Pursuant to Rule 9, Sec. 1 of the Bureau of Immigration Omnibus Rules of Procedure of 2015 (MC 2015-010), summary deportation proceedings shall apply in the following cases:
When the foreigner is overstaying found by virtue of a complaint or mission order. An overstaying foreigner is one with an expired visa.
When the foreigner is undocumented. An undocumented foreigner is one who does not have a validly issued passport/travel document or with a cancelled or expired passport.
When the foreigner is a fugitive from justice. This refers to a foreigner who has been tagged as such by the authorized personnel of a foreign embassy OR by the International Police OR whose passport was cancelled by his embassy/consulate [As amended by Immigration Memorandum Circular No. JHM-2018-002 dated 26 March 2018].
When the foreigner has fully served the sentence in a crime which carries with it the penalty of deportation after service of sentence
When the foreigner has fully served the sentence of a crime mentioned in Section 37 (a) (3) or Section 37(a)(10) of the Philippine Immigration Act. Section 37 (a) (3) refers to a crime involving moral turpitude with imprisonment of more than 1 year while Section 37(a)(10) pertains to failure to register with the Bureau of Immigration.
The crime of rape in the Philippines is a serious problem. The Philippine National Police (PNP) in a news report stated that rape is one of the most common crimes in the country with 3,762 cases from July 2021 to Jan. 7, 2022. Due to this alarming statistics, law practitioners should brush up on the latest legal jurisprudence on how to prosecute or defend in rape cases.
Denial
For decades, defense in rape cases is comprised by the impossibility of the accused to commit sexual aggression. Denial while considered a weak defense is the prevalent defense used by lawyers to prove that their accused could have not raped the private complainant. In the case of People vs. Astrologo (G.R. NO. 169873, June 8, 2007), the Supreme Court ruled that the defense of denial must be buttressed by strong evidence of non-culpability to merit credibility. This is because It is merely a negative and self-serving allegation that cannot be given any weight on the scale of justice. And although denial is a legitimate defense in rape cases, mere bare assertions to this effect cannot overcome the positive, straightforward, unequivocal and categorical testimony of the victim. It is an established rule that an affirmative testimony is far stronger than a negative testimony, especially so when it comes from a credible witness. Likewise, it is hornbook doctrine that such positive and categorical testimony of a rape victim, identifying the accused as the one who sexually attacked her, prevails over his bare denial.
Consent
Another defense frequently used is that the parties involved are actually in an amorous relationship (boyfriend-and-girlfriend defense). This defense is akin to “self-defense” as the accused no longer disputes sexual contact. In the case of People vs. Rapiz (G.R.No. 240662, September 16, 2020), the Supreme Court reiterated that it is the prosecution’s burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the elements of the crime of rape, which includes as above stated that an accused had carnal knowledge of a complainant through force or intimidation. Lack of consent through any of the modes mentioned in the RPC or case law as where moral ascendancy is involved is not to be presumed. However, where an accused alleges consent to the sexual act as a defense, it is his burden of evidence to prove this allegation by substantial evidence. Thus, consensual sexual congress as an affirmative defense needs convincing proof such as love notes, mementos, and credible witnesses attesting to the consensual romantic relationship between the offender and his supposed victim. Having admitted to carnal knowledge of the complainant, the burden shifts to the appellant to prove his defense by substantial evidence. Furthermore, even assuming arguendo, that there was some form of amorous relationship, such averment will not necessarily rule out the use of force or intimidation by appellant to have sex against her will.
It is however important to note that in rape of minors, defense of consent of the offended party is generally not valid.
Credibility of Offended Party is Dubious
In several Supreme Court decisions it is established that the credibility of the complainant is the single most important issue in the prosecution of rape cases. The categorical and candid testimony of the complainant suffices, and a culprit may be convicted solely on the basis of her testimony, provided that it hurdles the test of credibility. It should not just come from the mouth of a credible witness, it should likewise be credible and reasonable in itself, candid, straightforward and in accord with human experience. Where the discrepancies and contradictory statements on important details in the testimony seriously impair its probative value, cast serious doubt on its credibility, and erode the integrity of the testimony, the Court should acquit the accused (see People vs. Rapiz).
Marriage of the Parties
Article 266-C of Republic Act 8353, or the Anti-Rape Law of 1997 provides that subsequent valid marriage of the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty imposed. Same article also provides that if it is the legal husband who is the offender, the subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty. It should be noted, however, that for the crime of rape to be extinguished or the penalty be abated, the marriage is void ab initio.
Causing Dela Cruz Law Office 