FACTS: Maningding and Bersamina lived together without a valid marriage. From their cohabitation Zoe was born. Subsequently, they had differences that led Bersamina to leave their home and brought Zoe with her at her parents’ residence. They executed a Kasunduan to the effect that Maningding has three-day custody of Zoe.
Maningding filed a Verified Petition for Habeas Corpus with Custody and Parental Authority against Bersamina at the RTC QC, demanding (1) visual examination of Zoe and (2) medical examination of Zoe; and praying for full provisional custody and parental authority over Zoe with a minimum of three days custody—before granting him full custody.
Initially, the RTC granted the issuance of the writ sought. Maningding was granted visitation rights, provided he doesn’t bring Zoe outside his residence. However, the RTC suspended the visitation rights when Maningding failed to return Zoe on time of scheduled return. Finally, after exchange of position papers, the RTC granted Maningding 9AM to 5PM visitorial rights every Sunday on a condition that the same is supervised by the designated social worker.
The CA denied the appeal holding that mothers are entitled to the sole parental authority of their illegitimate children; and thus mothers are entitled to keep them, absent any imperative cause showing the mother’s unfitness to exercise such authority and care. However, the father is not left without any right. Visitorial right of an illegitimate father over his children is a constitutionally protected inherent and natural right of parents over their children. Thus, the father is entitled only visitation rights and not custody of the illegitimate child.
ISSUE: Whether an illegitimate father, Maningding, is entitled to full custody of Zoe, an illegitimate child.
RULING: No. It is a threshold principle that “insofar as illegitimate children are concerned, Article 176 of the Family Code states that illegitimate children shall be under the parental authority of their mother. Accordingly, mothers are entitled to the sole parental authority of their illegitimate children, notwithstanding the father’s recognition of the child. In the exercise of that authority, mothers are consequently entitled to keep their illegitimate children in their company, and the Court will not deprive them of custody, absent any imperative cause showing the mother’s unfitness to exercise such authority and care.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, a biological father’s visitation right (i.e., the right of access of a non-custodial parent to his or her child or children) has been recognized as an inherent and natural right.
AM No. 03-04-04-SC or the Rule on Custody of Minors and Writ of Habeas Corpus in Relation to Custody of Minors” allows the lower courts wide discretion to provide for “appropriate visitation rights to the non-custodial parent, unless the court finds said parent or parents unfit or disqualified” and to “issue any order that is just and reasonable permitting the parent who is deprived of the care and custody of the minor to visit or [when appropriate,] have temporary custody.
