RA 8353

ANTI-RAPE LAW OF 1997

Difference of the Old and New rape law:


OLD RAPE LAW
NEW RAPE LAW
Classification:
Crime Against Chastity
Crime Against Person
Offender:
By a MAN against a woman ONLY
under the second type, may be committed by ANY person.
Prosecution:
Must be filed by the woman or her parents, grandparents or guardian if the woman was a minor or incapacitated
May be prosecuted even if the woman does not file a complaint.

Effect of Marriage:
Marriage of the victim to one of the offenders benefits not only the principal but also the accomplices and accessories.
Marriage extinguishes the penal action only to the person whom the victim married.
Marital Rape:
NOT recognized
Recognized


Art. 266-A Rape is committed:

1. By a man who shall have Carnal Knowledge of a woman under any of the ff. circumstances:

a. Through force, threat, or intimidation;
b. When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious
c. By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority
d. When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even
though none of the circumstances mentioned above is present.
Elements:
I. Offender is a man
II. Offender had carnal knowledge of a woman
III. Such act is accomplished under the circumstances mentioned.

2. By any person who, under any of the circumstance in par. 1 shall commit an act of Sexual Assault by
inserting his penis into another person's mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or object, into the genital or anal
orifice of another person.
Elements:
I. Offender commits an act of sexual assault
II. Sexual assault is committed by any of the ff. means:
By inserting his penis into another person's mouth or anal orifice
By inserting any instrument or object into the genital or anal orifice of another person
III. The act of sexual assault is accomplished under the circumstances mentioned in par.1.

NB:
Only one of the four circumstances mentioned is sufficient.

Art. 266-B Penalties:

Under Par. 1- RECLUSION PERPETUA

Under Par. 2- PRISION MAYOR

Under Par. 2- PRISION MAYOR to RECLUSION TEMPORAL
Whenever the rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon or by two or more persons
When the rape is attempted and a homicide is committed
When by reason or on the occasion of rape,
The victim has become insane
Homicide is committed

AGGRAVATING / QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES
1. Victim is under 18 years of age and the offender is a her ascendant, stepfather, guardian, or relative by
affinity or consanguinity within the 3rd civil degree, or the common law husband of the victim's mother.
2. When the victim was under the custody of the police or military authorities, or other law enforcement
agency
3. Where the rape is committed in full view of the victim's husband, the parents, any of the children or
relatives by consanguinity within the 3rd civil degree.
4. Where the victim is a religious, that is, a member of a legitimate religious vocation and the offender knows
the victim as such before or at the time of the commission of the offense.
5. Where the victim is a child under 7 years of age.
6. Where the offender is a member of the AFP, its paramilitary arm, the PNP, or any law enforcement agency
and the offender took advantage of his position.
7. Where the offender is afflicted with AIDS or other STDs, and he is aware thereof when he committed the
rape, and the disease transmitted.
8. Where the victim has suffered permanent mutilation.
9. Where the pregnancy of the offended party is known to the rapist at the time of rape.
10. Where the rape is aware of the victim's mental disability, emotional disturbance or physical handicap.

Art. 266-C Effect of Pardon
Subsequent valid marriage extinguish the criminal action or the penalty imposed.
In case the legal husband is the offender, subsequent forgiveness extinguish the criminal action or
penalty; Provided, the marriage is valid.

Art. 266-D Presumptions
Evidence which may be accepted in the prosecution of rape:
Any physical overt act manifesting resistance against the act of rape in any degree from the offended party
Where the offended party is so situated as to render him/her incapable of giving him consent.

