EN BANC

[G.R. No. 131636. March 5, 2003.]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES , appellee, vs . ARTEMIO INVENCION y

SORIANO , appellant.

The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.

Isabelo C. Salamida for accused-appellant.
SYNOPSIS
For sexually violating his 16-year old daughter Cynthia P. Invencion, accused
Artemio Invencion was charged, tried and subsequently found guilty of the crime of
quali ed rape and was sentenced to the penalty of death. In convicting accused, the
Regional Trial Court of Tarlac found the prosecution's version more credible.
Hence, this automatic review.
The Supreme Court found no cogent reason to overturn the ndings of the trial
court on the culpability of the appellant. It held that the factual ndings of the trial court
especially on the credibility of the witnesses are accorded great weight and respect
and will not be disturbed on appeal. This is so because the trial court has the advantage
of observing the witnesses through the different indicators of truthfulness or
falsehood, such as the angry ush of an insisted assertion, the sudden pallor of a
discovered lie, the tremulous mutter of a reluctant answer, the forthright tone of a ready
reply, the furtive glance, the blush of conscious shame, the hesitation, the yawn, the
sigh, the candor or lack of it, the scant or full realization of the solemnity of an oath, or
the carriage and mien. This rule, however, admits of exceptions, as where there exists a
fact or circumstance of weight and in uence that has been ignored or misconstrued by
the court, or where the trial court has acted arbitrarily in its appreciation of the facts.
The Court did not nd any of these exceptions in this case. Nonetheless, it held that
appellant can be convicted only of simple rape punishable by reclusion perpetua. It
found that the allegation in the complaint regarding the victim's age was not clearly
proved. No birth certi cate or any similar authentic document was presented and
offered in evidence to prove the victim's age. According to the Court, to justify the
imposition of the death penalty in a rape committed by a father on her daughter, the
minority of the victim and her relationship with the offender, which are special qualifying
circumstances, must be alleged in the complaint or information and proved by the
prosecution during the trial by the quantum of proof required for conviction. cSEaDA

SYLLABUS

1. REMEDIAL LAW; EVIDENCE; CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES; FACTUAL

FINDINGS OF TRIAL COURT WITH RESPECT THERETO ACCORDED GREAT WEIGHT AND
RESPECT AND WILL NOT BE DISTURBED ON APPEAL; EXCEPTIONS NOT PRESENT IN
CASE AT BAR. — It is doctrinally settled that the factual ndings of the trial court,
especially on the credibility of the witnesses, are accorded great weight and respect and
will not be disturbed on appeal. This is so because the trial court has the advantage of
observing the witnesses through the different indicators of truthfulness or falsehood, such
as the angry ush of an insisted assertion, the sudden pallor of a discovered lie, the
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 tremulous mutter of a reluctant answer, the forthright tone of a ready reply, the furtive
glance, the blush of conscious shame, the hesitation, the yawn, the sigh, the candor or lack
of it, the scant or full realization of the solemnity of an oath, or the carriage and mien. This
rule, however, admits of exceptions, as where there exists a fact or circumstance of weight
and in uence that has been ignored or misconstrued by the court, or where the trial court
has acted arbitrarily in its appreciation of the facts. We do not nd any of these exceptions
in the case at bar. ICHcaD

