THIRD DIVISION
G.R. No. 219715. December 06, 2021
EDWARD CUMIGAD Y DE CASTRO, Petitioner, v. AAA**, Respondent.
D E C I S I O N
LEONEN, J.:
Victims of economic abuse may file a petition for a protection order. Among the reliefs that a court may grant is provision for spousal and child support, which shall be deducted from the offender's salary or income.
This Court resolves a Petition for Review on Certiorari1 assailing the Decision2 and Resolution3 of the Court of Appeals, which affirmed the Regional Trial Court Order granting the Petition for Permanent Protection Order filed by an aggrieved spouse under Republic Act No. 9262, or the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004.
Spouses Edward D. Cumigad (Edward) and AAA were married in 2006 in Taguig City.4 The two had lived a happy married life, or so it seemed.5 A couple of years into their marriage,6 AAA gave birth to their only child, BBB.7chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
However, their marriage quickly soured when AAA accidentally discovered Edward's extramarital affair with his former girlfriend8 in the last quarter of 2008.9 As soon as AAA discovered the illicit affair, Edward abandoned her and their newborn child10 without so much as an explanation,11 even taking their commonly owned Toyota Revo with him and later selling it.12 He never returned.13chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Edward and his paramour cohabited and had two children born in 2010 and 2011.14 Still, Edward continued to provide monthly financial support of P8,500.00 for BBB. This increased to P10,500.00 in 2009.15chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
In 2010, Edward won a Toyota Vios in a raffle draw. A year after, he sold the vehicle.16 Around this time, AAA had been asking Edward for BBB' s educational support, yet Edward ignored this request.17chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
On March 29, 2012, Edward and AAA met to discuss BBB's education. During their meeting, Edward refused to have his name written in the school's information sheet, saying that he would not be able to attend school gatherings anyway.18chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
In April 2012, AAA asked Edward for P61,350.00 to pay for BBB's school tuition fee.19 Edward refused, insisting that the amount was excessive and unreasonable.20chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
AAA knew that her meager monthly salary of P31,500.0021 and the monthly financial support from Edward would not be enough to meet the needs of their growing son who was about to attend school.22 She even had to ask for help from her parents and siblings to maintain her and her son's living conditions.23 Thus, on May 7, 2012, AAA formally demanded from Edward an increase in the amount of financial support for BBB.24chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
AAA believed that Edward would be able to meet her demands since he was a branch manager at Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company, earning a basic monthly salary of P80,000.00 excluding hefty bonuses and allowances. Yet, AAA's demands fell on deaf ears. Edward said that the demand was unreasonable and that the monthly P10,500.00 he gave was more than enough support to sustain BBB's needs.25chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
AAA felt that Edward neglected his obligations as a father. For several years, Edward only saw BBB on two occasions.26 Even on special events such as Christmas or BBB's birthday, Edward neither greeted his child nor sent him gifts.27 Worse, AAA discovered that Edward and his paramour had publicized their relationship on social media. This wounded AAA emotionally, so much so that she had to seek professional help and was diagnosed with dysthymia.28chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
On December 18, 2012, AAA filed before the Regional Trial Court a Petition for Issuance of Permanent Protection Order under Republic Act No. 9262.29 She prayed that Edward be directed to provide sufficient support and account for the sale of the cars.30 She also filed a separate criminal case against Edward for violation of Republic Act No. 9262.31chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
For his part, Edward denied AAA's accusations of infidelity, abandonment, and financial and emotional neglect.32 He alleged that their relationship fell apart due to AAA's immaturity and extreme attachment to her parents.33 Edward described AAA as a temperamental and paranoid woman who had an "obsessive pursuit for material security."34chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Edward asserted that he never neglected his obligations as a father. He said that he would talk to AAA to discuss BBB's welfare and would often ask her if he could visit BBB, but AAA forbade Edward from seeing their son. Despite this, Edward regularly sent financial support. He even procured a medical card and educational plan for BBB.35chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
In a May 15, 2014 Order,36 the Regional Trial Court granted the Petition for Permanent Protection Order:
