ABOUT a couple of months back, Quezon City councilor Alfred Vargas and his wife Yasmine filed a case of bullying against actor Rob Sy and his partner Juvelle Bacosa for violation of Section 10(a) of Republic Act (RA) 7610, or the Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act, before the Office of the City Prosecutor of Manila.
In their complaint, the Vargas couple cited a pattern of conduct where the respondents' minor child repeatedly pushed and held their son underwater during swimming training sessions.
The bullying incidents, the Vargases claim, by way of drowning the Vargas couple's child, occurred several times despite efforts, reminders and appeals made by the Vargases to the parents of the bully to tell their child to stop and to manage the minor's conduct.
Unfortunately, the couple said that every time they went to the parents to try to resolve these issues, they “were either dismissed or gaslighted.”
However, the case was dismissed by the Manila Prosecutors’ Office as the Vargases claimed the prosecutor assigned to the case relied on the definition of bullying under RA 10627, or the Anti-Bullying Act of 2013, a law specifically designed to address bullying in schools and educational institutions.
Is the honorable prosecutor now saying bullying is only limited to schools and educational institutions? And that whatever abuse against children by an individual or group who enjoys superior advantage to their victim is permitted as long as it is committed outside of a school or any educational institution?
Hence, the bullying incident the Vargases cited in their complaint which occurred during a swimming competition at the Rizal Memorial Sports Complex on Feb. 14, 2026, falls outside of any legal ambit?
So, what then is the purpose of enacting RA 7610, otherwise known as the Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act?
The said law, as I understand, was enacted to safeguard children from abuse, cruelty, exploitation and conditions prejudicial to their development and not within a school environment.
The Vargases, I’ve heard, has filed a motion for reconsideration before the Office of the City Prosecutor of Manila. And this time, I hope, the prosecutor will look beyond RA 10627 which he used as his basis in dismissing the case.
I am not privy to the evidence submitted by the Vargases to substantiate their claim that their child “was subjected to acts of aggression, ridicule, humiliation, intimidation, and emotional maltreatment” and that those “acts resulted in clinically documented psychological distress.”
However, to dismiss a case for simply failing to consider the very basis for which the complaint stands on and relying on a very different set of laws, an injustice might have been committed against the Vargases. A double whammy at that. And all because of a myopic interpretation of the law.
****
All eyes will be on the class opening today when around 28 million students — from preschool to senior high school — troop to their respective schools for another year of academic grind.
Indeed, all roads lead to and from the schools today and this is the part when the road safety should and must be discussed since class opening comes with the reality of additional volume of vehicles.
The past few weeks were a busy time for the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) in issuing show cause orders and ordering suspensions of operations as a result of road crashes across the country.
With more vehicles hitting the road for class opening, it is but logical to conclude that the probability of road crashes is even bigger. And the best gift that the LTFRB and other government transport-related agencies could give is a strong assurance that the kids will be safe from road crashes, both from kamote motorists and unexpected road crashes.
LTFRB chairman Atty. Vigor Mendoza II is right when he said that road crashes can be contained through aggressive proactive measures that include regular monitoring of road worthiness of vehicles and the mental and physical readiness of the drivers.
But there are two equally potent measures that he effectively initiated when he was still at the Land Transportation Office (LTO) and continue to do so in his current post: weaponizing social media content against kamote motorists and the certainty that those who would be involved in road crashes are called out and punished.
The irony about chairman Vigor is that despite his not so young age, he is one of the prime movers of digital transformation in the transport sector and one of the few government officials who recognized the power of social media in the campaign for road safety.
Back to the class opening, what parents only wish aside from maximum learning is to have a peace of mind that their children would reach the school and go back to their homes safely.
As such, the decision of the LTFRB to task all its regional offices for stricter monitoring of compliance of road safety rules and regulations to all public utility vehicles (PUVs) it allowed to operate is a laudable action.
And this was not limited to PUVs, particularly tricycles and jeepneys which will all be busy starting Monday.
This extends to school services wherein the LTFRB has supervisory and disciplinary power. Based on the LTFRB data, there are 2,552 operators of school services with 3,215 units issued with franchises across the country.
It is important then that the LTFRB should focus on all these because nobody wants the first week of class opening being marred by reports of road crashes involving students.
With limited manpower, however, all agencies must not wait to be told what to do. Instead, there must be coordination for a unified approach to ensure that the resumption of classes will be safe, peaceful and orderly especially for the children — the future of this wonderful country.