2. ID.; ID.; ID.; TESTIMONY OF WITNESS, ENTITLED TO FULL CREDENCE ABSENT

EVIDENCE OF IMPROPER MOTIVE TO TESTIFY FALSELY AGAINST ACCUSED. — The
alleged ulterior motive of Elven in testifying against his father also deserves scant
consideration. Such insinuation of ill-motive is too lame and imsy. As observed by the
OSG, Elven, who was of tender age, could not have subjected himself to the ordeal of a
public trial had he not been compelled by a motive other than to bring to justice the
despoiler of his sister's virtue. There is no indication that Elven testi ed because of anger
or any ill-motive against his father, nor is there any showing that he was unduly pressured
or in uenced by his mother or by anyone to testify against his father. The rule is that where
there is no evidence that the principal witness for the prosecution was actuated by
improper motive, the presumption is that he was not so actuated and his testimony is
entitled to full credence.
3. ID.; ID.; ID.; MINOR INCONSISTENCIES; INCONSISTENCIES AND
DISCREPANCIES AS TO MINOR MATTERS IRRELEVANT TO THE ELEMENTS OF THE
CRIME NOT GROUNDS FOR ACQUITTAL. — We nd as inconsequential the alleged variance
or difference in the time that the rape was committed, i.e., during the night as testi ed to
by Elven, or between 6:00 and 7:00 a.m. per the testimony of Eddie. The exact time or date
of the commission of rape is not an element of the crime. What is decisive in a rape charge
is that the commission of the rape by the accused has been su ciently proved.
Inconsistencies and discrepancies as to minor matters irrelevant to the elements of the
crime cannot be considered grounds for acquittal. In this case, we believe that the crime of
rape was, indeed, committed as testified to by Elven and Eddie.
4. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; CREDIBILITY IS NOT IMPAIRED BY INCONSISTENCIES ON
MINOR AND INSIGNIFICANT DETAILS. — The alleged inconsistencies in the testimonies of
both Elven and Gloria do not impair the credibility of these witnesses. We agree with the
trial court that they are minor inconsistencies, which do not affect the credibility of the
witnesses. We have held in a number of cases that inconsistencies in the testimonies of
witnesses that refer to minor and insigni cant details do not destroy the witnesses'
credibility. On the contrary, they may even be considered badges of veracity or
manifestations of truthfulness on the material points in the testimonies. What is important
is that the testimonies agree on essential facts and substantially corroborate a consistent
and coherent whole. AHcCDI

5. ID.; ID.; ID.; MOTIVE; NO MOTHER WOULD SUBJECT HER CHILD TO

HUMILIATION, DISGRACE, AND TRAUMA IF SHE WERE NOT MOTIVATED SOLELY BY THE
DESIRE TO HAVE THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR HER CHILD'S DEFILEMENT
INCARCERATED. — The alleged ill-motives on the part of Gloria and Celestino were not
su ciently proved. Nothing in the records suggests any reason that would motivate Gloria
to testify falsely against Artemio, who is the father of her other children. Moreover, we have
repeatedly held that no mother would subject her child to the humiliation, disgrace, and
trauma attendant to the prosecution for rape if she were not motivated solely by the desire
to have the person responsible for her child's de lement incarcerated. As for Celestino, he
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 testi ed that the lot where the hut stands is owned by his daughter Erlinda, and not by
Artemio's mother. At any rate, even without Celestino's testimony, Artemio's conviction
would stand.
6. ID.; ID.; ADMISSIBILITY; DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF RELATIONSHIP;
RULE ON FILIAL PRIVILEGE, MAY BE WAIVED. — As to the competency of Elven to testify,
we rule that such is not affected by Section 25, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court, otherwise
known as the rule on " lial privilege." This rule is not strictly a rule on disquali cation
because a descendant is not incompetent or disquali ed to testify against an ascendant.
The rule refers to a privilege not to testify, which can be invoked or waived like other
privileges. As correctly observed by the lower court, Elven was not compelled to testify
against his father; he chose to waive that lial privilege when he voluntarily testi ed
against Artemio. Elven declared that he was testifying as a witness against his father of his
own accord and only "to tell the truth."
7. ID.; ID.; PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE; EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES;
DIRECT EXAMINATION; LEADING QUESTIONS; ALLOWED WHEN WITNESS IS A CHILD OF
TENDER YEARS. — Neither can Artemio challenge the prosecution's act of propounding
leading questions on Elven. Section 10(c) of Rule 132 of the Rules of Court expressly
allows leading questions when the witness is a child of tender years like Elven.
8. CRIMINAL LAW; RAPE; SPECIAL QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES; MINORITY
AND RELATIONSHIP, MUST BE BOTH ALLEGED AND PROVED TO WARRANT THE
IMPOSITION OF DEATH PENALTY. — To justify the imposition of the death penalty in a
rape committed by a father on a daughter, the minority of the victim and her relationship
with the offender, which are special qualifying circumstances, must be alleged in the
complaint or information and proved by the prosecution during the trial by the quantum of
proof required for conviction. Although the relationship of Cynthia with her father Artemio
was alleged in the complaint and duly established by evidence during trial, the allegation in
the complaint regarding her age was not clearly proved.
9. ID.; ID.; ID.; APPRECIATION OF AGE EITHER AS AN ELEMENT OF THE CRIME
OR AS A QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE; GUIDELINES. — In the very recent case of People v.
Pruna, we set the guidelines in appreciating age either as an element of the crime or as a
qualifying circumstance: 1. The best evidence to prove the age of the offended party is an
original or certi ed true copy of the certi cate of live birth of such party. 2. In the absence
of a certi cate of live birth, similar authentic documents such as baptismal certi cate and
school records which show the date of birth of the victim would su ce to prove age. 3. If
the certi cate of live birth or authentic document is shown to have been lost or destroyed
or otherwise unavailable, the testimony, if clear and credible, of the victim's mother or a
member of the family either by a nity or consanguinity who is quali ed to testify on
matters respecting pedigree such as the exact age or date of birth of the offended party
pursuant to Section 40, Rule 130 of the Rules on Evidence shall be su cient under the
following circumstances: a. If the victim is alleged to be below 3 years of age and what is
sought to be proved is that she is less than 7 years old; b. If the victim is alleged to be
below 7 years of age and what is sought to be proved is that she is less than 12 years old;
c. If the victim is alleged to be below 12 years of age and what is sought to be proved is
that she is less than 18 years old. 4. In the absence of a certi cate of live birth, authentic
document, or the testimony of the victim's mother or relatives concerning the victim's age,
the complainant's testimony will su ce provided that it is expressly and clearly admitted
by the accused. 5. It is the prosecution that has the burden of proving the age of the
offended party. The failure of the accused to object to the testimonial evidence regarding
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 age shall not be taken against him. 6. The trial court should always make a categorical
finding as to the. age of the victim.SaIEcA

