Published in the Bohol Chronicle.
*******
Here is a lesson abusive teachers should learn.
Hilarion Araysa, a Grade 4 teacher of Cambuac Sur Elementary School, Sikatuna town was recently found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Child Abuse for violating Section 10 of Republic Act No. 7610, paragraph 1 in relation to Section 31 (e) and (f) (Anti-Child Abuse Act).
In a 41-page decision penned by Regional Trial Court - Branch 1 (Family Court) Presiding Judge Teofilo D. Baluma, Araysa was meted the penalty of 6 years and 1 day of prison mayor as minimum to 12 years of prison mayor as maximum with the accessory penalties and a fine of P12,000.
In an amended information, the victim, then 9 years old and a Grade 4 pupil of the said school, complained that on November 17, 2000, Araysa subjected him to physical abuse by scratching his face and hitting his back, which caused him to suffer injuries.
The child likewise complained that after inflicting injuries, Araysa also threatened him, causing psychological trauma.
Traumatized by the incident, the child stopped attending classes that school year. The following school year, he enrolled again in Grade 4 but in another school and in another town.
The court ruled that the prosecution ably presented credible witnesses to prove the incident whereas the defense raised nothing but negative defenses, arguing under the guise of discipline, that the accused only guided the child and merely exercised substitute parental authority.
This argument was, however, dismissed by the court as too flimsy to be credible.
As stated by the decision, "the denial proffered by the accused was plainly and simply misplaced being inherently weak as it was a clear negative evidence which failed to overcome the positive testimonies of the witnesses of the prosecution."
The court quoted the case of People vs. Jaime Bano alias Jimmy where the Supreme Court ruled that, "unsubstantiated defenses of denial and alibi, being negative and self-serving, deserves no weight in law and cannot, therefore, be given evidentiary value over the testimonies of credible witnesses who testify on affirmative matters."
The conviction of the erring teacher was a victorious moment for the child, now 15 years old, and his family.
This case should serve as a warning to all public and private teachers alike that although they are faced with the daunting task of educating children, they do not have the liberty to inflict physical and psychological injuries upon their students.
Teachers should not forget the demarcation line between discipline and violence.
As quoted in the Decision, "Violence is not discipline and discipline is not violence.
Discipline administered by a parent or a guardian to a child does not constitute cruelty provided it is reasonable in a manner and degree that does not constitute physical or psychological injuries."
Teachers should remember that while elders have the challenge of disciplining their children or students to prepare them for the future, they should not resort to methods that tend to degrade the well-being of the children.
The prosecution was handled by the Office of the Ombudsman-Visayas through Prosecutor Venerando Ralph Santiago Jr. and lawyer Esther Gertrude D. Biliran. Counsel for the defense was lawyer Danilo A. Bantugan.
Linkback:
https://tubagbohol.mikeligalig.com/index.php?topic=51.0