SC: Child abuse cases can proceed without victim testimony

Content Warning: This article contains descriptions of criminal case involving the abuse and sexual assault of a minor. Reader discretions is advised.

The Supreme Court (SC) has underscored that justice for child abuse victims can prevail even when victims are unable to testify in court. This landmark decision invokes the doctrine of unavailable child under the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness to ensure that cases move forward despite procedural challenges.

In a ruling dated 25 October, 2023, penned by Associate Justice Mario V. Lopez, the Court’s Second Division affirmed the conviction of a father for qualified rape against his minor daughter.

The case arose when the 14-year-old victim disclosed to her aunt on 25 May, 2018 that her father had been sexually abusing her since she was 10 years old. Acting on her disclosure, the aunt sought assistance from the barangay and police, resulting in the filing of formal charges.

The victim’s sworn statement provided detailed accounts of the abuse, including the most recent incident. She also completed a Sexual Abuse Protocol form and underwent a medical examination, which confirmed deep healed hymenal lacerations consistent with her testimony.

However, during the trial, the victim was unable to testify as her mother sent her away to prevent her from appearing in court. In lieu of her direct testimony, the prosecution submitted her sworn statement, the Sexual Abuse Protocol, and the medico-legal report. These were supplemented by testimonies from the victim's relatives.

Upholding justice through the Unavailable Child Doctrine

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted the accused under the doctrine of unavailable child, which is enshrined in Section 28 of the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness. This doctrine permits the admission of a child’s hearsay testimony when the child is unavailable due to death, illness, psychological trauma, or other valid reasons, provided the testimony is corroborated by other evidence.

The conviction was upheld by the Court of Appeals (CA) despite the accused's argument that the victim's statements were hearsay and inadmissible due to the lack of cross-examination. The SC affirmed the RTC and CA rulings, emphasizing that procedural technicalities must not obstruct justice in cases involving child abuse.

The SC emphasized that Section 28 seeks to prevent the miscarriage of justice by addressing the unique vulnerabilities of child abuse victims. It recognizes that children may be pressured or intimidated into avoiding court appearances, and it provides a pathway for justice in such circumstances.

This decision not only secures justice for the victim in this case but also reaffirms the judiciary's dedication to upholding the rights of all child abuse victims, ensuring that legal processes adapt to the realities faced by vulnerable individuals.