10. ID.; ID.; ID.; DEATH PENALTY CANNOT BE IMPOSED ABSENT SUFFICIENT
PROOF OF VICTIM'S MINORITY; CASE AT BAR. — In the present case, no birth certi cate or
any similar authentic document was presented and offered in evidence to prove Cynthia's
age. The statement in the medical certi cate showing Cynthia's age is not proof thereof,
since a medical certi cate does not authenticate the date of birth of the victim. Moreover,
pursuant to Pruna, Gloria's testimony regarding Cynthia's age was insu cient, since
Cynthia was alleged to be 16 years old already at the time of the rape and what is sought
to be proved is that she was then 18 years old. Moreover, the trial court did not even make
a categorical nding on Cynthia's minority. Finally, the silence of Artemio or his failure to
object to the testimonial evidence regarding Cynthia's age could not be taken against him.
It must be stressed that the severity of death penalty, especially its irreversible and nal
nature once carried out, makes the decision-making process in capital offenses aptly
subject to the most exacting rules of procedure and evidence. Accordingly, in the absence
of su cient proof of Cynthia's minority. Artemio cannot be convicted of quali ed rape and
sentenced to suffer the death penalty. He should only be convicted of simple rape and
meted the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
11. ID.; ID.; CIVIL INDEMNITY; AWARD THEREOF IS MANDATORY UPON
FINDING OF THE FACT OF RAPE; MORAL AND EXEMPLARY DAMAGES; AWARDED IN
CASE AT BAR. — As regards the civil liability of Artemio, the awards of moral damages in
the amount of P50,000 and exemplary damages in the amount of P25,000 are insu cient.
Civil indemnity, which is mandatory upon the nding of the fact of rape, should also be
awarded. In simple rape, the civil indemnity for the victim shall not be less than P50,000.

