CHAPTER V: PROSECUTION

The Complaint: Who Shall File It

“The offenses of seduction, abduction, rape or acts of lasciviousness, shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the offended party or by her parents, grandparents, or guardian, nor in any case, if the offender has been expressly pardoned by the above named persons, as the case may be. In case the offended party dies or becomes incapacitated before he could file the complaint and has no known parents, grandparents or guardian, the State shall initiate the criminal action in her behalf.” (Par. 3, Sec. 5, Rule 110, Rules of Court).

Under the above provision of law, the right to institute a criminal action for the offenses of seduction, abduction, rape or acts of lasciviousness is reposed exclusively and successively on the persons enumerated in the order they are named. This means,no one has the authority to proceed if there is some other person previously mentioned with legal capacity to appear and institute the action. Thus, a father cannot file a complaint for any of the above named crimes committed against his daughter if the latter has the legal capacity to appear and institute the action (People vs. De los Santos, 172 SCRA 547; U.S. vs. De la Santa, 9 Phil. 22).

The preferential right of the offended party to file the complaint will not however apply where she is otherwise physically or legally incapacitated to do so. In other words, even if she were a minor, she has the right to institute the prosecution for the above offenses independently of her parents, grandparents or guardian, unless she is incompetent or incapable of doing so upon grounds other than her minority (Par. 4, Sec. 5, Rule 110, Rules of Court).

A complaint for the crime of rape signed by the offended party, despite minority, confers jurisdiction upon the court (U.S. vs. Bautista, 40 Phil. 35); People vs. Medina, 45 OG 338). However, when the offended party who is a minor fails to file the complaint, her parents, grandparents or guardian may file the same (Tolentino vs. Dela Costa, 66 Phil. 100; Par. 4, Sec 5, Rule 110, Rules of Court). The same rule applies if the minor refuses to file the complaint (People vs. Bangalao, 94 Phil. 354; People vs. Pastores, L-29800, Aug. 31, 1971).

“It is well-settled that when the offended party is a minor, the father may file a complaint under Art. 344of the Revised Penal Code. The father has the custody of the person of the minor and owes to her all the legal obligations of maintenance, care and protection growing out of the relationship. The omission of relationship in the complaint is, if at all, a formal, not jurisdictional, defect.” (People vs. Copro, 126 SCRA 403).

Specially, when the offended party is a minor and she does not file the complaint, this may be done by her parents, grandparents or guardian, in the order named. If she is already of age and is in complete possession of her mental and physical faculties, the complaint should be filed by her exclusively. This is so because it is her paramount right to avenge the wrong done to the exclusion of her parents and other relatives mentioned in the law (People vs. Imas, 64 Phil. 412; People vs. Bautista, supra).

The Rationale of Article 344

Article 344 requires a complaint of the offended party in crimes against chastity out of consideration for the offended woman and her family who might prefer to suffer the outrage in silence rather than go through with the scandal of a public trial (Samilin vs. CFI of Pangasinan, 57 Phil. 298; Dario Teves, et al. vs. Vamenta, et al., 133 SCRA 616; Valdepenas vs. People, 16 SCRA 871; People vs. Tañada, 166 SCRA 361). The law deems it the wiser policy to let the aggrieved woman and her family decide whether to expose to public view or to heated controversies in court the vices, faults and disgraceful acts occuring in the family (U.S. vs. Bautista, supra).

 Article 344 was not enacted for the specific purpose of benefiting the accused. When it is said that the requirement in Article 344 (that there should be a complaint of the offended party or her relatives) is jurisdictional, what is meant is that it is the complaint that starts the prosecutory proceedings. It is not the complaint which confers jurisdiction on the court to try the case. The court’s jurisdiction is vested in it by the Judiciary Law (Valdepenas vs. People, supra).

“The complaint required in Art. 344 is merely a condition precedent to the exercise by the proper authorities of the power to prosecute the guilty parties. And such condition has been imposed out of consideration for the offended woman and her family who might prefer to suffer the outrage in silence rather than go through with the scandal of a public trial”. (Samilio vs. CFI of Pangasinan, supra, cited in Valdepeñas vs. People, supra People vs. Estrebella, 164 SCRA 114).

Requirement in Filing Complaint for Rape is Jurisdictional

A complaint for rape shall be filed by the offended party, or her parents, grandparents or guardian. Such requirement is jurisdictional and not procedural (People vs. Santos, No. L-8520, June 29, 1952). It is mandatory. (Tolentino vs. Dela Cruz, 66 Phil. 97; People vs. Ocampo, 150 SCRA 607; People vs. Mandia, 60 Phil. 372). Failure to comply with it would be proper basis for a motion to quash under paragraph (b), Section 3, Rule 117 of the Rules of Court, on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant.

The Supreme Court has invariably maintained strict compliance with the jurisdictional requirement of filing a complaint by the offended party as defined in Article 344 of the Revised Penal Code and Section 5 of Rule 110 of the Rules of Court (People vs. Engreso, 49 OG 1505)

Meaning of the Term “Parents”

The term “parents” refers to both father and mother (U.S. vs. Garibosa, 25 Phil. 171). Either has no preferential right over each other This means one can file a complaint even in the presence of the other (People vs. Mariano, L47437, Sept. 29, 1983). They jointly exercise parental authority over the legitimate children who are not emancipated. It is their duty to represent their emancipated children in actions which may redound to their benefit (Arts. 311 and 316, New Civil Code).

“It is contended that the trial court did not acquire jurisdiction over the case because the complaint for rape was filed by the mother of the eleven-year old offended girl and not by the father. It is argued that the father had the exclusive authority to file the complaint. Held: The contention is untenable. It is based on a dubious technicality. If sustained, it might defeat the ends of justice. It is not sanctioned by Section 4 of Rule 110, nor by Article 344 of the Revised Penal Code whose provisions do not categorically specify that father has the preferential right to file the complaint for seduction, abduction, rape or abuso deshonestos. It is noteworthy that the father and mother jointly exercise parental authority of their legitimate children who are not emancipated. It is their duty to represent their emancipated children in allactions which may redound to their benefit (People vs. De Ia Cruz, 56 SCRA 84).

In the same manner, neither the grandparents — grandmother or grandfather — has preferential right over the other in the filing of the complaint for and on behalf of their grandchildren.