Qualified seduction, A337 Revised Penal Code

Qualified seduction – refers to the offense of having sexual intercourse with a 16- or 17-year-old minor through abuse of confidence.

1. Concept

Qualified seduction – refers to the offense of having sexual intercourse with a 16- or 17-year-old minor through abuse of confidence.

a. Legal basis

Article 337. Qualified seduction. – The seduction of a minor, sixteen and over but under eighteen years of age, committed by any person in public authority, priest, home-servant, domestic, guardian, teacher, or any person who, in any capacity, shall be entrusted with the education or custody of the minor seduced, shall be punished by prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods.

The penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed upon any person who shall seduce his sister or descendant, whether or not she be a virgin or over eighteen years of age.

Under the provisions of this Chapter, seduction is committed when the offender have carnal knowledge of any of the persons and under the circumstances described therein. (As amended by R.A. 11648)

(NB: If the article has been amended by legislation or has been the subject of a Supreme Court decision which may have impacted how it is interpreted, do let us know so we can consider for the next update of this article. You may send it via: Feedback.)

2. Modes of commission

The following are the modes of committing the offense:

1) Having sexual intercourse with a 16- or 17-year-old minor through abuse of confidence

a. Mode 1: Sex with 16- or 17-year-old minor

Elements of the offense:

1) The offended party is a minor, sixteen and over but under eighteen years of age;

2) The offender has sexual intercourse with the offended party;

3) The offender is: (a) any person in public authority, (b) priest, (c) home-servant, (d) domestic, guardian, (e) teacher, or (f) any person who, in any capacity, shall be entrusted with the education or custody of the minor seduced. (REVISED PENAL CODE, as amended by R.A. 11648, Article 337; See also Babanto v. Zosa, G.R. No. L-32895, February 28, 1983)

1) Element 1: 16-17 offended party

The offended party has to be “sixteen and over but under eighteen years of age.” Meaning, the offended party is either 16 years old or 17 years old. Further, there is no requirement that the offended party is a virgin.

Under the old provisions, the offended party had to be 13 to 17 years old and a virgin.

a) Minor of either sex

The offended party may be a minor of either sex, i.e., the offended party may be a male or female.

2) Element 2: Sexual intercourse

That the offender engaged in sexual intercourse with the offended party is the gravamen of the offense.

a) Consent, not a defense

The offense of qualified seduction presupposes that there was consent to the sexual intercourse; otherwise, if there was no consent, it would constitute rape. However, despite the consent, it is an offense due to the age of the offended party who is either 16- or 17-year-old. Accordingly, that the offended party gave consent to the sexual intercourse is not a defense since the very act of having sex with a 16- or 17-year-old is the one being punished.

3) Element 3: Specific offenders

The offenders are specifically identified:

1) Any person in public authority;

2) Priest;

3) Home-servant;

4) Domestic guardian;

5) Teacher; or

6) Any person who, in any capacity, shall be entrusted with the education or custody of the minor seduced.

a) Abuse of confidence

Abuse of confidence is inherent in the offense. (People v. Samillano, G.R. No. L-31375, April 22, 1974)

[D]eceit, although an essential element of ordinary or simple seduction, does not need to be proved or established in a charge of qualified seduction. It is replaced by abuse of confidence. When the offender is a public officer, a priest or minister, a servant, domestic, tutor, teacher, or under any title is in charge of the education or keeping of the offended woman, as in the present case, the act is punishable although fraud or deceit may not have been used or, if employed, has not been proved. The seduction of [the offended party], committed by any of the persons enumerated in art. 337 “is constitutive of the crime of qualified seduction … even though no deceit intervenes or even when such carnal knowledge were voluntary on the part of the [offended party], because in such a case, the law takes for granted the existence of the deceit as an integral element of the said crime and punishes it with greater severity than it does the simple seduction … taking into account the abuse of confidence on the part of the agent (culprit), an abuse of confidence which implies deceit or fraud.” (People v. Fontanilla, En Banc, G.R. No. L-25354, June 28, 1968)

b) Domestic

Where the accused carnally abused two orphan girls, relatives of his wife, sheltered in his house, he was convicted of qualified seduction. He was a domestic in relation to the girls. (People v. Samillano, supra, citing U.S. vs. Arlante, 9 Phil. 595)

3. Things to note

The following are some additional things to note about this offense.

a. Common provisions

This offense shares common provisions with other offenses under Title XI of the Revised Penal Code – Crimes Against Chastity. See: Crimes Against Chastity

b. No virginity requirement – anymore

Following the amendments introduced by R.A. 11648, virginity of the offended party is no longer an element to the offense. This is important to note as there is a long line of jurisprudence reiterating the requirement of virginity.

3A. Procedural

a. Qualified seduction, not variance to rape

[A]ssuming that the prosecution failed to prove the use of force by accused-appellant, the latter cannot be convicted of qualified seduction. It is only when the complaint for rape contains allegations for qualified seduction that the accused may be convicted of the latter in case the prosecution fails to prove the use of force by the accused… To do otherwise would be violating the constitutional rights of the accused to due process and to be informed of the accusation against him. The accused charged with rape cannot be convicted of qualified seduction under the same information… Then, too, rape and qualified seduction are not identical offenses. While the two felonies have one common element which is carnal knowledge of a woman, they significantly vary in all other respects… (People v. Javier, En Banc, G.R. No. 126096, July 26, 1999, Per Melo J.)

4. Distinguish from other offenses

This offense is distinguished from other offenses or crimes below.

a. Qualified seduction vs Simple seduction

In both qualified seduction and simple seduction, there is sexual intercourse. However, for qualified seduction, the means used to have sex was due to abuse of confidence over a 16- or 17-year-old minor. On the other hand, in simple seduction, the means used to have sex was through deceit.

b. Qualified seduction vs Rape

While both qualified seduction and rape involves sexual intercourse, the main difference between the two is that in qualified seduction there was consensual sex albeit prohibited due to age and in rape there was no consent to the sex.

c. Qualified seduction vs Consented abduction

[T]he gravamen of the offense of the abduction of a woman with her own consent, who is still under the control of her parents or guardians is “the alarm and perturbance to the parents and family” of the abducted person, and the infringement of the rights of the parent or guardian. But cases of seduction, the gravamen of the offense is the wrong done the young woman who is seduced. (The United States v. Jayme, En Banc, G.R. No. L-7802, January 16, 1913, Per Carson, J.)

References

• Title XI – Crimes Against Chastity, Act No. 3815, Revised Penal Code

—

/Updated: May 20, 2023