DECISION

DAVIDE , JR ., C.J : p

Before us for automatic review 1 is the Decision 2 dated 22 September 1997 of the
Regional Trial Court of Tarlac, Tarlac, Branch 65, in Criminal Case No. 9375, nding
accused-appellant Artemio Invencion y Soriano guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the
crime of rape committed against his 16 year-old daughter Cynthia P. Invencion, and
sentencing him to suffer the penalty of death and to pay Cynthia the sum of P50,000 as
moral damages and P25,000 as exemplary damages, as well as the costs of suit. TAacHE

Artemio was charged before the Regional Trial Court of Tarlac with thirteen counts
of rape in separate complaints docketed as Criminal Cases Nos. 9363 to 9375, all dated
17 October 1996. The cases were consolidated and jointly tried. At his arraignment
Artemio entered a plea of not guilty in each case.
The witnesses presented by the prosecution in its evidence in chief were Elven
Invencion, Eddie Sicat, Gloria Pagala, Dr. Rosario Fider, and Atty. Florencio Canlas.
Presented as rebuttal witnesses were Gloria Pagala and Celestino Navarro.
Elven Invencion, an 8-year-old grade two pupil of Sapang Tagalog Elementary School
in Tarlac, Tarlac, testi ed that he is a half-brother of Cynthia and son of Artemio with his
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 second common-law wife. Sometime before the end of the school year in 1996, while he
was sleeping in one room with his father Artemio, Cynthia, and two other younger brothers,
he was awakened by Cynthia's loud cries. Looking towards her, he saw his father on top of
Cynthia, doing a pumping motion. After about two minutes, his father put on his short
pants. 3
Elven further declared that Artemio was a very strict and cruel father and a drunkard.
He angrily prohibited Cynthia from entertaining any of her suitors. Whenever he was drunk,
he would maul Elven and quarrel with his stepfather, Celestino Navarro. 4
Eddie Sicat, a 40-year-old farmer and neighbor of Artemio in Barangay Sapang
Tagalog, Tarlac, Tarlac, testi ed that on the second week of March 1996, between 6:00
and 7:00 a.m., while he was passing by the house of Artemio on his way to the eld to
catch sh, he heard somebody crying. He then peeped through a small opening in the
destroyed, portion of the sawali wall of Artemio's house. He saw Cynthia lying on her back
and crying, while her father was on top of her, doing a pumping motion. Eddie observed
them for about fteen seconds, and then he left and proceeded to the eld to catch sh. 5
He reported what he had witnessed to Artemio's stepfather, Celestino, later that morning. 6
Gloria Pagala, the mother of Cynthia and former common-law wife of Artemio,
testi ed that she and Artemio started living together in Guimba, Nueva Ecija, in February
1969. Out of their common-law relationship, they had six children, one of whom was
Cynthia. In March 1982, she and Artemio parted ways permanently. Later, Gloria and her
children lived in Pura, Tarlac. When Artemio's mother died sometime in 1996, Cynthia lived
with Artemio in a small one-room dwelling owned by Celestino and located in Barangay
Sapang Tagalog, Tarlac, Tarlac. 7 On 30 August 1996, her son Novelito told her that Cynthia
was pregnant. Gloria then went to the house of Artemio and asked Cynthia about her
condition. The latter confessed that she had been sexually abused by her father. Gloria
then went to the o ce of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) in Tarlac and reported
what Artemio had done to their daughter Cynthia. 8
Dr. Rosario Fider of Tarlac Provincial Hospital testi ed that she examined Cynthia on
16 September 1996. She found Cynthia to be ve to six months pregnant and to have
incomplete, healed hymenal lacerations at 3, 5, 8 o'clock positions, which could have been
caused by sexual intercourse or any foreign body inserted in her private part. 9
Atty. Florencio Canlas, an NBI agent, testi ed that on 18 September 1996, Cynthia,
accompanied by her mother, complained before him and NBI Supervising Agent Rolando
Vergara that she was raped by her father Artemio. She then executed a written statement,
1 0 which she subscribed and sworn to before Atty. Canlas. 1 1

