People vs Delantar

GR No. 169143, 2 Feb 2007

Facts:
1. In August 1996, accused Simplicio Delantar was indicted for violation of RA 7610, for
selling in prostitution his putative (this means supposedly) daughter A, to an Arab
national and for pimping and delivering A, who was then 11 yo to Congressman
Jalosjos.
2. Delantar pleaded not guilty and trial proceeded in due course.
3. RTC found accused guilty for two counts of RA 7610 violation.
4. CA upheld the guilty verdict but ruled that accused be convicted for one count only.
5. Accused appealed to the SC the imposition of the maximum penalty and questioned
the “justifying circumstances” of him being (supposedly) the father or guardian of A as it
was not clearly established.

Issue:
WON accused Delantar can be considered the father or guardian of A.

Ruling:
NO, the court ruled that the birth certificate of A, which did not contain Delantar’s
signature, is prima facie evidence (accepted as correct until proved otherwise) only of
the fact of her birth and not of her filial relationship with the accused. It is undisputed
that accused is not A’s biological father. Further, according to the maxim noscitur a
sociis (translation: it is known by its associates), the correct construction of a word or
phrase susceptible to various meanings may be made clear and specific by considering
the company of words in which it is found or in which it is associated.

Section 31, para C of RA 7610 or the “Special Protection of Children Against Abuse,
Exploitation and Discrimination Act” states the circumstances of relationship between
the perpetrator and the victim that warrants the imposition of the maximum penalty are:
“when the perpetrator is an ascendant, parent guardian, stepparent or collateral relative
within the second degree of consanguinity or affinity”.

In the phrasing of the law, we note that the term guardian denotes legal relationship.
We can safely deduce that the guardian as envisioned in the statute is a person who
has legal relationship with a ward. This relationship may be established either by (i)
being the ward’s biological parent (natural guardian) or (ii) through legal adoption (legal
guardian). Delantar is neither A’s biological parent nor is he A’s adoptive father. Clearly,
the accused is not the guardian as referred to in the law.

Absent of this qualifying circumstance, as prescribed in RA 7610, S31, Para C, the

maximum penalty may not apply.