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
WHEREFORE, the Court orders [Edward] to provide sufficient support to [AAA] and their son, and directs his employer Metrobank to regularly and timely deduct from his earning[s] one third of everything that (the) he receives and to automatically remit the same to [AAA and their son]. Failure to do so shall render [Edward] and employer liable for indirect contempt (Section 11 (h), A.M. No. 04-10-11-SC). [Edward] shall account for the sale of their car which belongs to the community property in accordance with Article 95 of the Family Code. The other issues raised in the Petition shall be resolved in separate proceedings.In granting the Petition, the trial court found Edward guilty of psychological and economic abuse. Aside from failing to rebut the allegation of marital infidelity, Edward deprived his wife and son of the benefits that "should accrue to the absolute community[.]"38chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
So ordered.37 (Citation omitted)
The unequal power relationship between women and men; the fact that women are more likely than men to be victims of violence; and the widespread gender bias and prejudice against women all make for real differences justifying the classification under the law. As Justice McIntyre succinctly states, "the accommodation of differences ... is the essence of true equality."Of course, it is a misguided view to always characterize women as victims. It only reinforces their disadvantaged position and rationalizes the discriminatory notion that women are the weaker sex.79 Portraying women as victims only widens gender inequality as it perpetuates prejudice and bias against them.
....
According to the Philippine Commission on Women (the National Machinery for Gender Equality and Women's Empowerment), violence against women (VAW) is deemed to be closely linked with the unequal power relationship between women and men otherwise known as "genderĀ-based violence". Societal norms and traditions dictate people to think men are the leaders, pursuers, providers, and take on dominant roles in society while women are nurturers, men's companions and supporters, and take on subordinate roles in society. This perception leads to men gaining more power over women. With power comes the need to control to retain that power. And V A W is a form of men's expression of controlling women to retain power.78 (Citations omitted)
The deprivation or denial of sufficient financial support to the woman and her child is an act of violence penalized under Republic Act No. 9262 and is deemed a continuing offense.84chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
- withdrawal of financial support or preventing the victim from engaging in any legitimate profession, occupation, business or activity, except in cases wherein the other spouse/partner objects on valid, serious and moral grounds as defined in Article 73 of the Family Code;
- deprivation or threat of deprivation of financial resources and the right to use and enjoyment of the conjugal, community or property owned in common;
- destroying household property; [and]
- controlling the victim's own money or properties or solely controlling the conjugal money or properties.
(a) Prohibition of the respondent from threatening to commit or committing, personally or through another, any of the acts mentioned in Section 5 of this Act;cralawlawlibraryThe broad scope of reliefs provided in protection orders was devised to give greater protection to victims by curtailing perpetrators' control and access to them. In Garcia:
(b) Prohibition of the respondent from harassing, annoying, telephoning, contacting or otherwise communicating with the petitioner, directly or indirectly;cralawlawlibrary
(c) Removal and exclusion of the respondent from the residence of the petitioner, regardless of ownership of the residence, either temporarily for the purpose of protecting the petitioner, or permanently where no property rights are violated, and, if respondent must remove personal effects from the residence, the court shall direct a law enforcement agent to accompany the respondent to the residence, remain there until respondent has gathered his things and escort respondent from the residence;cralawlawlibrary
(d) Directing the respondent to stay away from petitioner and any designated family or household member at a distance specified by the court, and to stay away from the residence, school, place of employment, or any specified place frequented by the petitioner and any designated family or household member;cralawlawlibrary
(e) Directing lawful possession and use by petitioner of an automobile and other essential personal effects, regardless of ownership, and directing the appropriate law enforcement officer to accompany the petitioner to the residence of the parties to ensure that the petitioner is safely restored to the possession of the automobile and other essential personal effects, or to supervise the petitioner's or respondent's removal of personal belongings;cralawlawlibrary
