The Supreme Court has ruled that cruel or degrading forms of punishment, even if the intention is for the best interest of a child, are not justified.
In a decision penned by Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, the High Court dismissed the petition of a couple seeking to overturn a Court of Appeals ruling finding them jointly liable for “harassing, intimidating, and spreading false and malicious rumors” against their child’s female partner and her parents.
“The best interest of a child cannot justify forms of cruel or degrading punishment which conflict with a child’s human dignity, including ‘punishment which belittles, humiliates, denigrates, scapegoats, threatens, scares, or ridicules a child,’” the SC said.
“A person who debases, degrades, or demeans the child’s intrinsic worth and dignity as a human being can be held liable for damages,” the high tribunal added.
The decision resolved the appeal of the couple who made humiliating remarks against the 14-year-old partner of their child in 2004.
The Supreme Court also affirmed with modification the resolution and ordered the couple to pay jointly and severally P30,000 as moral damages, P20,000 as exemplary damages, and P30,000 as attorney’s fees and litigation expenses.
The SC court also imposed a legal interest rate of 6 percent per annum until the finality of the decision.
“The exemplary damages are awarded not only to compensate respondents but more importantly to remind the petitioners of their fundamental duty as parents, not only to rear our youth for civic efficiency and the development of moral character but also to serve as role models,” the High Court said.
The tribunal said the couple had disapproved of the victim’s relationship with their son and often frequented their school to prevent the two from getting closer.
The SC noted the mother made snide remarks against the victim in the presence of her classmates and schoolmates. The mother also called the victim “malanding babae” (flirty) and “makati ang laman” (promiscuous) on multiple occasions.
To prevent contact with the couple, the victim and her parents no longer joined in school activities.
The couple, however, started spreading rumors among other parents and students, claiming that the female child had been praying on boys since grade school.
The SC lamented the victim developed depression and dropped her extracurricular activities, leading to the loss of her status as an honor student and student leader. Further, it said the victim attempted to commit suicide.
“While parents and legal guardians are bestowed with the right and duty to provide direction to a child, a child must still be accorded equal and inalienable rights, consistent with the evolving capacities of the child,” the high court said.
