The reversal of conviction based on a plea of guilty is an act which is not at all explained by the respondent court and, therefore, in excess of its jurisdiction. The respondent court further ruled that Christina Dempsey is not entitled to the rights arising from the parental responsibility of her father, she being an illegitimate child. Reliance was made on Art. 17 of P. D. 603 which defines the joint parental authority of parents over their legitimate or adopted children. The respondent court's observations are wrong because the law itself protects even illegitimate children.
Illegitimate children have rights of the same nature as legitimate and adopted children.
This is enunciated in Art. Rights must be enforced or protected to the extent that it is possible to do so. Article 211 of the Family Code, whose date of effectivity is approaching, merely formalizes into statute the practice on parental authority. The respondent court would shift jurisdiction over the case from the Municipal Trial Court to the Department of Social Services and Development. It is readily apparent that the DSSD cannot take cognizance of and enforce the criminal sanctions of P. D. 603.