You are on page 1of 1

Valenton, Francis Angelo T.

Criminal Law 2

1S

Aguirre vs. Secretary of Justice (G. R. No. 170723)

Facts: The petitioner is Gloria Pilar S. Aguirre. The respondents are Secretary of the Department
of Justice, Michelina S. Aguirre-Olondriz, Pedro B. Aguirre, Dr. Juvido Agatep and Dr. Marissa
B. Pascual. In the case at bar, a certain Laureano Larry Aguirre was adopted by the herein
respondent Pedro Aguirre and his spouse. As Larry was growing up, the spouses Aguirre and
their children noticed that Larry’s developmental milestones were remarkably delayed. In
November of 2001, the herein respondent Dr. Agatep was approached concerning the intention to
have Larry, then 24 years old, vasectomized. In view of the required psychiatric clearance for the
performance of such procedure, Larry was brought to respondent Dr. Pascual, a psychiatrist, for
evaluation. The latter said that the responsibility of decision making may be given to his parent
or guardian. Respondent Pedro Aguirre then wrote a consent letter. Hence, the vasectomy
proceeded. On June 11, 2002 the herein petitioner filed a complaint against the herein
respondents for the crime of mutilation.

Issue: Is the respondent liable for mutilation.

Held: The Supreme Court said that in order for the crime of mutilation to rise, the two elements
must concur. These are: 1) that there be a castration, that is, mutilation of organs necessary for
generation; and 2) that the mutilation is caused purposely and deliberately, that is, to deprive the
offended party of some essential organ for reproduction. The question in this case is that if
vasectomy denies a man of his power of reproduction. The Supreme Court said that vasectomy
does not deprive a person either totally or partially of some essential organ for reproduction.