The defense did not present Artemio as a witness. Instead, his counsel de parte,
Atty. Isabelo Salamida, took the witness stand and testi ed for the defense. He declared
that on 24 June 1997 (the same day when he testi ed before the court), between 10:45
and 11:00 a.m., he and his secretary went to the house of Artemio in Barangay Sapang
Tagalog, The hut was made of sawali. Its door was padlocked, and its windows were shut.
When he went around the house and tried to peep through the old sawali walls on the front
and left and right sides of the hut, he could not see anything inside the room where
Artemio and his children used to sleep. Although it was then about noontime, it was dark
inside. 1 2 Atty. Salamida then concluded that prosecution witness Eddie Sicat was not
telling the truth when he declared having seen what Artemio did to Cynthia when he peeped
through a small opening in the sawali wall of the house in the early morning sometime on
the second week of March 1996.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 On rebuttal, Gloria Pagala testi ed that the house where Artemio used to live was a
small hut with some destroyed portions in its sawali walls. When she went there to visit her
children sometime in December 1995, there was a hole in front and at the sidewall of the
hut facing a vacant lot where people passed by to sh in a nearby brook. 1 3 When she went
to the place again sometime in September 1996 after she was informed of Cynthia's
pregnancy, she noticed that the destroyed portions of the hut's sawali walls were not yet
repaired. 1 4
The second rebuttal witness Celestino Navarro, stepfather of Artemio, testi ed that
he is the owner of the small house where Artemio and his children used to reside. At the
time that Artemio and his children, including Cynthia, were living in that house, the hut's old
sawali walls had some small holes in them, thus con rming the testimony of Eddie Sicat.
After Artemio was arrested on the basis of Cynthia's complaint before the NBI, Celestino
made some repairs in the hut by, among other things, placing galvanized iron sheets to
cover the holes at the destroyed portions of the sawali walls. Thereafter, a person named
Alvin occupied the house. 1 5
In its Decision of 22 September 1997, the trial court convicted Artemio in Criminal
Case No. 9375. It, however, acquitted him in all the other twelve cases for lack of evidence.
In his Appellant's Brief, Artemio contends that the trial court erred in
I
. . . BELIEVING THE TESTIMONIES OF THE PROSECUTION WITNESSES;

II
. . . NOT DISMISSING THIS CASE FOR FAILURE OF THE PROSECUTION TO
PROVE [HIS] GUILT . . . BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. CETDHA

