Caram v. Segui
Caram v. Segui
Caram v. Segui
* EN BANC.
87
88
VILLARAMA, JR.,J.:
Before us is a petition for review on certiorari under
Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended,
and Section 19[1] of the Rule on the Writ of Amparo[2]
seeking to set aside the August 17, 2010[3] and September
6, 2010[4] Orders of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch
106 of Quezon City, in Sp. Proc. Case No. Q-10-67604. The
RTC had dismissed petitioners petition for the issuance of
a writ of amparo which petitioner filed in order for her to
regain parental authority and custody of Julian Yusay
Caram (Baby Julian), her biological child, from the
respondent officers of the Department of Social Welfare and
Development (DSWD).
The factual antecedents as gleaned from the records
follow:
Petitioner Ma. Christina Yusay Caram (Christina) had
an amorous relationship with Marcelino Gicano
Constantino III (Marcelino) and eventually became
pregnant with the latters child without the benefit of
marriage. After getting pregnant, Christina mislead
Marcelino into believing that she had an abortion when in
fact she proceeded to complete the term of her pregnancy.
During this time, she intended to have the child adopted
through Sun and Moon Home for Children (Sun and Moon)
in Paraaque City to avoid placing her family in a
potentially embarrassing situation for having a second
illegitimate son.[5]
_______________
[1] SEC.19.Appeal.Any party may appeal from the final judgment
or order to the Supreme Court under Rule 45. The appeal may raise
questions of fact or law or both.
The period of appeal shall be five (5) working days from the date of
notice of the adverse judgment.
The appeal shall be given the same priority as in habeas corpus cases.
[2] A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC effective October 24, 2007.
[3] Rollo, pp. 25-35. Penned by Presiding Judge Angelene Mary W.
Quimpo-Sale.
[4] Id., at pp. 41-44.
[5] Records, pp. 2-3.
89
90
WELFARE
AVAILABLE
AMENDING
AND
FOR
THE
CERTIFICATION
DEVELOPMENT (DSWD)
ADOPTION
FOR THIS
OTHERWISE KNOWN
AS A
TO
OF THE
DECLARE
PREREQUISITE
FOR
OF
AS THE
DEPARTMENT
A
OF
SOCIAL
CHILD LEGALLY
ADOPTION PROCEEDINGS,
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8552,
OF
OF
1995,
AS THE
CHILD
AND
AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES.
xxxx
SEC.7.Declaration of Availability for Adoption of Involuntarily
Committed Child and Voluntarily Committed Child.The certificate
declaring a child legally available for adoption in case of an involuntarily
committed child under Article 141, paragraph 4(a) and Article 142 of
Presidential Decree No. 603 shall be issued by the DSWD within three (3)
months following such involuntary commitment.
In case of voluntary commitment as contemplated in Article 154 of
Presidential Decree No. 603, the certification declaring the child legally
available for adoption shall be issued by the Secretary within three (3)
months following the filing of the Deed of Voluntary Commitment, as
signed by the parent(s) with the DSWD.
Upon petition filed with the DSWD, the parent(s) or legal guardian
who voluntarily committed a child may recover legal custody and
parental authority over him/her from the agency or institution to which
such child was voluntarily committed when it is shown to the satisfaction
of the DSWD that the parent(s) or legal guardian is in a position to
adequately provide for the needs of the child: Provided, That, the
petition for restoration is filed within (3) months after the
signing of the Deed of Voluntary Commitment. (Emphasis supplied)
[17] Records, pp. 1-9.
92
service of the writ, the respondent shall file a verified written return
together with supporting affidavits which shall, among other things,
contain the following:
(a) The lawful defenses to show that the respondent did not violate
or threaten with violation the right to life, liberty and security of the
aggrieved party, through any act or omission;
(b) The steps or actions taken by the respondent to determine the
fate or whereabouts of the aggrieved party and the person or persons
responsible for the threat, act or omission;
(c) All relevant information in the possession of the respondent
pertaining to the threat, act or omission against the aggrieved party; and
(d) If the respondent is a public official or employee, the return shall
further state the actions that have been or will still be taken:
(i)
(ii)
or disappearance; and
(vi)
shall also state other matters relevant to the investigation, its resolution and
the prosecution of the case.
[20] Records, pp. 37-54.
94
2.
Whether or not this petition is the proper
remedy based on the facts of the case and prayer in
the petition; and
3.
Whether or not the prayer in the petition
should be granted and custody of the child be given
to his biological mother.
The parties were given five (5) days from today to file their
respective position papers based on these three main issues. They
may include other related issues they deem essential for the
resolution of this case. Set this case for further hearing, if
necessary, on August 18, 2010 at 9:00 a.m.[21]
photographs of him.
On August 17, 2010, the RTC dismissed the petition for
issuance of a writ of amparo without prejudice to the filing
of the appropriate action in court. The RTC held that
Christina availed of the wrong remedy to regain custody of
her child Baby Julian.[22] The RTC further stated that
Christina should have filed a civil case for custody of her
child as laid down in the Family Code and the Rule on
Custody of Minors and Writ of Habeas Corpus in Relation
to Custody of Minors. If there is extreme urgency to secure
custody of a minor who has been illegally detained by
another, a petition for the issuance of a writ of habeas
corpus may be availed of, either as a principal or ancillary
remedy, pursuant to the Rule on Custody of Minors and
Writ of Habeas Corpus in Relation to Custody of Minors.[23]
_______________
[21] Id., at p. 92.
[22] Supra note 3.
[23] Id., at p. 34.
95
96
killings
and
enforced
(d)
that the intention for such refusal is to remove subject person
from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time.
_______________
[32] G.R. Nos. 184379-80, April 24, 2012, 670 SCRA 545, 558.
[33] G.R. No. 184467, June 19, 2012, 673 SCRA 618, 634.
[34] PHILIPPINE ACT
GENOCIDE,
AND
ON
11, 2009.
98
99