LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

R.A. Republic Act

Art. - article

Sec. section

Par. - paragraph

1
 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES (LIST OF SOURCES)

1. Republic Act No. 9262 Law Against Violence Against Women and Children

2. Family Code of the Philippines

3. Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure (Sec. 3, par. (a), Rule 117)

2
 STATEMENT OF FACTS

1) Sometime in 2008, Datu Digong met Leni Ako in a famous restaurant in Davao City. Datu Digong
is a chief cook of a local commercial shipping company. Leni Ako was a sophomore student of
Ateneo de Davao University taking up Bachelor of Science in Nursing.

2) After a very short courtship, Datu proposed marriage to Leni. They got married in 2009 in a
simple church wedding ceremony. Because of the demand of his work, the couple decided to live
in Cagayan de Oro City and rented a small house, which served as their temporary conjugal
dwelling.

3) One night, while Leni was browsing the inbox of the cellphone of Digong, she found a message
which read: Langga, asa man ka? Gimingaw nako nimo. Leni immediately confronted Digong
who strongly denied that he was having an affair with the unknown sender.

4) On the next day, Leni left for Davao and stayed with his parents in Matina, Davao City. Digong
didnt follow her, much more took the effort to win Lenis heart again. Since then, the two didnt
have any communication.

5) On the other hand, Digong moved to Manila for greener pasture and got employed in a
multinational shipping company, MAERSK Line Company. His hard work and dedication paid
off. He was promoted in 2014 as Executive Chef of the company. On the other hand, Leni
remained in Davao City and didnt finish her college.

6) On November 25, 2016, Digong received a call from his mother in Davao that they received a
subpoena from the Office of the City Prosecutor of Davao. The subpoena contains parts of the
following:

3
Greetings!

You are hereby required to answer within ten (10) days from the receipt of the herein attached
AFFIDAVIT COMPLAINT, in a form of COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT, furnish copy to
complainant and submit the same to this Office.

FOR Violation of Republic Act 9262

The issue in the complaint is whether there is probable cause to file charges for the crime of
violation of RA 9262, particularly under Section D, paragraph 1 or economic abuse.

We find probable cause.

Section D, paragraph 1 or RA 9262 explicitly provides, to wit:

D. Economic abuse refers to acts that make or attempt to make a woman financially
dependent which includes, but is not limited to the following:

1. Withdrawal of financial support or preventing the victim from engaging in any

legitimate profession, occupation, business or activity, except in cases wherein the other
spouse/partner objects on valid, serious and moral grounds as defined in Article 73 of the
Family Code;

2. Deprivation or threat of deprivation of financial resources and the right to the use and
enjoyment of the conjugal, community or property owned in common;

3. Destroying household property;

4. Controlling the victims own money or properties or solely controlling the conjugal
money or properties.

4
 The complainant and the respondent are legally married. The complainant wants to pursue her
studies but respondent is preventing her from finishing her own studies without any valid
reason. Respondent is gainfully employed and can very well afford to send her wife to school.

WHEREFORE, there being a finding of probable cause, it is respectfully recommended that an

information for violation of Section D (1) of R.A. 9262 be filed against respondent Datu
Digong.

7) On January 15, 2017, the City Prosecutor filed the information to the court. The information reads
as follows:

INFORMATION

The undersigned Prosecutor accuses Datu Digong for VIOLATION OF R.A 9262 committed as
follows:

The sometime from the month September 2009, up to the present at Matina, Davao City,
Philippines and within the jurisdiction of the Honorable Court the above named accused, being the
husband of LENI AKO did and there willfully and unlawfully commit an act of economic abuse upon
afore-named wife by then and there depriving her of financial support, preventing her from continuing
her studies despite his capacity to do so, causing her mental or emotional anguish.

CONTRARY to and in violation of Sec. D (1) of R.A. 9262

8) As Digong was scheduled for embarkation on the following day, he failed to submit his counter
- affidavit.

5
 ISSUES

1. Whether or not the petitioners claim for marital infidelity is a valid ground to abandon the
conjugal home?

2. Whether or not the complaint has considerable basis to constitute economic abuse under R.A.
9262?

3. Whether or not the text message is admissible as evidence in court?

4. Whether or not the petitioners statement in her complaint affidavit is contradictory to the facts
narrated in the information?

5. Is there veracity on the text message read by the wife?

6
 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

o The text message was not sufficient to prove that the accused committed marital infidelity.
o The accused was not depriving her of financial support.
o The facts charged do not constitute an offense.
o RA 9262 was not violated.

7
 POINTS OF ARGUMENTS

o The mere existence of the text message was not sufficient to prove that Datu Digong committed
marital infidelity. It cannot be considered as a valid evidence for grounds against marital infidelity
unless be presented before the court and found authentic and correct. Hence, the reason of the
complainant is not held reasonable to abandon their rented conjugal home in Cagayan de Oro
City. Article 127, sec. 1 of the Family Code provides that the spouse who leaves the conjugal
home, or refuses without just cause, shall not have the right to be supported.

o Leni Ako does not have any right to be supported at all since she left the conjugal home and chose
to stay with her mother without giving any information about her whereabouts. Article 101, par.
3 of the Family Code provides that A spouse is deemed to have abandoned the other when he or
she has left the conjugal dwelling without the intention of returning. The spouse who has left the
conjugal dwelling for a period of three months or has failed within the same period to give any
information of his or her whereabouts shall be prima facie presumed to have no intention of
returning to the conjugal dwelling.

o The accused spouse may have acted in good faith by refusing to send his wife to school to attain
the homely needs solely as they are already financially capacitated through his occupational
status, and the complaint bares no substantial basis to constitute economic abuse under R.A. 9262.

o No section of RA 9262 was violated at all since the allegation could not be considered as a crime.
In Criminal Law, a crime is defined as an act committed or omitted in violation of a public law
forbidding or commanding it.

o The accused may move to quash the complaint or information as stated under Rule 117, sec. 3 of
the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure provided that the facts charged do not constitute an
offense. In the case, it did not constitute an offense under RA 9262.

8
 CONCLUSION

Based on the above presented facts, we are hereby filing for a motion to quash pursuant to Section
3, par (a) of Rule 117 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure seeking the dismissal of the case on
the ground that the facts in the information do not constitute an offense under R.A. 9262. Further provided
that the accused did not commit marital infidelity, did not deprive her of financial support, and that the
text message has not veracity and cant be used as valid evidence against the accused, Datu Digong.

9
10