)at *&n&' alon& is not &nou*) 0asis to &1'i& t)& )us0an4fat)&' of t)& '&&i&s un&' it 0&(aus& its ao3& 1u'1os& is to (u'0 an 1unis) s1ousal iol&n(&. T)& sai '&&i&s a'& is('iinato'y a*ainst t)& )us0an4al& *&n&'. . T)&'& 0&in* no '&asona0l& iff&'&n(& 0&t3&&n an a0us& )us0an an an a0us& 3if&, t)&equal protection *ua'ant&& is iolat&. Important and Essential Governmental Objectives: 1.
Saf&*ua' #uan Ri*)ts,
2.
!nsu'& :&n&' !;uality an
3.
!1o3&' Wo&n
-.
/. :. ;. 1.
In!erna!iona La4s 3% constitutional !andate the Philippines is co!!itted to ensure that hu!an rihts and funda!ental freedo!s are full% en2o%ed b% ever%one. It "as one of the countries that voted in favor of the Universal ,eclaration of $u!an Rihts (U,$R). In addition the Philippines is a sinator% to !an% United Nations hu!an rihts treaties such as the Convention on the 8li!ination of +ll 9or!s of Racial ,iscri!ination the International Covenant on 8cono!ic Social and Cultural Rihts the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rihts the Convention +ainst 'orture and the Convention on the Rihts of the Child a!on others. UDHR
+s a sinator% to the U,$R the Philippines pleded itself to achieve the pro!otion of universal respect for and observance of hu!an rihts and funda!ental freedo!s #eepin in !ind the standards under the ,eclaration. +!on the standards under the U,$R are the follo"in< Ar!i#e &. +ll hu!an beins are born free and e5ua in dinit% and rihts. 'he% are endo"ed "ith reason and conscience and should act to"ards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. &&&& Ar!i#e -. +ll are eual before the la" and are entitled 4i!$ou! an' dis#ri*ina!ion !o e5ua 6ro!e#!ion o( !$e a4 . +ll are entitled to eual protection aainst an% discri!ination in violation of this ,eclaration and aainst an% incite!ent to such discri!ination. Ar!i#e 7. 8ver%one has the riht to an e((e#!i8e re*ed' b% the co!petent national tribunals for acts violatin the funda!ental rihts ranted hi! b% the constitution or b% la".
•
•
De#ara!ion o( Poi#' in RA /0/ enunciates the purpose of the said la" "hich is to fulfill the overn!ent=s obliation to safeuard the dinit% and hu!an rihts of "o!en and children b% providin effective re!edies aainst do!estic violence or ph%sical ps%choloical and other for!s of abuse perpetuated b% the husband partner or father of the victi!. 'he said la" is also vie"ed "ithin the conte&t of the constitutional !andate to ensure gender e5uai!' "hich is uoted as follo"s< Se#!ion &%. 'he State reconi>es the role of "o!en in nation*buildin and shall ensure the funda!ental eualit% before the la" of "o!en and !en. HE!: "A #$%$ is &OT U&CO&SITUTIO&A'
&. RA /0/ " #o*6ian#e 4i!$ !$e CEDA9
It has been ac#no"leded that ?ender*based violence is a for! of discri!ination that seriousl% inhibits "o!en@s abilit% to en2o% rihts and freedo!s on a basis of eualit% "ith !en. ? R+ 4/A/ can be vie"ed therefore as the Philippines= co!pliance "ith the CEDA9, "hich is co!!itted to
conde!n discri!ination aainst "o!en and directs its !e!bers to underta#e "ithout dela% all appropriate !eans to eli!inate discri!ination aainst "o!en in all for!s both in la" and in practice. CEDA9 7no"n as the International 3ill of Rihts of 6o!en the C8,+6 is the central and !ost co!prehensive docu!ent for the advance!ent of the "elfare of "o!en. 'he C8,+6 in its prea!ble e&plicitl% ac#no"ledes the e&istence of e&tensive discri!ination aainst "o!en and e!phasi>ed that such is a violation of the principles of e5uai!' of rihts and res6e#! (or $u*an digni!'.
