Case Summary (G.R. No. 193652)
Adoption Proceedings and Petitioner’s Change of Heart
A local matching conference on January 27, 2010 paired Baby Julian with prospective adoptive parents, the Medina spouses. Supervised trial custody commenced on February 5, 2010. On May 5, 2010, Christina wrote to DSWD requesting suspension of adoption proceedings, expressing her desire to reunite the family. The DSWD informed her that the three-month reglementary period for restoring parental authority had lapsed under Section 7 of R.A. No. 9523.
Petition for Writ of Amparo Before the RTC
On July 27, 2010, Christina filed a petition for a writ of amparo in Quezon City RTC, Branch 106. She alleged that DSWD officers had “blackmailed” her into signing the Deed of Voluntary Commitment, thereby depriving her of custody and effecting an “enforced disappearance” of her child. The RTC issued the writ on July 28, 2010, directing respondents to produce Baby Julian and file a verified return. Respondents appeared, filed their return, and explained that the child was with the Medina spouses and that threats of kidnapping prevented his appearance at the initial hearing.
RTC Proceedings and Dismissal
The RTC conducted hearings on August 4 and 5, 2010. The Office of the Solicitor General was permitted to participate. The court narrowed the issues to jurisdiction, propriety of the amparo remedy, and merits of the custody claim. After viewing the child and receiving position papers, the RTC dismissed the petition on August 17, 2010, holding that amparo is not the proper remedy for asserting parental authority or contesting child custody; a civil action under the Family Code and the Rule on Custody of Minors or a writ of habeas corpus would be appropriate. The petition for reconsideration was denied on September 6, 2010.
Issue on Appeal
The Supreme Court addressed whether a petition for writ of amparo is a proper recourse for reclaiming parental authority and custody of a minor child. Christina also challenged the constitutionality of R.A. No. 9523 and sought application of amparo to vindicate her rights to life, liberty, and security.
Scope and Purpose of the Writ of Amparo
Under Section 1 of the Amparo Rule, the writ addresses extralegal killings and enforced disappearances—or threats thereof—by public or private actors. In Secretary of National Defense v. Manalo and subsequent jurisprudence (Lozada Jr. v. Macapagal-Arroyo; Navia v. Pardico), the Court confined amparo’s coverage to these contexts, requiring (1) arrest, detention, abduction or deprivation of liberty; (2) state involvement; (3) refusal to disclose fate or whereabouts; and (4) intent to remove the victim from legal protection for a prolonged period.
Court’s
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 193652)
Facts of the Case
- Ma. Christina Yusay Caram became pregnant by Marcelino Gicano Constantino III without marriage and feigned an abortion to him while carrying the child to term.
- Christina intended to have the newborn adopted through Sun and Moon Home for Children to avoid family embarrassment.
- On July 26, 2009, Baby Julian was born; Sun and Moon Home for Children paid all medical expenses.
- On August 13, 2009, Christina executed a Deed of Voluntary Commitment, surrendering Baby Julian to the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD).
- Marcelino died on November 26, 2009, without knowledge of his son’s birth; his family later learned of Baby Julian and vowed to help Christina regain custody.
- On November 27, 2009, DSWD issued a certificate declaring Baby Julian “Legally Available for Adoption.”
- A local matching conference on January 27, 2010 paired the child with prospective adoptive parents, the Medina spouses, leading to supervised trial custody.
- On May 5, 2010, Christina sought suspension of the adoption proceedings and recovery of parental custody.
- On May 28, 2010, DSWD informed Christina that her parental rights had lapsed by operation of law under Section 7 of R.A. 9523, three months after her Deed of Voluntary Commitment.
- In July 2010, a planned DNA test was blocked by DSWD officials, who advised Christina to seek relief in regular courts.
Procedural History
- July 27, 2010: Christina filed a petition for a writ of amparo in RTC Quezon City, Branch 106, alleging unlawful deprivation of custody and enforced disappearance.
- July 28, 2010: The trial court issued the writ of amparo, directed respondents to produce Baby Julian on August 4, 2010, and to file a return within five days.
- August