Artemio attacks the competency and credibility of Elven as a witness. He argues

that Elven, as his son, should have been disquali ed as a witness against him under
Section 20(c), Rule 130 of the Rules of Court. 1 6 Besides, Elven's testimony appears not to
be his but what the prosecution wanted him to say, as the questions asked were mostly
leading questions. Moreover, Elven had ill-motive in testifying against him, as he (Artemio)
was cruel to him.
In another attempt to cast doubt on the credibility of the prosecution witnesses,
Artemio points to the following inconsistencies in their testimonies: (1) as to the time of
the commission of the crime, Elven testi ed having seen Artemio on top of his sister one
night in March 1996, while Eddie Sicat testi ed having seen them in the same position
between 6:00 and 7:00 a.m. in the second week of March 1996; (2) as to the residence of
Cynthia in 1996, Gloria testi ed that the former was living with her in Guimba from
November 1995 to September 1996, while Elven and Eddie declared that she was in
Sapang Tagalog in March 1996; and (3) as to the residence of Artemio, Jr., Gloria stated
that he was living with the appellant, but later she declared that he was living with her in
Pura.
Artemio also argues that since his house had no electricity and was dark even at
daytime, it was impossible for Elven and Eddie to see him allegedly doing pumping motion
on top of Cynthia. In his Reply Brief, he likewise urges us to disregard the testimonies of
rebuttal witnesses Celestino and Gloria. According to him, Celestino had an ax to grind
against him (Artemio) because he had been badgering Celestino for his share of the lot
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 where the hut stands, which was owned by Artemio's deceased mother. On the other hand,
Gloria wanted to get rid of Artemio because she was already cohabiting with another man.
In the Appellee's Brief, the O ce of the Solicitor General (OSG) prays for the
a rmation of Artemio's conviction and sentence, but recommends that a civil indemnity in
the amount of P75,000 be awarded in addition to the awards of moral and exemplary
damages.
We nd no cogent reason to overturn the ndings of the trial court on the culpability
of Artemio.
It is doctrinally settled that the factual ndings of the trial court, especially on the
credibility of the witnesses, are accorded great weight and respect and will not be
disturbed on appeal. This is so because the trial court has the advantage of observing the
witnesses through the different indicators of truthfulness or falsehood, such as the angry
ush of an insisted assertion, the sudden pallor of a discovered lie, the tremulous mutter
of a reluctant answer, the forthright tone of a ready reply, the furtive glance, the blush of
conscious shame, the hesitation, the yawn, the sigh, the candor or lack of it, the scant or
full realization of the solemnity of an oath, or the carriage and mien. 1 7 This rule, however,
admits of exceptions, as where there exists a fact or circumstance of weight and in uence
that has been ignored or misconstrued by the court, or where the trial court has acted
arbitrarily in its appreciation of the facts. 1 8 We do not nd any of these exceptions in the
case at bar.
As to the competency of Elven to testify, we rule that such is not affected by Section
25, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court, 1 9 otherwise known as the rule on " lial privilege." This
rule is not strictly a rule on disquali cation because a descendant is not incompetent or
disquali ed to testify against an ascendant. 2 0 The rule refers to a privilege not to testify,
which can be invoked or waived like other privileges. As correctly observed by the lower
court, Elven was not compelled to testify against his father; he chose to waive that lial
privilege when he voluntarily testi ed against Artemio. Elven declared that he was
testifying as a witness against his father of his own accord and only "to tell the truth." 2 1
Neither can Artemio challenge the prosecution's act of propounding leading
questions on Elven. Section 10(c) of Rule 132 of the Rules of Court 2 2 expressly allows
leading questions when the witness is a child of tender years like Elven.
The alleged ulterior motive of Elven in testifying against his father also deserves
scant consideration. Such insinuation of ill-motive is too lame and imsy. As observed by
the OSG, Elven, who was of tender age, could not have subjected himself to the ordeal of a
public trial had he not been compelled by a motive other than to bring to justice the
despoiler of his sister's virtue. There is no indication that Elven testi ed because of anger
or any ill-motive against his father, nor is there any showing that he was unduly pressured
or in uenced by his mother or by anyone to testify against his father. The rule is that where
there is no evidence that the principal witness for the prosecution was actuated by
improper motive, the presumption is that he was not so actuated and his testimony is
entitled to full credence. 2 3
We nd as inconsequential the alleged variance or difference in the time that the
rape was committed, i.e., during the night as testi ed to by Elven, or between 6:00 and
7:00 a.m. per the testimony of Eddie. The exact time or date of the commission of rape is
not an element of the crime. What is decisive in a rape charge is that the commission of
the rape by the accused has been su ciently proved. Inconsistencies and discrepancies
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 as to minor matters irrelevant to the elements of the crime cannot be considered grounds
for acquittal. 2 4 In this case, we believe that the crime of rape was, indeed, committed as
testified to by Elven and Eddie.
The alleged inconsistencies in the testimonies of both Elven and Gloria do not
impair the credibility of these witnesses. We agree with the trial court that they are minor
inconsistencies, which do not affect the credibility of the witnesses. We have held in a
number of cases that inconsistencies in the testimonies of witnesses that refer to minor
and insigni cant details do not destroy the witnesses' credibility. 2 5 On the contrary, they
may even be considered badges of veracity or manifestations of truthfulness on the
material points in the testimonies. What is important is that the testimonies agree on
essential facts and substantially corroborate a consistent and coherent whole. 2 6
Artemio's allegation that it was impossible for both Elven and Eddie to have seen
and witnessed the crime because the room was dark even at daytime was convincingly
disputed by rebuttal witnesses Gloria Pagala and Celestino Navarro. Furthermore, as
observed by the OSG, even if the hut was without electricity, Elven could not have been
mistaken in his identi cation of Artemio because he had known the latter for a long time.
Moreover, Elven was at the time only two meters away from Cynthia and Artemio. Even
without su cient illumination, Elven, who was jostled out of his sleep by Cynthia's loud cry,
could observe the pumping motion made by his father. 2 7
The alleged ill-motives on the part of Gloria and Celestino were not su ciently
proved. Nothing in the records suggests any reason that would motivate Gloria to testify
falsely against Artemio, who is the father of her other children. Moreover, we have
repeatedly held that no mother would subject her child to the humiliation, disgrace, and
trauma attendant to the prosecution for rape if she were not motivated solely by the desire
to have the person responsible for her child's de lement incarcerated. 2 8 As for Celestino,
he testi ed that the lot where the hut stands is owned by his daughter Erlinda, and not by
Artemio's mother. 2 9 At any rate, even without Celestino's testimony, Artemio's conviction
would stand.
The remaining issue for our resolution is the correctness of the penalty of death
imposed by the trial court. The death penalty was imposed because of the trial court's
appreciation of the special qualifying circumstances that Artemio is the father of the
victim and the latter was less than 18 years old at the time the crime was committed. DHEcCT

Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 7659, which is the
governing law in this case, pertinently reads:
Article 335. When and how rape is committed. —
The crime of rape shall be punished by reclusion perpetua.
The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed
with any of the following circumstances:
1. when the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender
is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by
consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the
common-law spouse of the parent of the victim.

To justify the imposition of the death penalty in a rape committed by a father on a

daughter, the minority of the victim and her relationship with the offender, which are
special qualifying circumstances, must be alleged in the complaint or information and
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 proved by the prosecution during the trial by the quantum of proof required for conviction.
The accusatory portion of the complaint in Criminal Case No. 9375 reads as follows:
That on or about the month of March 1996 at Sapang Tagalog,
Municipality of Tarlac, Province of Tarlac, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction
of this Honorable Court, the said accused Artemio S. Invencion did then and there
willfully, unlawfully and feloniously by using force and intimidation have carnal
knowledge of his daughter Cynthia P. Invencion who was sixteen (16) years old,
in their house.
CONTRARY TO LAW. 3 0

Although the relationship of Cynthia with her father Artemio was alleged in the complaint
and duly established by evidence during trial, the allegation in the complaint regarding her
age was not clearly proved.
In the very recent case of People v. Pruna, 3 1 we set the guidelines in appreciating
age either as an element of the crime or as a qualifying circumstance:
1. The best evidence to prove the age of the offended party is an original or
certified true copy of the certificate of live birth of such party.
2. In the absence of a certi cate of live birth; similar authentic documents
such as baptismal certi cate and school records which show the date of
birth of the victim would suffice to prove age.
3. If the certi cate of live birth or authentic document is shown to have been
lost or destroyed or otherwise unavailable, the testimony, if clear and
credible, of the victim's mother or a member of the family either by a nity
or consanguinity who is quali ed to testify on matters respecting pedigree
such as the exact age or date of birth of the offended party pursuant to
Section 40, Rule 130 of the Rules on Evidence shall be su cient under the
following circumstances:
a. If the victim is alleged to be below 3 years of age and what is
sought to be proved is that she is less than 7 years old;
b. If the victim is alleged to be below 7 years of age and what is
sought to be proved is that she is less than 12 years old;
c. If the victim is alleged to be below 12 years of age and what is
sought to be proved is that she is less than 18 years old.
4. In the absence of a certi cate of live birth, authentic document, or the
testimony of the victim's mother or relatives concerning the victim's age,
the complainant's testimony will su ce provided that it is expressly and
clearly admitted by the accused.
5. It is the prosecution that has the burden of proving the age of the offended
party. The failure of the accused to object to the testimonial evidence
regarding age shall not be taken against him.
6. The trial court should always make a categorical nding as to the age of
the victim.