Jurisprudence:

People vs. Orita
There is NO crime of frustrated rape because In rape, from the moment the offender has
carnal knowledge of the victim, he actually attains his purpose, from that moment also all the essential elements of
the offense have been accomplished. Nothing more is left to be done by the offender because he has performed the
last act necessary to produce the crime.
People vs. Mangalino
Rape was committed even though the penetration could only go as deep as the labia. The court
has consistently held that for rape to be committed, full penetration is not required. Even the slightest penetration is
sufficient to consummate the crime of rape.
People vs. Castro
Perfect penetration, rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina are not essential for the
offense of consummated rape. Entry to the extent of the labia or lips of the female organ is sufficient. The victims
remaining a virgin does not negate rape.
People vs. Campuhan
For rape to be consummated, a slight brush or scrape of the penis on the external layer of the
vagina (mons pubis) will not suffice. There must be sufficient and convincing proof that the penis indeed touched the
labias or slid into the female organ, and NOT merely stroked the external surface thereof. AT LEAST THE LABIA
MAJORA MUST BE ENTERED FOR RAPE TO BE CONSUMMATED.
People vs. Atento
Even though force and intimidation has not been established, rape was still committed because
the victim is deprived of reason. Under paragraph 2 of Article 335, it is not necessary that the culprit actually deprives
the victim of reason prior to the rape, as by administration of drugs or some other method. This provision also applies
to cases where the woman has been earlier deprived of reason by other causes, as when she is congenitally
retarded.

Anonimity of Victim

People v. Cabalquinto
Pursuant to Republic Act No. 9262, otherwise known as the Anti-Violence Against Women and
Their Children Act of 2004 and its implementing rules, the real name of the victim, together with the real names of
her immediate family members, is withheld and fictitious initials instead are used to represent her, both to protect her
privacy.

Statutory Rape

People v. Jalosjos
In statutory rape, mere sexual congress with a woman below twelve years of age consummates
the crime of statutory rape regardless of her consent to the act or lack of it. The law presumes that a woman of
tender age does not possess discernment and is incapable of giving intelligent consent to the sexual act. Thus, it was
held that carnal knowledge of a child below twelve years old even if she is engaged in prostitution is still considered
statutory rape. The application of force and intimidation or the deprivation of reason of the victim becomes irrelevant.
The absence of struggle or outcry of the victim or even her passive submission to the sexual act will not mitigate nor
absolve the accused from liability.
People vs. Bautes
Rape do not require complete or full penetration of the victim's private organ. Neither is the
rupture of the hymen necessary. The mere introduction of the penis into the labia majora of the victim's genitalia
engenders the crime of rape. 40 Hence, it is the "touching" or "entry" of the penis into the labia majora or the labia
minora of the pudendum of the victim's genitalia that consummates rape. 41 Penile invasion necessarily entails
contact with the labia. Even the briefest of contacts, without laceration of the hymen, is deemed to be rape.
People v. Dalisay
The presence of either hymenal laceration or spermatozoa on Lanie's private part is not an
essential element of rape. As testified to by Lanie, "the tip" of appellant's penis was inserted into her vagina, as a
result of which she felt pain. In other words, there was no full penetration, and this explains why her hymen remained
intact. Nonetheless, carnal knowledge was consummated by the entry of "the tip" of appellant's private organ into the
labia or pudendum of Lanie's genitalia.

Liability of Several Accused in Multiple Rape

People v. Plurad

In cases of multiple rape, each of the defendants is responsible not only for the rape committed
by him but also for those committed by the others. Plurad, therefore, is responsible not only for the rape committed
personally by him but also for the two other counts of rape committed by his co-accused.

Rape may be commited by a woman

People vs. dela Torre
An accused may be considered a principal by direct participation, by inducement, or by
indispensable cooperation. This is true in a charge of rape against a woman, provided of course a man is charged
together with her. In two cases the Court convicted the woman as a principal by direct participation since it was
proven that she held down the complainant in order to help her co- accused spouse consummate the offense.


Rape through sexual assault

People v. Fetalino
The insertion of ones finger into the genital or anal orifice of another person constitutes rape by
sexual assault and not merely an act of lasciviousness.

Delay in Reporting Rape

People v. Arnaiz
Neither does AAAs failure to tell her mother about the incident nor her long delay in reporting the
matter to the authorities negate rape. As correctly observed by the OSG, the delay in reporting the rape incident does
not weaken the case for the prosecution. It is not uncommon for a young girl to conceal assaults on her virtue,
especially when the rapist is living with her.
People v. Coloma
Even a delay of 8 years is not a sign of fabrication.

