MANILA, Philippines—A man has been fined P1,000 after a Manila judge found him guilty of animal cruelty for helping his brother beat a neighbor’s dog with a baseball bat in 2012.
The complaint against Mel Reyes—a resident of Tondo and an administrative aide at the Department of Education division of Manila—was earlier dismissed but a volunteer lawyer of the Philippine Animal Welfare Society (PAWS) appealed the decision, maintaining that the former was an accomplice to the crime.
A witness had captured on video Reyes holding the leash of the dog as his brother, Edgardo, repeatedly hit it with a stainless steel baseball bat. Edgardo was also convicted last year of violating Section 6 of Republic Act 8485 or the Animal Welfare Act of 1998.
The Manila Metropolitan Trial Court Branch 21 on Tuesday fined Reyes P1,000, the minimum amount stated in the old Animal Welfare Act as the incident happened before the law was amended in 2013.
The penalty might be a slap on the wrist, but Anna Cabrera, president of PAWS, said, “We will take whatever victory we can get. What’s important is that we can show that people can be prosecuted for abusing animals.”
Under the present law, animal offenders face up to P100,000 in fines and imprisonment of up to two years.
The mauling happened on Aug. 19, 2012, when the mother of the accused complained of being bitten by Blackie, the dog owned by Norma Eustaquio.
Prosecution witnesses said Reyes hit the dog first with a baseball bat and then handed the weapon over to Edgardo who struck the animal repeatedly.
The brothers only left when the dog stopped moving. “(Reyes) was even shown covering the dog with what appeared to be a mat after the dog was left motionless. Edgardo hit the covered dog one last time before walking away calmly with the accused,” the court decision said.
The dog, however, survived although it lost one of its eyes.
In his defense, Reyes said that he was holding the leash to prevent his brother from hitting the dog and denied that he had provided the baseball bat.
But the court deemed, based on the video, that the accused was holding the leash as an act of assistance. “The court is convinced beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of the offense charged,” it said.
“While it is true that the dog may have bitten the mother of the accused, it was no excuse for him to take revenge on the dog … he could have availed of other remedies not contrary to law,” Judge Ana Teresa Cornejo-Tomacruz said in her decision.
“The violence inflicted upon the dog was an unnecessary act of cruelty that has no place in a civilized society,” she added.