(f) Granting a temporary or permanent custody of a child/children to the petitioner;cralawlawlibrary
(g) Directing the respondent to provide support to the woman and/or her child if entitled to legal support. Notwithstanding other laws to the contrary, the court shall order an appropriate percentage of the income or salary of the respondent to be withheld regularly by the respondent's employer for the same to be automatically remitted directly to the woman. Failure to remit and/or withhold or any delay in the remittance of support to the woman and/or her child without justifiable cause shall render the respondent or his employer liable for indirect contempt of court;cralawlawlibrary
(h) Prohibition of the respondent from any use or possession of any firearm or deadly weapon and order him to surrender the same to the court for appropriate disposition by the court, including revocation of license and disqualification to apply for any license to use or possess a firearm. If the offender is a law enforcement agent, the court shall order the offender to surrender his firearm and shall direct the appropriate authority to investigate on the offender and take appropriate action on the matter;cralawlawlibrary
(i) Restitution for actual damages caused by the violence inflicted, including, but not limited to, property damage, medical expenses, childcare expenses and loss of income;cralawlawlibrary
(j) Directing the DSWD or any appropriate agency to provide petitioner temporary shelter and other social services that the petitioner may need; and
(k) Provision of such other forms of relief as the court deems necessary to protect and provide for the safety of the petitioner and any designated family or household member, provided petitioner and any designated family or household member consents to such relief. (Emphasis supplied)
The scope of reliefs in protection orders is broadened to ensure that the victim or offended party is afforded all the remedies necessary to curtail access by a perpetrator to the victim. This serves to safeguard the victim from greater risk of violence; to accord the victim and any designated family or household member safety in the family residence, and to prevent the perpetrator from committing acts that jeopardize the employment and support of the victim. It also enables the court to award temporary custody of minor children to protect the children from violence, to prevent their abduction by the perpetrator and to ensure their financial support.100 (Citation omitted)In particular, Section 8(g), which orders a respondent to provide support to the victims, is a support enforcement legislation specifically aimed to address economic abuses against women and children.101 Once entitlement to support is proven, the offender's employer shall be directed to withhold and deduct an appropriate percentage of the offender's income or salary to be remitted directly to the woman.102chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Broadly, the word "salary" means a recompense or consideration made to a person for his pains or industry in another man's business. Whether it be derived from "salarium," or more fancifully from "sal," the pay of the Roman soldier, it carries with it the fundamental idea of compensation for services rendered. Indeed, there is eminent authority for holding that the words "wages" and "salary" are in essence synonymous. "Salary," the etymology of which is the Latin word "salarium," is often used interchangeably with "wage", the etymology of which is the Middle English word "wagen". Both words generally refer to one and the same meaning, that is, a reward or recompense for services performed.110 (Citations omitted)Salary excludes allowances and other benefits granted by the employer. In Equitable Banking Corporation v. Sadac:111chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Salary increases are not akin to allowances or benefits, and cannot be confused with either. The term "allowances" is sometimes used synonymously with "emoluments," as indirect or contingent remuneration, which may or may not be earned, but which is sometimes in the nature of compensation, and sometimes in the nature of reimbursement. Allowances and benefits are granted to the employee apart or separate from, and in addition to the wage or salary.112chanRoblesvirtualLawlibraryOn the other hand, income covers not just salary, but also other sources such as emoluments and honoraria, bonuses, allowances, pensions, retirement pay, and the like.113 Salary is but a component of income. And because Republic Act No. 9262 provides that the support can be obtained from income or salary, we affirm the amount of financial support indicated in the protection order, which includes the petitioner's allowances.
Endnotes:
* Designated additional Member per Special Order No. 2868.
** In line with Amended Administrative Circular No. 83-2015, as mandated by Republic Act No. 9262, the names of offended parties, along with all other personal circumstances that may tend to establish their identities, are made confidential to protect their privacy and dignity.
