“Inclusion of Adult Children in Permanent Protection Order Under Republic Act No. 9262: Estacio y Salvosa vs. Estacio y Santos”
### Facts:
Roberto Estacio and Ma. Victoria Estacio were married with three adult children. Victoria filed for a permanent protection order against Roberto under RA 9262, following threats and harassment. The Regional Trial Court issued an ex-parte Temporary Protection Order and, later, made it permanent, including directives for Roberto to stay away from Victoria and their children. Roberto appealed, arguing the inclusion of his adult children and the extent of the stay-away directive. The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC’s decision, citing the law’s provision for liberal interpretation to protect abuse victims.
### Issues:
1. Whether adult children may be included in the stay-away directive of a Permanent Protection Order issued under RA 9262.
2. If coercive control through children constitutes psychological violence warranting their inclusion in the Protection Order.
3. The necessity of the children’s consent for inclusion in the Protection Order.
4. Application of principles such as restorative justice and the family as a basic social institution in the context of Protection Orders.
### Court’s Decision:
The Supreme Court denied Roberto’s petition and affirmed the decisions of the lower courts, amending the Permanent Protection Order to include mandatory professional counseling for Roberto. The Court ruled that:
1. Adult children can be included in protection orders to prevent further harm, as the law allows for the designation of family members without age distinction for their protection.
2. Coercive control exercised through children falls under the law’s definition of psychological violence, justifying their inclusion in the Protection Order.
3. The law does not require the consent of adult children for their inclusion in the Protection Order for specific reliefs already provided, including stay-away directives.
4. The principles of restorative justice and family protection do not prevent the inclusion of adult children in Protection Orders when necessary for the victim’s safety. The family’s well-being, not the preservation of abusive relationships, is paramount.
### Doctrine:
The Supreme Court reiterated the doctrine that a liberal interpretation of RA 9262 is necessary to ensure the protection of women and children from violence. It emphasized that protection orders, including stay-away directives, can cover any family member designated by courts, without age restriction, to safeguard victims.
### Class Notes:
– RA 9262 provides for the issuance of protection orders to prevent further violence against women and children, including adult children if they are designated by the court.
– The principle of restorative justice aims at rehabilitation and reintegration of the offender while ensuring the victims’ safety.
– Psychological violence under RA 9262 includes coercive control, highlighting the broader spectrum of violence beyond physical harm.
– Protection Orders are construed liberally to achieve the law’s objective of protecting abuse victims.
### Historical Background:
RA 9262, enacted as a measure against domestic violence, recognizes the unequal power dynamics between genders historically leading to violence against women. The Supreme Court’s jurisprudence has consistently emphasized the law’s broad protective scope meant to address physical, psychological, and economic abuse within intimate relationships, affirming the State’s commitment to eradicating domestic violence and safeguarding family welfare.
Leave a Reply