SC: Victim鈥檚 sexual history inadmissible in child sexual abuse cases
MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled that a victim’s sexual disposition or sexual history cannot be used as evidence in cases of child sexual abuse.
In a decision penned by Associate Justice Antonio Kho Jr., the SC affirmed Adrian Adrales’s conviction for qualified trafficking in persons under Republic Act No. 9208, also known as the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003.
Adrales was charged after he was arrested for arranging for a 14-year-old girl to have sex with a certain “Emong” and two other men in separate incidents, with Adrales waiting outside during the encounters to receive payment.
The minor was paid P800 afterward.
Adrales, in defending himself, then argued that the minor was already known in their place as a prostitute or “pokpok.”
The Regional Trial Court then convicted Adrales, which the Court of Appeals affirmed.
Article continues after this advertisementAdrales then appealed the CA decision, which ruled against him, prompting him to elevate the case to the Supreme Court.
Article continues after this advertisementThe High Court, however, also affirmed Adrales’ conviction, dismissing his defense that the victim was already a prostitute when they met.
“Under the sexual abuse shield rule found in Section 30(a) of the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness, evidence offered to prove that victims engaged in other sexual behavior or their sexual disposition are not admissible in any criminal proceeding involving child sexual abuse,” the SC Information said in citing the decision in a statement.
“The sexual abuse shield rule aims to protect victims against invasion of privacy, potential embarrassment, and sexual stereotyping that happen when intimate sexual details are disclosed in public. This protection also encourages victims to speak up against their abusers,” it added.
Furthermore, the SC ruled that the prosecution proved that Adrales befriended the victim to recruit her for prostitution, thereby taking advantage of the victim’s vulnerability.
READ: DOJ urges more trafficking victims to come forward
The Court also maintained that it found that elements of trafficking under RA 9208 were met in the case, highlighting that trafficking occurs “when individuals are recruited, transported, or transferred—regardless of consent or knowledge—under threats, coercion, deception, or abuse of power for exploitative purposes such as prostitution.”
“The crime is classified as qualified trafficking when it involves minors, which carries a life sentence,” the SC said.
With the conviction upheld, Adrales was sentenced to life imprisonment and fined P6 million and was also ordered to pay P1.8 million in damages to the minor.
