12 Jaime Araza vs. People of The Philippines

CASE DIGEST FORMAT
File Name: (Number) then Title of the case
#12 JAIME ARAZA, petitioner vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent
TOPIC: RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE SPOUSES; Psychological Violence under

Section 5(i) of RA 9262 Due to Marital Infidelity
Doctrine:
In Dimamling v. People, the elements of violation of Section 5(i) of R.A. No. 9262 are
enumerated:
1. The offended party is a woman and/or her child or children;

2. The woman is either the wife or former wife of the offender, or is a woman with
whom the offender has or had a sexual or dating relationship, or is a woman with
whom such offender has a common child. As for the woman's child or children, they
may be legitimate or illegitimate, or living within or without the family abode;
3. The offender causes on the woman and/or child mental or emotional anguish; and
4. The anguish is caused through acts of public ridicule or humiliation, repeated verbal
and emotional abuse, denial of financial support or custody of minor children or
access to the children or similar acts or omissions.
The law does not require proof that the victim became psychologically ill due to the
psychological violence done by her abuser. Rather, the law only requires emotional anguish
and mental suffering to be proven. To establish emotional anguish or mental suffering,
jurisprudence only requires that the testimony of the victim to be presented in court, as such
experiences are personal to this party. In order to establish psychological violence, proof of
the commission of any of the acts enumerated in Section 5(i) or similar of such acts, is
necessary
Facts:
AAA and Araza were married on 1989. She had no marital issues with Araza until he went to
Zamboanga City in February 2007, for their networking business. Araza was formerly
working as an OFW but decided to stop in 1993 to join AAA in her business. It was at this
point that she began to notice Araza's change in behavior. Allegedly, he would act depressed,
always appeared absent-minded. She was concerned and would ask him about it but he would
just stay quiet, and stare at her full of anxiety.
One day, she received a text message from her co-workers who told her that her husband is
having an affair with their best friend.She instituted a complaint against her husband Araza
and his alleged mistress, for Concubinage but was resolved by an amicable settlement that
Araza and Fabillar committed they will never see each other again.
CASE DIGEST FORMAT
In the days to come, she would receive text messages from her husband's supposed mistress
using various numbers. Telling her that Araza was sick and threatening she would kill Araza.
This prompted AAA to be emotionally depressed and anxious of her husband’s condition.
Until she fell and ill and was hospitalized, thereafter even filing a Petition for habeas corpus
to find his husband only to find out Araza was cohabiting with her Fabillar.
The truth caused AAA emotional and psychological suffering. She was suffering from
insomnia and asthma. She claimed she had spent a large amount of money to search for her
husband, which includes the filing of several cases. Allegedly, he kept that information to
himself because he knew once AAA would know about it, there would be trouble in their
relationship.
Based on Dr. Lindain’s assessment and expert opinion, the symptoms AAA was having was
like the depressed mood; her occasional difficulty in sleeping are secondary to the relational
distress with Araza.
Araza testified that his relationship with his wife has gone sour. Oftentimes, she would
believe rumors and accuse him of being a womanizer. He denied having an affair with
Fabillar. He revealed that when AAA went to Zamboanga, she filed a complaint against him
at the Women's Desk. He was arrested as a consequence and was forced to sign an agreement.
He returned to Manila with his wife hoping that she would change her ways towards him, but
she did not. He left his wife because he could no longer stand her attitude towards him. He
also denied fathering children with Fabillar.
RTC RULING: JAIME ARAZA - GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt for Violation of
Section 5(i) of Republic Act 9262
The RTC found that all the elements of the crime of violence against women under Section
5(i) of R.A. No. 9262 were satisfied. Araza and AAA were married, as required by the first
element. The prosecution was able to establish through testimonial and documentary
evidence that Araza was the perpetrator of the mental and emotional anguish suffered by
AAA.
Araza left their conjugal abode and chose to live with his mistress; and he reneged his
promise to stop seeing his mistress, contrary to the written agreement between him and his
mistress. AAA's psychological and emotional sufferings due to the said ordeals can also be
gleaned from Dr. Lindain's testimony, who was presented as an expert witness.
CA RULING: RTC CONVICTION AFFIRMED - The CA concluded that R.A. No. 9262
does not criminalize acts such as the marital infidelity per se, but the psychological violence
causing mental or emotional suffering on the wife.
CASE DIGEST FORMAT
Issue
Whether AAA suffered mental and emotional anguish and Aranza’s act was the proximate
cause thereof
Ruling
YES. Aranza’s marital infidelity caused the mental and emotional anguish of AAA.
Psychological violence is an indispensable element of violation of Section 5(i) of R.A. No.

9262. Equally essential is the element of emotional anguish and mental suffering, which are
personal to the complainant. Psychological violence is the means employed by the
perpetrator, while emotional anguish or mental suffering are the effects caused to or the
damage sustained by the offended party.
Section 3(c) of R.A. No. 9262, in relation to Section 5(i), provides: Section 3. Definition of
Terms. — As used in this Act: xxx
Section 3(c) Section 5(i)

"Psychological violence" refers to acts or Penalizes some forms of psychological
omissions, causing or likely to cause violence that are inflicted on victims who are
mental or emotional suffering of the women and children through the following
victim such as but not limited to acts: (i) Causing mental or emotional
intimidation, harassment, stalking, anguish, public ridicule or humiliation to
damage to property, public ridicule or the woman or her child, including, but not
humiliation, repeated verbal abuse and limited to, repeated verbal and emotional
mental infidelity. It includes causing or abuse, and denial of financial support or
allowing the victim to witness the physical, custody of minor children or access to the
sexual or psychological abuse of a member woman's child/children.
of the family to which the victim belongs,
or to witness pornography in any form or to
witness abusive injury to pets or to unlawful
or unwanted deprivation of the right to
custody and/or visitation of common
children.
In Dimamling v. People, the elements of violation of Section 5(i) of R.A. No. 9262 are
enumerated:
1. The offended party is a woman and/or her child or children;

2. The woman is either the wife or former wife of the offender, or is a woman with
whom the offender has or had a sexual or dating relationship, or is a woman with
CASE DIGEST FORMAT
whom such offender has a common child. As for the woman's child or children, they
may be legitimate or illegitimate, or living within or without the family abode;
3. The offender causes on the woman and/or child mental or emotional anguish; and
4. The anguish is caused through acts of public ridicule or humiliation, repeated verbal
and emotional abuse, denial of financial support or custody of minor children or
access to the children or similar acts or omissions.
The law does not require proof that the victim became psychologically ill due to the
psychological violence done by her abuser. Rather, the law only requires emotional
anguish and mental suffering to be proven. To establish emotional anguish or mental
suffering, jurisprudence only requires that the testimony of the victim to be presented
in court, as such experiences are personal to this party. In order to establish
psychological violence, proof of the commission of any of the acts enumerated in Section
5(i) or similar of such acts, is necessary.

12 Jaime Araza vs. People of The Philippines

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

12 Jaime Araza vs. People of The Philippines

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

12 Jaime Araza vs. People of The Philippines

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CASE DIGEST FORMAT

File Name: (Number) then Title of the case

#12 JAIME ARAZA, petitioner vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent

TOPIC: RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE SPOUSES; Psychological Violence under

1. The offended party is a woman and/or her child or children;

Psychological violence is an indispensable element of violation of Section 5(i) of R.A. No.

Section 3(c) Section 5(i)

1. The offended party is a woman and/or her child or children;

You might also like