Absence of Medical Findings

People v. Teodoro
Thus, the contention of appellant that there were no lacerations in the vagina does not merit any
consideration. In that regard, it has been held that the medical examination of the victim is merely corroborative in
character and is not an element of rape. Likewise, a freshly broken hymen is not an essential element of rape and
healed lacerations do not negate rape.

Sweetheart defense

People vs. Bautista
Even if he and the victim were really sweethearts, such a fact would not necessarily establish
consent. It has been consistently ruled that "a love affair does not justify rape, for the beloved cannot be sexually
violated against her will." The fact that a woman voluntarily goes out on a date with her lover does not give him
unbridled license to have sex with her against her will. The court cited the case of People v. Dreu, where it was held
that "A sweetheart cannot be forced to have sex against her will. Definitely, a man cannot demand sexual
gratification from a fiancee and, worse, employ violence upon her on the pretext of love. Love is not a license for
lust."

Moral Character of Victim

People v. Agsaoay
The debasement of Josephines character does not necessarily cast doubt on her credibility, nor
does it negate the existence of rape. It is a well-established rule that in the prosecution and conviction of an accused
for rape, the victim's moral character is immaterial, there being absolutely no nexus between it and the odious deed
committed. Even a prostitute or a woman of loose morals can be the victim of rape, for she can still refuse a man's
lustful advances.

Forcible abduction absorbed in rape

People v. Lining
Lining could only be convicted for the crime of rape, instead of the complex crime of forcible
abduction with rape. Indeed, it would appear from the records that the main objective of the accused when the victim
was taken to the house of Mila Salvacion was to rape her. Hence, forcible abduction is absorbed in the crime of rape.



BAR EXAM QUESTIONS:

Rape; Anti-Rape Law of 1997 (2002)
The Anti-Rape Law of 1997 reclassified rape from a crime against honor, a private offense, to that of a crime against persons.
Will the subsequent marriage of the offender and the offended party extinguish the criminal
action or the penalty imposed? Explain. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)
Yes. By express provision of Article 266-C of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, the subsequent valid marriage between
the offender and offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty imposed, although rape has been reclassified
from a crime against chastity, to that of a crime against persons.

Rape; Consented Abduction (2002)
A with lewd designs, took a 13-year old girl to a nipa hut in his farm and there had sexual intercourse with her. The girl did not
offer any resistance because she was infatuated with the man, who was good-looking and belonged to a rich and prominent
family in the town. What crime, if any, was committed by A? Why? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A committed the crime of consented abduction under Article 343 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended. The said Article
punishes the abduction of a virgin over 12 and under 18 years of age, carried out with her consent and with lewd designs.
Although the problem did not indicate the victim to be virgin, virginity should not be understood in its material sense, as to
exclude a virtuous woman of good reputation, since the essence of the crime is not the injury to the woman but the outrage and
alarm to her family (Valdepenas vs. People,16 SCRA 871 [1966]).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
A committed "Child Abuse" under Rep. Act No. 7610. As defined in said law, "child abuse" includes sexual abuse or any act
which debases, degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human being, whose age is below eighteen
(18) years.

Rape; Effect; Affidavit of Desistance (1993)
Ariel intimidated Rachel, a mental retardate, with a bolo into having sexual Intercourse with him. Rachel's mother immediately
filed a complaint, supported by her sworn statement, before the City Prosecutor's Office. After the necessary preliminary
investigation, an information was signed by the prosecutor but did not contain the signature of Rachel nor of her mother. Citing
Art. 344 of the RPC (prosecution of the crimes of rape, etc.), Ariel moves for the dismissal of the case. Resolve with reasons.
After the prosecution had rested its case, Ariel presented a sworn affidavit of desistance executed by Rachel and her mother
stating that they are no longer interested in prosecuting the case and that they have pardoned Ariel.
What effect would this affidavit of desistance have on the criminal and civil aspects of the case? Explain fully.
A, a male, takes B, another male, to a motel and there, through threat and intimidation, succeeds in inserting his penis into the
anus of B. What, if any, is As criminal liability? Why?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A shall be criminally liable for rape by committing an act of sexual assault against B, by inserting his penis into the anus of the
latter.
Even a man may be a victim of rape by sexual assault under par. 2 of Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, as amended,
"when the offender's penis is inserted into his mouth or anal orifice."

