When is Sex Considered Rape? Examining Consent in Philippine Law

n

G.R. No. 116740, November 28, 1996

nn

Imagine a scenario: a young woman is alone in her house when a man she knows enters. He claims they had a prior arrangement, that she consented to his presence and advances. She says otherwise, claiming force and lack of consent. This is the crux of many rape cases: discerning consent. The case of People v. Gumahob delves into this complex issue, highlighting the importance of understanding what constitutes consent, especially when there is a power imbalance or vulnerability involved.

nn

This case scrutinizes the circumstances surrounding an alleged rape, focusing on the credibility of the complainant’s testimony and the plausibility of the accused’s defense of consent. It underscores that the absence of physical resistance does not automatically equate to consent, especially when intimidation or force is present.

nn

Legal Context: Rape and Consent

nn

In the Philippines, rape is defined under Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code as amended by Republic Act No. 8353, also known as the Anti-Rape Law of 1997. It is committed by a man who has carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances:

nn

n
• Through force, threat, or intimidation;

n

• When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious;

n

• When the woman is below twelve (12) years of age, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present; and

n

• When the woman is afflicted with insanity or imbecility.

n

nn

Crucially, the law recognizes that consent must be freely given. It cannot be obtained through coercion, deception, or exploitation of a vulnerable individual. This case occurred before the enactment of RA 8353, thus, the applicable law is the Revised Penal Code prior to amendment. However, the basic principles regarding consent remain relevant.

nn

For example, if a man threatens to harm a woman’s family if she does not comply with his sexual demands, any sexual act that follows is considered rape, regardless of whether she physically resists. Similarly, if a woman is intoxicated to the point where she cannot make rational decisions, she cannot legally consent to sexual activity.

nn

The Revised Penal Code states that rape is committed when a man “shall have carnal knowledge of a woman by means of force or intimidation.” The key element is the lack of consent on the part of the woman, and the presence of force or intimidation employed by the man to achieve penetration.

nn

Case Breakdown: People of the Philippines vs. Gerry Gumahob

nn

In October 1993, Marijun Montalba, a 14-year-old high school student, was alone in her uncle’s house in Camiguin. Gerry Gumahob, an older acquaintance, allegedly entered the house naked, grabbed her, covered her mouth, and boxed her. According to Marijun, he then tore her clothes, forced her to the floor, and raped her, threatening to kill her if she reported the incident. She lost consciousness during the assault.

nn

Gerry, on the other hand, claimed that Marijun had invited him to her house that evening. He testified that they had been courting, and she had accepted him. He alleged that the sexual encounter was consensual, but he stopped when Marijun expressed concern about getting pregnant.

nn

The case proceeded through the following steps:

nn

n
1. Complaint Filed: Marijun filed a complaint accusing Gerry of rape.

n

2. Preliminary Investigation: Gerry waived his right to a preliminary investigation.

n

3. Trial: The Regional Trial Court heard testimony from both Marijun and Gerry.

n

4. Conviction: The trial court found Gerry guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

n

5. Appeal: Gerry appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that Marijun had consented to the sexual act.

n

nn

The Supreme Court upheld the trial court’s decision, finding Gerry guilty of rape. The Court emphasized the following:

nn

n
• Marijun’s testimony was credible and consistent with the evidence.

n

• Gerry’s claim of consent was unsubstantiated and implausible.

n

• The age difference and power imbalance between the two individuals weighed heavily against the claim of consent.

n

nn

The Court stated,