45. [G.R. No. 131636.

 March 5, 2003]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. ARTEMIO

INVENCION y SORIANO, appellant.

The filial privilege rule is not strictly a rule on disqualification because a descendant

is not incompetent or disqualified to testify against an ascendant. The rule refers to a
privilege not to testify, which can be invoked or waived like other privileges. 

Facts:

Artemio Invencion was charged with rape committed against his 16-year-old daughter.
During the trial, the prosecution presented Elven Invencion, the son of Artemio with his
second common-law wife, to testify against Artemio. The trial court convicted Artemio for
one count of rape.

Artemio challenges the competency and credibility of Elven as a witness. He argues that
Elven, as his son, should have been disqualified as a witness against him under the rule on
filial privilege.

Issue: WON Elven is disqualified as a witness pursuant to the rule on filial privilege? 

Held:

No, Elven was not disqualified. The competency of Elven to testify is not affected the rule on
“filial privilege.” This rule is not strictly a rule on disqualification because a descendant is
not incompetent or disqualified to testify against an ascendant. The rule refers to a privilege
not to testify, which can be invoked or waived like other privileges. Elven was not compelled
to testify against his father; he chose to waive that filial privilege when he voluntarily
testified against Artemio. Hence, his testimony is entitled to full credence.