A PATIENT with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) has asked the Supreme Court to reverse and set aside a ruling of the Court of Appeals affirming the decision of the Taguig City Metropolitan Trial Court junking the discrimination suit he filed against a dentist and owner of a major dental clinic.
In a petition for review on certiorari filed on April 17, the complainant said the appellate court erred in its June 28, 2022 decision and February 9, 2023 resolution affirming the August 23, 2018 decision of Taguig MeTC 116 Judge Richard Pascual dismissing the case for violation of Republic Act 8504, also known as the Philippines AIDS Prevention and Control Act of 1998, based on the accused’s demurrer to evidence.
The Taguig City Regional Trial Court Branch 153 also denied the petition for certiorari jointly filed by the complainant and the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG).
The patient also asked the High Court to rule that Pascual abused his discretion when he ruled to junk his case against Dr. Sarah Jane Mugar and Dr. Mylene Guevarra-Agrubay, who is the owner of the Enhanced Dental Clinic (EDC).
He also petitioned that the case be remanded to the trial court for continuation of proceedings.
Records of the case showed that the complainant went to the said dental clinic on February 16, 2017 to seek treatment due to the pain in his left molar tooth.
He initially consulted Mugar, to whom he disclosed that he was under medical treatment for HIV.
He said Mugar advised him to undergo molar tooth extraction but advised him to first secure a clearance from his attending physician at the San Lazaro Hospital. His tooth extraction can be scheduled as soon as he is able to present the clearance.
After getting clearance from the hospital, the patient said he went to the EDC but Mugar allegedly turned down his request, explaining that the instruction came from the clinic’s owner who said that they do not have the “UV” type of desterilization equipment needed for his surgery.
He said he found the excuse hard to believe since EDC boasted on its website of having advance dental equipment.
“The reason for the denial was apparent – this is because (complainant) is afflicted with HIV,” the petition read.
The complainant then lodged a discrimination suit before the Taguig city prosecutors’ office, which found probable cause indict Mugar and Guevarra-Agrubay.
The case was raffled to the sala of Pascual and during the arraignment, the two entered pleaded “not guilty.”
However on August 2, 2018, Pascual dismissed the charges on the ground that the prosecution “failed to properly discharge its burden establishing the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.”
On December 14, 2018, Pascual also dismissed the complainant’s motion for reconsideration, prompting him to elevate the case to the CA.
However, the appellate court also ruled against him and denied his appeal as well as a subsequent motion for reconsideration.
The denials prompted the patient to elevate the case to the SC.
In seeking the SC’s intervention, the patient said the CA committed a “reversible error” when it failed to recognize Pascual’s abuse of discretion when he ruled to junk the case and subsequently denied his motion for reconsideration.
He said the CA also erred when it held that the appeal was without conformity of the OSG and that the latter also failed to file the memorandum within the required reglementary period even if the OSG clearly pursued the appeal.
He asked the SC to rule in his favor, saying that his case is of “extreme public importance.”
“It is also a novel case insofar as Philippine jurisdiction is concerned. This case tests the way the State enforces protection against discrimination of people suffering with AIDS.
Thus, this Honorable Court disposition of the instant case may very well set a precedent on how the Philippines respond to the call of the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS for zero discrimination in health care settings “ he said.