/. P$ii66ines o)iga!ion as s!a!e"6ar!' !o CEDA9
'he Philippines is under leal obliation to ensure their develop!ent and advance!ent for the i!prove!ent of their position fro! one of de 2ure as "ell as de facto eualit% "ith !en. 'he C8,+6 oin be%ond the concept of discri!ination used in !an% leal standards and nor!s focuses on discri!ination aainst "o!en "ith the e!phasis that "o!en have suffered and are continuin to suffer fro! various for!s of discri!ination on account of their )ioogi#a se:. 'he overn!ental ob2ectives of protectin hu!an rihts and funda!ental freedo!s "hich includes pro!otin ender eualit% and e!po"erin "o!en as !andated not onl% b% our Cons!i!u!ion but also b% co!!it!ents "e have !ade in the in!erna!iona sphere are undeniabl% i!portant and essential. RA /0/ provides the "idest rane of reliefs for "o!en and children "ho are victi!s of violence "hich are often reported to have been co!!itted not b% straners but b% a father or a husband or a person "ith "ho! the victi! has or had a se&ual or datin relationship.
3. T$e Gender"Based Cassi(i#a!ion in RA /0/ is Su)s!an!ia' Rea!ed !o !$e A#$ie8e*en! o( Go8ern*en!a O);e#!i8es His!ori#a Pers6e#!i8e+
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• •
•
•
+ forein histor% professor noted that< ?fro! the earliest civili>ations on the sub2uation of "o!en in the for! of violence "ere facts of life Judeo*Christian reliious ideasB Gree# philosoph%B and the Co!!on a" eal Code< all ?assu!ed 6a!riar#$' as na!ura B that is !ale do!ination ste!!in fro! the vie" of !ale superiorit%.? -Dth centur% leal e&pert 9iia* Ba#
•
T$e a4 re#ogni=es, 4i!$ 8aid (a#!ua su66or! )ased on s!a!is!i#s !$a! 4o*en and #$idren are !$e *os! 8unera)e 8i#!i*s o( 8ioen#e, and !$ere(ore need ega in!er8en!ion. On !$e o!$er $and, !$ere is a dear!$ o( e*6iri#a )asis !o an#$or a #on#usion !$a! *en need ega 6ro!e#!ion (ro* 8ioen#e 6er6e!ua!ed )' 4o*en.
%. Di((eren! !rea!*en! o( 4o*en and *en )ased on )ioogi#a, so#ia, and #u!ura di((eren#es
•
•
'he persistent and e&istin bioloical social and cultural differences bet"een "o!en and !en prescribe that the% be treated differentl% under particular conditions in order to achieve substantive eualit% for "o!en. 'hus the disadvantaed position of a "o!an as co!pared to a !an reuires the special protection of the la" as leaned fro! the follo"in reco!!endations of the CEDA9 Co!!ittee< 'he Convention reuires that "o!en be iven an eual start and that the% be e!po"ered b% an enablin environ!ent to achieve eualit% of results. It is not enouh to uarantee "o!en treat!ent that is identical to that of !en. Rather bioloical as "ell as sociall% and culturall% constructed differences bet"een "o!en and !en !ust be ta#en into account . Under certain circu!stances non*identical treat!ent of "o!en and !en "ill be reuired in order to address such differences. Pursuit of the oal of substantive eualit% also calls for an effective strate% ai!ed at overco!in under representation of "o!en and a redistribution of resources and po"er bet"een !en and "o!en. 8ualit% of results is the loical corollar% of de facto or substantive eualit%. 'hese results !a% be uantitative andor ualitative in natureB that is "o!en en2o%in their rihts in various fields in fairl% eual nu!bers "ith !en en2o%in the sa!e inco!e levels eualit% in decision*!a#in and political influence and "o!en en2o%in freedo! fro! violence. 'he overn!ent=s co!!it!ent to ensure that the status of a "o!an in all spheres of her life are parallel to that of a !an reuires the adoption and i!ple!entation of a!eliorative !easures such as R+ 4/A/. Unless the "o!an is uaranteed that the violence that she endures in her private affairs "ill not be inored b% the overn!ent "hich is co!!itted to uplift
her to her rihtful place as a hu!an bein then she can neither achieve substantive eualit% nor be e!po"ered. 1. RA /0/ ;us!i(ied under !$e Cons!i!u!ion 'he Constitution abundantl% authori>e Conress or the overn!ent to activel% underta#e a!eliorative action that "ould re!ed% e&istin ineualities and ineuities e&perienced b% "o!en and children brouht about b% %ears of discri!ination. 'he eual protection clause "hen 2u&taposed to this provision provides a stroner !andate for the overn!ent to co!bat such discri!ination. Indeed these provisions order Conress to ?ive hihest priorit% to the enact!ent of !easures that protect and enhance the riht of all the people to hu!an dinit% reduce social econo!ic and political ineualities and re!ove cultural ineuities.?
