Saturday, 28 June 2025

Case 236 of 327: Can a stepfather's moral ascendancy over his minor stepdaughter substitute for force and intimidation in establishing the crime of rape, even when the victim did not physically resist or cry for help during the sexual assault?

327 Cases Penned by Associate Justice Amy Lazaro-Javier: 2025 Bar Examination

Can a stepfather's moral ascendancy over his minor stepdaughter substitute for force and intimidation in establishing the crime of rape, even when the victim did not physically resist or cry for help during the sexual assault?

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. XXX, G.R. No. 230904, January 8, 2020

FACTS OF THE CASE

This case involves a series of heinous crimes committed by XXX against his common-law wife's children. The accused was charged with six separate criminal cases: two counts of rape by carnal knowledge, one count of rape by sexual assault, two counts of acts of lasciviousness, and violation of Section 5(c) of Republic Act 9262 (Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act).

The primary victim, AAA, testified that she first met the accused when she was six years old after her mother introduced him as her new live-in partner. She considered the accused as her real father since her biological father had abandoned them. The crimes began when AAA was fourteen years old.

On August 14, 2002, after overhearing the accused asking her mother's permission to treat AAA as his wife, the accused first raped AAA in their kitchen. He covered her mouth, removed her clothing, and forcibly inserted his penis into her vagina from behind while threatening to kill her mother if she reported the incident.

A week later, on August 21, 2002, the accused again raped AAA by pushing her face-down on their sofa and forcibly penetrating her while her mother and half-brother were away. AAA remained silent due to the accused's previous threats.

Four years later, on August 3, 2006, the accused sexually assaulted the now seventeen-year-old AAA by inserting his finger into her vagina while she was sleeping in the same room as her half-brother CCC. On August 4, 2006, he molested her again by touching and mashing her breasts while she was cleaning kitchen utensils.

The accused also committed lascivious acts against AAA's fifteen-year-old sister BBB on August 5, 2006, touching her thighs and breasts while threatening to kill the family if she disclosed the incident.

On the same evening of August 5, 2006, the accused arrived home intoxicated, berated the family, and chased them with a samurai (bladed weapon), leading to his arrest when the family reported the incident to police.

The Regional Trial Court of Calapan City convicted the accused on all charges, sentencing him to multiple terms of reclusion perpetua and other penalties. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction with modifications to the penalties and damage awards.

ISSUE

SUPREME COURT DECISION

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the legal characterization of some offenses. The Court ruled that moral ascendancy indeed substitutes for force and intimidation in rape cases involving father-daughter relationships, including stepfather-stepdaughter relationships where the stepfather exercises parental authority.

The Court emphasized that when the offender is the victim's father or father-figure, actual force, threat, or intimidation need not be proven because the father's moral ascendancy over his minor daughter substitutes for violence and intimidation. The Court also clarified that rape victims react differently to traumatic experiences, and the failure to shout for help does not impair the credibility of the victim's testimony.

Importantly, the Supreme Court modified the designation of some crimes from "rape by sexual assault" and "acts of lasciviousness" to "lascivious conduct under Section 5(b) of Republic Act 7610" when the victims were minors between 12-18 years old, reflecting the more appropriate legal framework for crimes against children.

DISPOSITIVE PORTION

WHEREFORE, the appeal is DENIED. The Decision of the Court of Appeals dated December 12, 2016 in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 07090 is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION:

a. In CR-06-8540, XXX is found GUILTY of lascivious conduct under Section 5(b) of Republic Act 7610 and sentenced to reclusion perpetua; b. In CR-06-8541, XXX is found GUILTY of lascivious conduct under Section 5(b) of Republic Act 7610 and sentenced to reclusion perpetua; c. In CR-06-8542, XXX is found GUILTY of violation of Section 5(c) of Republic Act 9262 and sentenced to six (6) months of arresto mayor and fine of P100,000.00; d. In CR-06-8543, XXX is found GUILTY of lascivious conduct under Section 5(b) of Republic Act 7610 and sentenced to reclusion perpetua; e. In CR-06-8544, XXX is found GUILTY of Rape, qualified by minority and relationship, and sentenced to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole; f. In CR-06-8545, XXX is found GUILTY of Rape, qualified by minority and relationship, and sentenced to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole.

SO ORDERED.

💭Should the law create stricter safeguards to prevent situations where children are left vulnerable to abuse by their parents' live-in partners, considering the inherent power imbalance and trust relationships involved?

IMPORTANT LEGAL DOCTRINES

1. MORAL ASCENDANCY DOCTRINE "When a father commits the odious crime of rape against his own daughter who was a minor at the time the crime was committed, his moral ascendancy or influence over the latter substitutes for violence and intimidation."

This doctrine recognizes that in familial relationships, psychological dominance can be as coercive as physical force.

2. VICTIM REACTION VARIABILITY PRINCIPLE "Rape victims react differently. There is no standard form of reaction for a woman when facing a shocking and horrifying experience such as rape."

This principle prevents the dismissal of rape cases based on expectations of how victims "should" behave.

3. VICTIM-BLAMING PROHIBITION "This reasoning is outrageous, if not outright despicable... the accused-appellant not only committed the abhorrent practice of victim-blaming so prevalent in sexual abuse cases."

Courts must reject attempts to blame victims for their vulnerability or failure to avoid dangerous situations.

4. CREDIBILITY OF MINOR WITNESSES "Youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity."

Testimonies of child victims carry special weight due to their inherent honesty and lack of motive to fabricate serious accusations.

5. LASCIVIOUS CONDUCT UNDER RA 7610 "When sexual assault is committed against a victim 12 years old or older but below 18... the crime committed is lascivious conduct under Section 5(b) of RA 7610."

This doctrine ensures appropriate legal framework for crimes against children, providing enhanced protection.

CLASSIFICATION: CRIMINAL LAW

From <https://claude.ai/chat/94d0536d-fe8e-4c14-a764-5fa5a48fb0d4>

Looking for a reliable and affordable study companion for the 2025 Bar Exams? The Law Requisites PH offers expertly curated digital case digests designed specifically for bar examinees, law students, and legal professionals. With concise, organized content tailored to support your review and legal practice, you can now access these powerful tools for only ₱499. Start strengthening your preparation today by visiting https://beacons.ai/thelawrequisitesph. Your bar success begins with the right resources—get yours now!

📢DISCLAIMER:

This content is for educational purposes only and does not guarantee the infallibility of the legal content presented. All content was created using premium AI tools and reviewed for accuracy to the best of our abilities. Always consult a qualified legal professional for legal advice.