SHE was ?brainwashed? by her father into taking up law instead of the fine arts course she preferred, reveals Judge Victoria Isabel A. Paredes. ?He was a criminal lawyer and he?d bring me to court to watch him during trials. He would even discuss his cases with me,? she recalls. ?I was also brought up thinking that members of the Paredes clan are expected to go into law or politics,? adds this great niece of Quintin Paredes, who was Senate President during the early ?50s.

But that parental advice was the last bit of pressure that Paredes, a graduate of the University of the Philippines? College of Law, would give in to. Her determined stance to uphold the law as family court judge in Caloocan City led to her being cited recently as the country?s ?Outstanding Gender-Sensitive Judge.? The award was given by the Philippine Commission on Women, the Commission on Human Rights, and the Supreme Court.

Paredes was cited for her decisions involving cases that violated the anti-rape law (Republic Act 8353) and the law against child abuse, exploitation and discrimination (RA 7610). The victims were all minors, with ages ranging from seven to 15, and they all suffered from sexual abuse at the hands of male relatives or neighbors.

Although the law mandates that these survivors testify on the witness stand, Paredes makes sure that unnecessary trauma in reliving the experience is minimized, the child?s privacy is respected and that defense lawyers are made aware that the victim?s sexual history should not be brought up during the trial.

Paredes started as a corporate lawyer in 1975 and later joined the Department of Justice as a state counsel. ?I was no longer that keen about corporate work because it had ceased to be challenging for me,? she explains. She was appointed judge in 1996.

Her years on the bench established her reputation as a hardworking, no-nonsense judge. ?I have very little patience with lawyers who come to my court unprepared. I really take them to task for this,? says this single judge who gets up at 3:30 in the morning to be at her office by 6:30. ?This routine affords me time to read my trial schedules, review my laws, and study the cases before me in relative peace and quiet before all activities in my courtroom begin.?

Paredes notes that, especially in sexual abuse cases, the child victim is almost always called as witness. ?You would want to spare the child the ordeal of reliving the torment she went through at the hands of her abuser. She is still suffering from some psychological trauma even if the physical injuries from her experience have healed. But my hands are tied. She has to testify.?

In such situations, Paredes ensures that her court strictly conforms to the rule on examining a child witness.

This rule of court aims ?to create and maintain an environment that will allow children to give reliable and complete evidence, minimize trauma, encourage children to testify in legal proceedings, and facilitate the ascertainment of truth.?

?It is very intimidating for a child to appear in court as a witness. That?s why I see to it that, as much as possible, the process would minimize trauma for her. If I sense that she seems afraid of the defense counsel, I can direct the counsel not to approach her. I can even order the public out of my courtroom to protect her privacy or if I have determined that giving testimony in open court would add to her psychological trauma,? she explains.

Paredes is also very particular in applying the sexual abuse shield rule. This rule considers inadmissible evidence that seeks to prove that the alleged victim engaged in other sexual behaviors or if it relates to the victim?s sexual predisposition.

?Despite the sexual abuse shield rule, there are still counsels who will file a motion to present as evidence a specific instance of a complainant?s sexual behavior. Barring any compelling argument for the motion, I generally deny it,? she says.

One of the cases that clinched the award for her involved a 15-year-old girl who accused her neighbor of raping her. The defense counsel wanted to present a witness who claimed that the alleged victim visited her boyfriend the day before, spent the night alone with him, and went back to Caloocan with kiss marks on her neck.

?The defense wanted to cast reasonable doubt on the guilt of his client by alluding to the victim?s sexual behavior. Of course, following the sexual abuse shield rule, I ruled that he cannot present his witness,? she says.

Paredes observes that some lawyers still insist on including a complainant?s sexual history in their defense. ?You?d be surprised, but some lawyers are not aware of the sexual abuse shield rule, or the similar rape shield rule. Even some judges are not aware of these rules.?

This, according to Paredes, shows a limitation in the way the judiciary handles cases involving women and children. ?There is a need for the judiciary to build the capability of justices, judges, lawyers and court personnel to be gender-sensitive and to understand and appreciate the rights of women and children.?

While women?s groups hail as a major victory the passage of such laws as the anti-rape law and the law against child abuse, Paredes maintains that much remains to be done.

?The judiciary must step up and work harder to address gender bias in the court system. At the same time, lawyers and judges need to keep educating themselves on new jurisprudence, especially those that pertain to cases involving women and children. Otherwise, we who are in the profession of upholding and defending the law will be the weakest link in protecting the rights of women and children and in bestowing justice to those whose rights have been violated,? the judge points out. Women?s Feature Service