•
•
RA /0/ is >THE? a*eiora!i8e a#!ion In enactin R.+. 4/A/ Conress has ta#en an a!eliorative action that "ould address the evil effects of the social !odel of patriarch% a pattern that is deepl% e!bedded in the societ%=s subconscious on 9ilipino "o!en and children and elevate their status as hu!an beins on the sa*e e8e as the father or the husband. R.+. 4/A/ ai!s to put a stop to the c%cle of !ale abuses borne of discri!ination aainst "o!en. It is an a!eliorative !easure not a for! of ?reverse discri!ination? aainst. A*eiora!i8e a#!ion ?is not an e&ception to eualit% but an e&pression and attain!ent of de facto eualit% the enuine and substantive eualit% "hich the 9ilipino people the!selves enshrined as a oal of the -4D Constitution.? +!eliorative !easures are necessar% as a redistributive !echanis! in an uneual societ% to achieve substantive eualit%. A*eiora!i8e *easures !o a#$ie8e su)s!an!i8e e5uai!' In the conte&t of "o!en=s rihts su)s!an!i8e e5uai!' has been defined b% the Convention on the 8li!ination of all for!s of ,iscri!ination +ainst 6o!en (C8,+6) as eualit% "hich reuires that "o!en be iven an eual start and that the% be e!po"ered b% an enablin environ!ent to achieve eualit% of results. It is not enouh to uarantee "o!en treat!ent that is identical to that of !en. Rather bioloical as "ell as sociall% and culturall% constructed differences bet"een "o!en and !en !ust be ta#en into
account. Under certain circu!stances non"iden!i#a !rea!*en! of "o!en and !en "ill be reuired in order to address such differences. 6o!en=s strule for eualit% "ith !en has evolved under three !odels< -. @or*a e5uai!' * "o!en and !en are to be rearded and treated as the sa!e. 3ut this !odel does not ta#e into account bioloical and sociall% constructed differences bet"een "o!en and !en. 3% failin to ta#e into account these differences a for!al eualit% approach !a% in fact perpetuate discri!ination and disadvantae. /. Pro!e#!ionis! *ode F this reconi>es differences bet"een "o!en and !en but considers "o!en=s "ea#ness as the rationale for different treat!ent. 'his approach reinforces the inferior status of "o!en and does not address the issue of discri!ination of "o!en on account of their ender. :. Su)s!an!i8e e5uai!' *ode F this assu!es that "o!en are ?not vulnerable b% nature but suffer fro! i!posed disadvantae? and that ?if these i!posed disadvantaes "ere eli!inated there "as no further need for protection.? 'hus the substantive eualit% !odel ives pri!e i!portance to "o!en=s conte&ts realities and e&periences and the outco!es or results of acts and !easures directed at or affectin the! "ith a vie" to eli!inatin the disadvantaes the% e&perience as "o!en.
A. T$e gender")ased #assi(i#a!ion o( RA /0/ does no! 8ioa!e !$e E5ua Pro!e#!ion Cause (application of the substantive eualit% !odel) 'he eual protection clause in our Constitution does not uarantee an absolute prohibition aainst classification. 'he non*identical treat!ent of "o!en and !en under R+ 4/A/ is 2ustified to put the! on eual footin and to ive substance to the polic% and ai! of the state to ensure the eualit% of "o!en and !en in liht of the )ioogi#a, $is!ori#a, so#ia, and #u!ura' endo4ed di((eren#es )e!4een *en and 4o*en. R+ 4/A/ b% affordin special and e&clusive protection to "o!en and children "ho are vulnerable victi!s of do!estic violence undoubtedl% serves the i!portant overn!ental ob2ectives of protectin hu!an rihts insurin ender eualit% and e!po"erin "o!en. 'he ender*based classification and the special re!edies prescribed b% said la" in favor of "o!en and children are substantiall% related in fact essentiall% necessar%
to achieve such ob2ectives. $ence said +ct survives the inter!ediate revie" or !iddle*tier 2udicial scrutin%. 'he ender*based classification therein is therefore no! 8ioa!i8e of the eual protection clause e!bodied in the -4D Constitution. Jus!i#e Brion+ +s traditionall% vie"ed the constitutional provision of eual protection si!pl% reuires that si!ilarl% situated persons be treated in the sa!e "a%. It does not connote identit% of rihts a!on individuals nor does it reuire that ever% person is treated identicall% in all circu!stances. It acts as a safeuard to ensure that State*dra"n distinctions a!on persons are based on reasonable classifications and !ade pursuant to a proper overn!ental purpose. In short statutor% classifications are not unconstitutional "hen sho"n to be reasonable and !ade pursuant to a leiti!ate overn!ent ob2ective.