Rape; Multiple Rapes; Forcible Abduction (2000)
Flordeluna boarded a taxi on her way home to Quezon City which was driven by Roger, Flordeluna noticed that Roger was
always placing his car freshener in front of the car aircon ventilation but did not bother asking Roger why. Suddenly, Flordeluna
felt dizzy and became unconscious. Instead of bringing her to Quezon City, Roger brought Flordeluna to his house in Cavite
where she was detained for two (2) weeks. She was raped for the entire duration of her detention. May Roger be charged and
convicted of the crime of rape with serious illegal detention? Explain. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, Roger may not be charged and convicted of the crime of rape with serious illegal detention. Roger may be charged and
convicted of multiple rapes. Each rape is a distinct offense and should be punished separately. Evidently, his principal intention
was to abuse Flordeluna; the detention was only incidental to the rape.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
No, Roger may not be charged and convicted of the crime of rape with serious illegal detention, since the detention was
incurred in raping the victim during the days she was held. At most, Roger may be prosecuted for forcible abduction for taking
Flordeluna to Cavite against the latter's will and with lewd designs. The forcible abduction should be complexed with one of the
multiple rapes committed, and the other rapes should be prosecuted and punished separately, in as many rapes were charged
and proved.

Rape; Male Victim (2002)
A, a male, takes B, another male, to a motel and there, through threat and intimidation, succeeds in inserting his penis into the
anus of B. What, if any, is As criminal liability? Why?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A shall be criminally liable for rape by committing an act of sexual assault against B, by inserting his penis into the anus of the
latter.
Even a man may be a victim of rape by sexual assault under par. 2 of Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, as amended,
"when the offender's penis is inserted into his mouth or anal orifice.

2006
Dang was a beauty queen in a university. Job, a rich classmate, was so enamored with her that he persistently wooed and
pursued her. Dang, being in love with another man, rejected him. This angered Job. Sometime in September 2003, while Dang
and her sister Lyn were on their way home, Job and his minor friend Nonoy grabbed them and pushed them inside a white van.
They brought them in an abandoned warehouse where they forced them to dance naked. Thereafter, they brought them to a hill
in a nearby barangay where they took turns raping them. After satisfying their lust, Job ordered Nonoy to push Dang down a
ravine, resulting in her death. Lyn ran away but Job and Nonoy chased her and pushed her inside the van. Then the duo drove
away. Lyn was never seen again.
1. What crime or crimes were committed by Job and Nonoy? 2.5%
2. What penalties should be imposed on them? 2.5%
3. Will Nonoy's minority exculpate him? 2.5%
4. Is the non-recovery of Lyn's body material to the criminal 2.5%


2013
While walking alone on her way home from a party, Mildred was seized at gun point by Felipe and taken on board a tricycle to a
house some distance away. Felipe was with Julio, Roldan, and Lucio, who drove the tricycle.At the house, Felipe, Julio, and
Roldan succeeded in having sexual intercourse with Mildred against her will and under the threat of Felipes gun. Lucio was not
around when the sexual assaults took place as he left after bringing his colleagues and Mildred to their destination, but he
returned everyday to bring food and the news in town about Mildreds disappearance.For five days, Felipe, Julio and Roldan
kept Mildred in the house and took turns in sexually assaulting her. On the 6th day, Mildred managed to escape; she
proceeded immediately to the nearest police station and narrated her ordeal. What crime/s did Felipe, Julio, Roldan, and Lucio
commit and what was their degree of participation? (7%)