1 Rollo, pp. 14-30.
2 Id. at 34-43. The April 27, 2015 Decision was penned by Associate Justice Ramon R. Garcia and concurred in by Associate Justices Leoncia R. Dimagiba and Maria Elisa Sempio Diy of the Seventeenth Division, Court of Appeals, Manila.
3 Id. at 46-47. The July 30, 2015 Decision was penned by Associate Justice Ramon R. Garcia and concurred in by Associate Justices Leoncia R. Dimagiba and Maria Elisa Sempio Diy of the Seventeenth Division, Court of Appeals, Manila.
4 Id. at 16.
5 Id. at 80.
6 Id. at 35.
7 Id. at 16.
8 Id. at 35.
9 Id. at 35 and 80.
10 Id. at 35.
11 Id. at 83.
12 Id. at 92.
13 Id. at 83.
14 Id. at 35.
15 Id.
16 Id. at 92.
17 Id. at 35.
18 Id. at 36.
19 Id. at 35.
20 Id. at 19.
21 Id. at 40.
22 Id. at 36.
23 Id. at 87.
24 Id. at 35-36.
25 Id. at 36.
26 Id.
27 Id. at 82.
28 Id. at 36. Dysthymia is a form of depression. It is less severe than major depression but lasts longer. See Dysthymia, HARVARD HEALTH PUBLISHING, available at <http://www.health.harvard.edu/depression/dysthymia> (last accessed on November 31, 2021).
29 Id. at 19.
30 Id. at 85.
31 Id. at 80.
32 Id. at 36.
33 Id. at 37.
34 Id.
35 Id.
36 Id. at 34. The Order dated May 15, 2014 was issued by the Regional Trial Court, Branch 207, Muntinlupa City. A copy was not attached to the rollo.
37 Id. at 34-35. The dispositive portion was lifted from the CA Decision, which quoted it.
38 Id. at 37-38.
39 Id. at 34.
40 Id. at 39.
41 Id.
42 Id.
43 Id. at 34-43.
44 Id. at 43.
45 Id. at 41.
46 Id. at 42.
47 Id.
48 Id. at 42.
49 Id. 46-47.
50 Id. at 14-29.
51 Id. at 14.
52 Id. at 79-93.
53 Id. at 106-109.
54 Id. at 21.
55 Republic Act No. 9262 (2004), sec. 8(g) provides:
Section 8. Protection Orders. - A protection order is an order issued under this Act for the purpose of preventing further acts of violence against a woman or her child specified in Section 5 of this Act and granting other necessary relief. The relief granted under a protection order should serve the purpose of safeguarding the victim from further harm, minimizing any disruption in the victim's daily life, and facilitating the opportunity and ability of the victim to independently regain control over her life. The provisions of the protection order shall be enforced by law enforcement agencies. The protection orders that may be issued under this Act are the barangay protection order (BPO), temporary protection order (TPO) and permanent protection order (PPO). The protection orders that may be issued under this Act shall include any, some or all of the following reliefs:
....
(g) Directing the respondent to provide support to the woman and/or her child if entitled to legal support. Notwithstanding other laws to the contrary, the court shall order an appropriate percentage of the income or salary of the respondent to be withheld regularly by the respondent's employer for the same to be automatically remitted directly to the woman. Failure to remit and/or withhold or any delay in the remittance of support to the woman and/or her child without justifiable cause shall render the respondent or his employer liable for indirect contempt of court[.]
56 Rollo, p. 21.
57 Id. at 24.
58 Id. at 24-25.
59 Id. at 25-26.
60 Id. at 28.
61 Id. at 24. The statistics were derived from the Philippine Statistics Authority.
62 Id. at 27.
63 Id. at 29.
64 Id. at 79-94.
65 Id. at 87.
66 Id.
67 Id. at 90.
68 Id. at 90.
69 Id. at 92.
70 Id. at 106-116.
71 Id. at 107.
72 Id. at 108.
73 Id.
74 Id.
75 Id. at 66.
76 Estacio v. Estacio, G.R. No. 21 1851, September 16, 2020, [Per J. Leonen, Third Division].
77 712 Phil. 44 (2013) [Per J. Perlas-Bernabe, En Banc].