In the present case, no birth certi cate or any similar authentic document was
presented and offered in evidence to prove Cynthia's age. The statement in the medical
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 certi cate showing Cynthia's age is not proof thereof, since a medical certi cate does not
authenticate the date of birth of the victim. Moreover, pursuant to Pruna, Gloria's testimony
regarding Cynthia's age was insu cient, since Cynthia was alleged to be 16 years old
already at the time of the rape and what is sought to be proved is that she was then 18
years old. Moreover, the trial court did not even make a categorical nding on Cynthia's
minority. Finally, the silence of Artemio or his failure to object to the testimonial evidence
regarding Cynthia's age could not be taken against him.
It must be stressed that the severity of death penalty, especially its irreversible and
nal nature once carried out, makes the decision-making process in capital offenses aptly
subject to the most exacting rules of procedure and evidence. 3 2 Accordingly, in the
absence of su cient proof of Cynthia's minority, Artemio cannot be convicted of quali ed
rape and sentenced to suffer the death penalty. He should only be convicted of simple
rape and meted the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
As regards the civil liability of Artemio, the awards of moral damages in the amount
of P50,000 and exemplary damages in the amount of P25,000 are insu cient. Civil
indemnity, which is mandatory upon the nding of the fact of rape, 3 3 should also be
awarded. In simple rape, the civil indemnity for the victim shall not be less than P50,000.
WHEREFORE, the decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 65, Tarlac, Tarlac, in
Criminal Case No. 9375 is hereby AFFIRMED with the modi cation that that accused
Artemio Invencion y Soriano is held guilty beyond reasonable doubt as principal of the
crime of simple rape, and is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to
pay the victim Cynthia Invencion the sums of P50,000 as indemnity; P50,000 as moral
damages; and P25,000 as exemplary damages. AEDISC

Costs de oficio.
SO ORDERED.
Bellosillo, Puno, Vitug, Mendoza, Panganiban, Quisumbing, Sandoval-Gutierrez,
Carpio, Austria-Martinez, Carpio-Morales, Callejo, Sr. and Azcuna, JJ., concur.
Ynares-Santiago and Corona, JJ., are on leave.

Footnotes
1. Pursuant to Article 47 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 7659.
2. Per Judge Angel J. Parazo. Original Record (OR), 147-156; Rollo, 29-38.

3. TSN, 8 April 1997, 7-10.

4. Id., 10-11; TSN, 15 April 1997, 2.
5. TSN, 7 May 1997, 4-10.
6. Id., 19-20.
7. TSN, 15 April 1997, 6-13.

8. Id., 9-12; Sinumpaang Salaysay, OR, 6.

9. TSN, 15 May 1997, 4-5; Exhibit "B", OR, 126.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com

 10. Exhibit "A", OR, 8-9.
11. TSN, 21 May 1997, 3-5.
12. TSN, 24 June 1997, 4-7.
13. TSN, 5 August 1997, 8.
14. Id., 12.
15. TSN, 7 August 1997, 4-6.
16. Section 25, Rule 130, 1991 Rules on Evidence.
17. People v. Bertulfo, G.R. No. 143790, 7 May 2002, citing People v. Abella, 339 SCRA 129,
144-145 [2000].
18. Id., citing People v. Quejada, 223 SCRA 77 [1993].
19. SEC. 25. Parental and filial privilege. — No person may be compelled to testify against
his parents, other direct ascendants, children or other direct descendants.
20. See 2 FLORENZ REGALADO, REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM 583 (7th rev. ed. 1995).
21. TSN, 8 April 1997, 5.

22. SEC. 10. Leading and misleading questions. — A question which suggests to the
witness the answer which the examining party desires is a leading question. It is not
allowed, except:
xxx xxx xxx

(c) When there is difficulty in getting direct and intelligible answers from a witness
who is ignorant, or a child of tender years, or is a feeble mind, or a deaf-mute. . .
.

23. People v. Ramos, 312 SCRA 137, 148 [1999].

24. People v. Matugas, G.R. Nos. 139698-726, 20 February 2002. See also People v. Alba,
305 SCRA 811 [1999]; People v. Montejo, 355 SCRA 210, 226 [2001].
25. People v. Palomar, 278 SCRA 114, 147 [1997].
26. People v. Gaspar, 318 SCRA 649, 671 [1999].
27. See Appellant's Brief, 14.
28. People v. Oliva, 282 SCRA 470, 482 [1997]. See also People v. Sanchez, 250 SCRA 14,
27 [1995]; People v. Dela Cruz 251 SCRA 77, 85 [1995]; People v. Alimon, 257 SCRA 658,
676 [1996].
29. TSN, 7 August 1997, 7-8.

30. Rollo, 17.

31. G.R. No. 138471, 10 October 2002.

32. People v. Pruna, supra, citing People v. Liban, 345 SCRA 453 [2000].
33. People v. Rebato, 358 SCRA 230, 238 [2001]; People v. Panganiban, 359 SCRA 509, 524
[2001].
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com