Is failure to resist the sexual advances an indication that no rape has been committed? This is the issue raised in this case of Liza.
Liza is a 16-year-old teenager and one of the three daughters of Lina and Ben. Her other sisters who are older, namely Ana and Mina are no longer with them as they have separate families of their own living in their own houses. On the other hand, her mother Lina has two brothers, Bruno and Max whose house is adjacent to them. Liza is afraid of her uncles because they used to scold her and would sometimes kick her particularly Bruno, the younger one.
One late evening when Liza was already asleep in her room, she was suddenly awakened by someone removing her short pants and panty. When she got up, she found Bruno lying beside her while removing his own short pants. Thereafter Bruno kissed Liza’s lips, touched her breast and sexually assaulted her. After satisfying his bestial desires, Bruno slept by Liza’s side as he was quite drunk already.
Liza then went to the comfort room and cried in silence. By early morning, she went to the house of her elder sister Ana who found her outside the door sobbing. Upon Ana’s prodding, Liza narrated her tragic experience and recounted to Ana how she was raped by Bruno. Aghast, Ana went to the house of their eldest sister Minda to inform the latter what happened to Liza and to plan their next move. Later on, after Liza’s medical examination confirming that she was indeed raped, and after reporting the incident to the police. Minda filed a complaint against Bruno for the rape of Liza.
At the trial, Liza testified and reiterated her tragic experience. Ana also testified and corroborated what happened to her sister. Bruno on the other hand denied that he went to Liza’s house that evening. He said he was at his friend’s house drinking until 3 a.m. the following morning. And when he awoke at around 7 a.m. he did not notice Liza. He contended that the charge against him was motivated by the quarrel he had with Lina, the mother of Liza and his sister.
But the trial court found Bruno guilty of the crime of rape as charged and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and to pay the corresponding indemnity plus damages. The court said that Liza was able to positively identity Bruno as the perpetrator of the crime which was further bolstered by the medical findings.
Bruno questioned the decision all the way to the Supreme Court. He contended that Liza’s failure to offer resistance to his advances discounted the occurrence of rape. Was he correct?
No, said the Supreme Court. In rape cases, the law does not impose a burden on the victim to prove resistance because it is not an element of rape. The failure to shout or offer tenacious resistance does not mean that the victim voluntarily submitted to the criminal act of the offender. Rape victims react differently. Some may offer strong resistance while others may be too intimidated.
In this case it is evident that Liza feared Bruno, her uncle, who can be reasonably expected to exercise moral authority over her even prior to the rape incident. In fact, Bruno and her other Uncle Max used to scold her and kick her. This fear immobilized her and disabled her to offer physical resistance to Bruno’s advances. Physical resistance need not be established when intimidation is brought to bear on the victim and the latter submits out of fear especially if the reprehensible act is done on a 16-year-old child-woman by no less than her uncle.
In fact, Bruno’s conviction for rape is qualified by his being the uncle of Liza and related by third degree of consanguinity (Article 266_B Revised Penal Code). And since Liza was only 16 years old, the rape calls for the application of death penalty. But with the passage of R.A. 9436 suspending the imposition of death penalty, Bruno should suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole. The civil indemnity and moral damages should also be increased (People vs Palanay, G.R. 224583, February 1, 2017)
* * *
Email: attyjosesison@gmail.com