SC：过度管教不应损害孩子的尊严

虽然并非所有形式的体罚都构成虐待儿童，但最高法院表示，过度体罚不应损害儿童的尊严。

The Supreme Court has ruled that while some forms of physical discipline may not constitute child abuse, parents should avoid excessive discipline that could harm a child's dignity.

最高法院裁定，虽然某些形式的体罚可能不构成虐待儿童，但父母应避免可能损害儿童尊严的过度体罚。

In a 14-page decision, the high court stated that the manner in which children are disciplined by their parents should not "be violent, excessive, or disproportionate to their misbehavior."

在一份长达 14 页的裁决中，高等法院表示，父母管教儿童的方式不应“暴力、过度或与他们的不当行为不相称”。

"This Court held that the laying of hands against a child, when done in the spur of the moment and in the heat of anger, cannot be deemed as an act of child abuse, absent the offender's specific intent to debase, degrade, or demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of the child as a human being," the court's decision read.

“本法院认为，如果犯罪者没有具体意图贬低、贬低或贬低儿童，那么在一时冲动和盛怒之下对儿童下手，不能被视为虐待儿童行为。儿童作为人的内在价值和尊严，”法院的判决中写道。

The case, penned by Associate Justice Jhosep Lopez, was promulgated on July 22, 2024.

该案件由副法官约瑟夫·洛佩兹 (Jhosep Lopez) 撰写，于 2024 年 7 月 22 日颁布。

The case arose from the conviction of a father, identified as XXX, who subjected his 12-year-old daughter and 10-year-old son to violent and excessive discipline between 2017 and 2018.

该案起因于一位名叫 XXX 的父亲被定罪，他在 2017 年至 2018 年间对他 12 岁的女儿和 10 岁的儿子进行暴力和过度管教。

The father's actions included kicking his daughter, pulling her hair, striking them with a wooden rod, and hitting them with a dustpan. He also repeatedly cursed at his children.

父亲的行为包括踢女儿、拉扯她的头发、用木棍打女儿、用簸箕打她们。他还多次咒骂自己的孩子。

XXX argued that these actions were intended to discipline his children for misbehavior, such as failing to eat lunch and losing money from their coin banks.

XXX 辩称，这些行为是为了惩罚他的孩子的不当行为，例如不吃午饭和丢失硬币银行的钱。

However, the lower courts found him guilty of violating Republic Act No. 7610, the Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act.

然而，下级法院判定他违反了第 7610 号共和国法，即《特别保护儿童免遭虐待、剥削和歧视法》。

This prompted XXX to file a petition before the Supreme Court.

这促使 XXX 向最高法院提交请愿书。

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction, stating that the father's actions went beyond reasonable discipline and clearly intended to harm the children's dignity.

最高法院维持原判，称父亲的行为超出了合理纪律，明显意图损害孩子们的尊严。

According to the Supreme Court, while parents have the right to discipline their children, such discipline must be reasonable and should not involve violence, excessive force, or punishment that is disproportionate to the child's misbehavior.

根据最高法院的规定，虽然父母有权管教子女，但这种管教必须合理，不应涉及暴力、过度武力或与孩子的不当行为不相称的惩罚。

The high court clarified that without the specific intent to harm a child's dignity, the offender may still be held liable under other provisions of the Revised Penal Code.

高等法院澄清，如果没有损害儿童尊严的具体意图，犯罪者仍可能根据修订后的刑法典的其他条款被追究责任。

"In the absence of this specific intent, the offender cannot be held liable for child abuse but only for other crimes punishable under the RPC, provided that all the elements of the latter are present," the court's decision read.

法院的判决中写道：“在没有这种具体意图的情况下，犯罪者不能对虐待儿童承担责任，而只能对根据 RPC 可惩罚的其他罪行承担责任，前提是后者的所有要素都存在。”

The father was sentenced to four to six years in prison and fined P45,000. He was also ordered to pay his children P180,000 in damages.

父亲被判处四到六年监禁，并罚款 P45,000。他还被勒令向他的孩子们支付 180,000 比索的损害赔偿金。