Dear PAO,

The teenage son of my neighbor and his friends are always hanging around at night by the road in front of my house. Their unruly behavior disturbs my sleep. One night, I asked them to go home, but they just laughed and ignored me. In a fit of anger, I took my gun and pointed it at the son of my neighbor. They immediately scampered to different directions. Their parents are now accusing me of child abuse. During the barangay confrontation, I told them my mere intention was not to harm but to force them to go home. Their parents claimed otherwise and said that my action was tantamount to psychological abuse. Is the act of merely pointing a gun at a minor considered child abuse?

Roger

Dear Roger,

The possible crime committed based on the given set of facts falls under the following provisions of Republic Act (RA) 7610, as amended, or the “Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act.” Section 3 (b) of the law states:

“Section 3. Definition of Terms. –

“(b) ‘Child abuse’ refers to the maltreatment, whether habitual or not, of the child, which includes any of the following:

“(1) Psychological and physical abuse, neglect, cruelty, sexual abuse and emotional maltreatment;

“(2) Any act by deeds or words which debases, degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human being;

“(3) Unreasonable deprivation of his basic needs for survival, such as food and shelter, or

“(4) Failure to immediately give medical treatment to an injured child resulting in serious impairment of his growth and development or in his permanent incapacity or death.

Meanwhile, Section 10 (a) thereof states:

“Section 10, Other Acts of Neglect, Abuse, Cruelty or Exploitation and Other Conditions Prejudicial to the Child’s Development. –

“(a) Any person who shall commit any other acts of child abuse, cruelty or exploitation or to be responsible for other conditions prejudicial to the child’s development including those covered by Article 59 of Presidential Decree No. 603, as amended, but not covered by the Revised Penal Code, as amended, shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period.”

Psychological harm may result from your act of pointing a gun at a minor. This finds support in the case of San Juan v. People of the Philippines, GR 236628, Jan. 17, 2023, where the Supreme Court, speaking through Associate Justice Jhosep Y. Lopez, stated:

“It bears emphasis that the object involved in this case is a gun. Unlike other objects that may be used to hurt a child, a gun serves no other purpose than to cause injury or death. In the hands of a person with ill-motive, the objective to injure or kill could be achieved; in the hands of a person with good intentions, the objective to repel an unlawful aggression may be accomplished. In these cases, one has to cause injury in order to achieve either objective.

“Certainly, when there is nothing to defend against, any preparatory act of using a gun, as by pointing it towards a minor, would only cause fear in the mind of that person. With the only remaining act of pulling the trigger of a gun, it is the near possibility of the resulting death or injury that will remain etched in the mind of the minor. There is no denying that psychological harm immediately results therefrom, which falls as psychological abuse, as Section 3(b) of RA No. 7610 classifies maltreatment as child abuse based on the act committed, whether it be habitual or not.”

The Court went further and said that:

“It is not farfetched to assume that children, recognized as the most vulnerable members of society, can offer no resistance against an armed officer and, in all likelihood, would be scarred by trauma long after the incident. A gun, when used to threaten an individual, moreso a minor, would undoubtedly create a lasting fear that could persist throughout the minor’s life; worse, such an incident could further erode and even endanger the minor’s psychological state and normal development. Ineluctably, the use of such firearm in such manner as in this case inherently carries with it a malicious intent to which San Juan must be held answerable for. As such, San Juan must be held liable for violation of Section 10(a) in relation to Section 3(b)(1) of RA No. 7610.”

Applying the afore-cited decision to your situation, a gun serves no other purpose other than to cause injury or death. A gun, when used to threaten a minor, would create a lasting fear that could persist throughout the minor’s life or could erode and endanger the minor’s psychological state and normal development. Thus, your action may be considered as other acts of abuse/cruelty under Section 10 (a) in relation to Section 3 (b) (1) of RA 7610.

We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice is based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.

Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to [email protected]