Victims of rape are no longer required to prove resistance if the crime was committed through force, threats, or intimidation.
This clarification comes from a recent Supreme Court (SC) ruling.
In a June 2024 decision penned by Associate Justice Maria Filomena Singh, the SC upheld the conviction of a father who was found guilty of repeatedly raping his daughter from the ages of nine to sixteen.
The SC reaffirmed Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, which defines rape as occurring when sexual intercourse is forced, threatened, or coerced; when the victim is unconscious; through deception or abuse of authority; or when the victim is under 12 years old or suffers from a mental disability.
The SC clarified that in cases where rape happens under these conditions, the mere occurrence of the sexual act is sufficient to establish the crime.
Additionally, the SC overturned its previous stance, which implied that a woman must prove resistance to claim she was raped.
The High Court emphasized that such views perpetuate misguided stereotypes, gender bias, and insensitivity.
The ruling also dispelled the notion that failure to resist implies consent, stating that this belief is unacceptable in modern society.
Furthermore, the SC highlighted that, in many cases, the perpetrator is someone the victim knows or is close to, such as a family member.
In cases where a child is abused by a parent, the victim is unlikely to resist due to the abuser’s physical and moral authority.
