Motion For Reconsideration For Ra 7610

Republic of the Philippines
Department of Justice
National Prosecution Service
OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR
THE PEOPLE OF THE

PHILIPPINES,
-versus- Criminal Case No. 123456
s
NPS Docket No.123456
For: VIOLATION OF RA 7610
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA,
Accused.
x---------------------------------------------------------x
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
PRIVATE COMPLAINANT, BBBBBBBB, most respectfully files this

instant motion, and alleges as follow:
1. The instant case for Slight Physical Injury under Art. 266 of the Revised
Penal Code (RPC) was filed by the Honorable Provincial Prosecutor
anchored on their findings of the existence of probable cause;
2. That while an Information was filed against the herein accused, the
complainant is in disagreement because the complaint she filed before the
Honorable Provincial Prosecutor was for the accused commission of
violation of Republic Act 7610 otherwise known as AN ACT
PROVIDING FOR STRONGER DETERRENCE AND SPECIAL
PROTECTION AGAINST CHILD ABUSE, EXPLOITATION AND
DISCRIMINATION, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES;
3. That the information filed came as a surprise to the private complainant as
she never received a copy of the resolution issued by the Honorable
Prosecutor even if their records show that her copy was sent through
registered mail, hence, she filed before the Honorable Court a Motion for
Reinvestigation1;
1
Copy of the Motion is herewith attached and marked as Annex “A”;
4. On September 3, 2019, finding the motion meritorious, the same was
granted and the court ordered to remand the instant case before the
Honorable Provincial Prosecutor for further investigation and to allow the
herein private complainant to file her motion for reconsideration, hence, the
filing of the instant motion;
5. That the private complainant prays before this Honorable Office to
reinvestigate the instant case and to grant that the information filed against
the accused be amended to violation of RA 7610 for those acts committed
on or about 3 to 5 o’ clock in the afternoon of September 30, 2018;
6. This Honorable Office resolved that the injuries inflicted to the
complainant’s daughter cannot be equated as child abuse or physical abuse
nor maltreatment as acts committed were not for the purpose of debasing,
degrading or demeaning the intrinsic worth and dignity of a minor as
human being;
7. However, with deference to this Honorable Office, the private complainant
begs to disagree to its findings. The victim is a child when the incident
occurred, thus, she is entitled to protection under Republic Act No. 7610,
the primary purpose of which has been defined in Araneta v. People, to wit:
Republic Act No. 7610 is a measure geared towards the
implementation of a national comprehensive program for the
survival of the most vulnerable members of the population, the
Filipino children, in keeping with the Constitutional mandate
under Article XV, Section 3, paragraph 2, that "The State shall
defend the right of the children to assistance, including proper
care and nutrition, and special protection from all forms of
neglect, abuse, cruelty, exploitation, and other conditions
prejudicial to their development."
8. Under Section 3(b) of the Republic Act No. 7610, child abuse is defined,
thus:
Section 3. Definition of Terms.

(b) "Child abuse" refers to the maltreatment, whether
habitual or not, of the child which includes any of the
following:
(1) Psychological and physical abuse, neglect, cruelty,
sexual abuse and emotional maltreatment;
(2) Any act by deeds or words which debases,
degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a
child as a human being;
(3) Unreasonable deprivation of his basic needs for
survival, such as food and shelter; or
(4) Failure to immediately give medical treatment to
an injured child resulting in serious impairment of his growth
and development or in his permanent incapacity or death.
9. As can be gleaned from this provision, a person who commits an act that
debases, degrades, or demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of the child as
a human being, whether habitual or not, can be held liable for violation of
Republic Act No. 7610.
10. Although it is true that not every instance of laying of hands on the child
constitutes child abuse, respondent’s intention to debase, degrade, and
demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child can be inferred from the
manner in which she committed the act complained of;
11. To note, accused rolled her eyes against the minor complainant not just
once but twice and then after intentionally pressed the cheeks of the child
uttering, “Huwag kang lalaban sa matanda, is clearly intended not merely to
discipline the child, it is a form of cruelty. The incident occurring in a store
where there are many passersby is a humiliating and traumatizing experience
for all persons regardless of age. Accused,as an adult, should have exercised
restraint and self-control rather than retaliate against the child.
12. Hence, from the narration of facts, there is probable cause to indict the
respondent for violation of RA 7610 under the above stated provisions;
13. Assuming but without conceding that the findings of the Honorable
Prosecutor is correct that what happened cannot be construed to debase,
degrade or demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of a minor as a human
being, the private complainant opines that respondent can be held liable for
violation of RA 7610 specifically Sec. 10(a), to wit:
Section 10. Other Acts of Neglect, Abuse, Cruelty or
Exploitation and Other Conditions Prejudicial to the Child's
Development. –
(a) Any person who shall commit any other acts of child
abuse, cruelty or exploitation or to be responsible for other
conditions prejudicial to the child's development including
those covered by Article 59 of Presidential Decree No. 603, as
amended, but not covered by the Revised Penal Code, as
amended, shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its
minimum period.
14. Herein, as a result of the actuations of the respondent on September 30,
2018, the child now suffers with acute trauma2 and that she is now being
recommended for counseling as medications. It is undeniable that
experiencing trauma in childhood can result in a severe and long-lasting
effect and would be prejudicial to the child’s development. Thus, accused
should be held liable for the results of her irresponsible actions.
15. From the foregoing, there is more than probable cause to indict the accused
for violation of RA 7610. It is thus prayed that the previously filed
information for slight physical injury be amended and the necessary
information for violation of RA 7610 be filed;
2
Copy of the findings of a registered psychiatrist is herewith attached and marked as Annex “__”;

Motion For Reconsideration For Ra 7610

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Motion For Reconsideration For Ra 7610

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Motion For Reconsideration For Ra 7610

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines

THE PEOPLE OF THE

PRIVATE COMPLAINANT, BBBBBBBB, most respectfully files this

Section 3. Definition of Terms.

You might also like