78 Id. at 91-92.
79 Estacio v. Estacio, G. R. No. 211851, September 16, 2020, [Per J. Leonen, Third Division]. See Toliongco v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 231748, July 8, 2020, [Per J. Leonen, Third Division].
80 Perez v. People, 830 Phil. 162 (2018) [Per J. Leonen, Third Division].
81 Republic Act No. 9262 (2004), sec. 3.
82 Republic Act No. 9262 (2004), sec. 3(d).
83 Reyes v. People, G.R. No. 232678, July 3, 2019, [Per J. Peralta, Third Division].
84 Melgar v. People, 826 Phil. 177, 186 (2018) [Per J. Perlas-Bernabe, Second Division].
85 Republic Act No. 9262 (2004), sec. 5(e)(2).
86 749 Phil. 823 (2014) [Per J. Peralta, Third Division].
87 Id.
88 826 Phil. 177 (2018) [Per J. Perlas-Bernabe, Second Division].
89 Id.
90 G.R. No. 232678, July 3, 2019, [Per J. Peralta, Third Division].
91 Id.
92 Republic Act. No. 9262 (2004), sec. 5(e)(2).
93 Executive Order No. 209 (1987), art. 194.
94 See Montefalcon v. Vasquez, 577 Phil. 383 (2008) [Per J. Quisumbing, Second Division]; Gotardo v. Buling, 692 Phil. 566 (2012) [Per J. Brion, Second Division].
95 FAMILY CODE, art. 201.
96 FAMILY CODE, art. 202.
97 Mangonon v. Court of Appeals, 526 Phil. 505 (2006) [Per J. Chico-Nazario, First Division].
98 Montefalcon v. Vasquez, 577 Phil. 383 (2008) [Per J. Quisumbing, Second Division].
99 Republic Act No. 9262 (2004), sec. 8.
100 Garcia v. Drilon, 712 Phil. 44, 105 (2013) [Perl Perlas-Bernabe, En Banc].
101 Republic v. Yahon, 736 Phil. 397 (2014) [Per J. Villarama, Jr., First Division].
102 Republic Act No. 9262 (2004), sec. 8(g).
103 See Gotardo v. Buling, 692 Phil. 566,575 (2012) [Per J. Brion, Second Division].
104 FAMILY CODE, art. 202 provides:
Article 202. Support in the cases referred to in the preceding article shall be reduced or increased proportionately, according to the reduction or increase of the necessities of the recipient and the resources or means of the person obliged to furnish the same.
105 Rollo, p. 42.
106 Id. at 40.
107 First Philippine Holdings Corporation v. Securities and Exchange Commission, G.R. No. 206673, July 28, 2020, [Per J. Caguioa, First Division].
108 People v. Martin, 148-A Phil. 294 (1971) [Per J. Castro, En Banc].
109 262 Phil. 667 (1990) [Per J. Medialdea, First Division].
110 Id. at 675.
111 523 Phil. 781 (2006) [Per J. Chico-Nazario, First Division].
112 Id. at 881.
113 See ING Bank N.V. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 764 Phil. 418 (2015) [Per J. Leonen, Second Division].
114 Rollo, pp. 24-25.
115 736 Phil. 397 (2014) [Per J. Villarama, First Division].
116 786 Phil. 517 (2016) [Per J. Leonen, Second Division].
117 Id.
118 Id. at 411.
119 Mabugay-Otamias v. Republic, 786 Phil. 517(2016) [Per J. Leonen, Second Division].
120 Id. at 520.
121 Republic Act No. 9262 (2004), sec. 8(k).
cralawredlibrary