BY GEROME DALIPE IV
ILOILO City – The Supreme Court has ruled that evidence of a victim’s past sexual behavior or predisposition is inadmissible in any criminal proceedings involving child sexual abuse.
The court’s recent ruling provides a significant step in protecting victims’ rights and recognizes the principle that a victim’s prior sexual history should have no bearing on the credibility or merit of their allegations in cases of sexual abuse, especially those involving minors.
By excluding such evidence, the court aims to prevent the re-traumatization of victims, reduce biases that can undermine their testimony, and promote a focus on the actions of the accused rather than on the personal history of the victim.
This shift also strengthens the legal framework to protect child victims from invasive and potentially harmful questioning in court, thereby making the judicial process more child-sensitive and victim-centered.
In a decision by Associate Justice Antonio T. Kho, Jr., the Court’s Second Division convicted Adrian J. Adrales, also known as “Alicia Bakla”, for qualified trafficking in persons under Republic Act No. (RA) 9208, or the Anti-Trafficking of Persons Act of 2003.
In his defense, he claimed that the victim was known in their community as a prostitute, using the derogatory term “pokpok.” Adrales’ argument, however, was not sufficient to absolve him of responsibility for his actions.
The tribunal emphasized that such characterizations of the victim are irrelevant in cases of trafficking and child sexual abuse, reinforcing the principle that the victim’s past or reputation should not diminish the culpability of the perpetrator.
In July 2011, Adrales approached the then-14-year-old victim while she was walking home from a party. He arranged for her to have sexual intercourse with a certain Emong. Afterward, Adrales paid the victim about P800.
The same happened two other times with different men, with Adrales waiting outside during the encounters to receive payment.
The Regional Trial Court later convicted Adrales. The Court of Appeals also affirmed the conviction, prompting Adrales’ lawyer to appeal his conviction.
In upholding Adrales’ conviction, the tribunal found that the elements of trafficking under RA 9208 were met.
The court noted 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 court’s stance underscores the protection of vulnerable individuals from exploitation, regardless of their circumstances or societal perceptions.
The court emphasized that trafficking occurs when individuals are recruited, transported, or transferred — regardless of their consent or knowledge — under threats, coercion, deception, or abuse of power for exploitative purposes, including prostitution.
Furthermore, the crime is classified as qualified trafficking when it involves minors, which is treated with particular severity under the law and carries a life sentence.
The court determined that the prosecution successfully established that Adrales befriended the victim and actively recruited her for prostitution.
He exploited the victim’s vulnerability by offering her money in exchange for engaging in sexual activities with various men.
In upholding the conviction of Adrales, the Court emphasized the application of the sexual abuse shield rule as outlined in Section 30(a) of the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness.
This rule disallows any evidence related to the victim’s past sexual behavior or sexual predisposition in cases involving child sexual abuse, reinforcing the notion that a victim’s history should not influence the adjudication of such cases.
By dismissing Adrales’ defense that the victim was already a prostitute before they met, the court underscored that a victim’s past does not lessen the accountability of the perpetrator or justify the crime of trafficking.
The sexual abuse shield rule plays a critical role in protecting victims from privacy invasion, unnecessary embarrassment, and harmful stereotypes, particularly in sensitive cases of child abuse.
This legal safeguard helps to create a more supportive environment for victims, encouraging them to testify against their abusers without fear of public judgment based on their personal history. Ultimately, Adrales received a life sentence and a fine of P6-million, with additional damages of P1.8-million awarded to the victim./PN