R.+. No. 4/A/ as a *easure in!ended !o s!reng!$en !$e (a*i' . Conress found that do!estic and other for!s of violence aainst "o!en and children contribute to the failure to unif% and strenthen fa!il% ties thereb% i!pedin the State=s !andate to activel% pro!ote the fa!il%=s total develop!ent. Conress also found as a reai!', !$a! 4o*en and #$idren are *ore sus#e6!i)e !o do*es!i# and o!$er (or*s o( 8ioen#e due to a!on others the pervasive bias and pre2udice aainst "o!en and the stereot%pin of roles "ithin the fa!il% environ!ent that traditionall% e&ist in Philippine societ%. On this basis Conress found it necessar% to reconi>e the substantial distinction "ithin the fa!il% bet"een !en on the one hand and "o!en and children on the other hand. 'his reconition incidentall% is not the first to be !ade in the la"s as our la" on persons and fa!il% under the Civil Code also reconi>e in various "a%s the distinctions bet"een !en and "o!en in the conte&t of the fa!il%.
Jus!i#e Leonen+ It !a% be said that violence in the conte&t of inti!ate relationships should not be seen and encrusted as a ender issueB rather it is a po"er issue.
3% concurrin "ith these state!ents I e&press a hope< that the nor!ative constitutional reuire!ents of hu!an dinit% and funda!ental eualit% can beco!e descriptive realit%. 'he sociall% constructed distinctions bet"een
"o!en and !en that have afflicted us and spa"ned discri!ination and violence should be eradicated sooner. Po4er and in!i*a#' s$oud no! #o" e:is!. 'he inti!ate spaces created b% our hu!an relationships are our safe havens fro! the helter s#elter of this "orld. It is in that space "here "e ro" in the safet% of the special other "ho "e hope "ill be there for our entire lifeti!e. If that is not possible then for such ti!e as "ill be sufficient to create cherished !e!ories enouh to last for eternit%. I concur in the ponencia. +ainst abo!inable acts let this la" ta#e its full course. Jus!i#e A)ad+ R+ 4/A/ is a historic step in the 9ilipino "o!en@s lon strule to be freed fro! a lon*held belief that !en are entitled "hen displeased or !inded to hit their "ives or partners and their children. 'his la" institutionali>es pro!pt co!!unit% response to this violent behavior throuh barana% officials "ho can co!!and the !an to i!!ediatel% desist fro! har!in his ho!e partner and their children. It also establishes do!estic violence as a cri!e not onl% aainst its victi!s but aainst societ% as "ell. No loner is do!estic violence lihtl% dis!issed as a case of !arital dispute that la" enforcers ouht not to et into.
C$ie( Jus!i#e Puno on E:6anded E5ua 6ro!e#!ion and Su)s!an!i8e E5uai!' Chief Justice Re%nato S. Puno espouses that the eual protection clause can no loner be interpreted as onl% a uarantee of for!al eualit% but of substantive eualit%. ?It ouht to be construed in consonance "ith social 2ustice as Ethe heart= particularl% of the -4D Constitutiona transfor!ative covenant in "hich the 9ilipino people areed to enshrine as'**e!ri#a e5uai!' to uplift disadvantaed roups and build a enuinel% ealitarian de!ocrac%.? 'his !eans that the "ea# includin "o!en in relation to !en can be treated "ith a !easure of bias that the% !a% cease to be "ea#. C$ie( Jus!i#e Puno oes on< ?'he 8&panded 8ual Protection Clause anchored on the hu!an rihts rationale is desined as a "eapon aainst the indinit% of discri!ination so that in the 6a!en!' une5ua P$ii66ine so#ie!'
each person !a% be restored to his or her rihtful position as a person "ith eual !oral status.?
