Amicable Settlement for Acts of Lasciviousness in the Philippines: A Comprehensive Overview

Disclaimer: The following discussion is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific concerns regarding actual legal cases, always consult a qualified Philippine attorney.

1. Introduction

In the Philippine legal system, Acts of Lasciviousness are governed primarily by the Revised Penal Code (RPC), as amended, under Article 336 (for adult victims) and relevant special laws such as Republic Act No. 7610 (for child victims). These laws set forth the criminal liability of a person who commits any act of lasciviousness or sexual misconduct short of rape.

One recurring question in practice is whether such offenses can be the subject of an amicable settlement between the accused and the offended party. While there is a mechanism under Philippine law for the offended party to withdraw or desist from pursuing charges, criminal liability is typically not subject to compromise. This article discusses the nature of Acts of Lasciviousness, relevant legal provisions, and the limits of amicable settlement in these cases.

2. Legal Framework

2.1. Revised Penal Code (Article 336)

Under Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code, the crime of Acts of Lasciviousness is committed by any person who, under circumstances not constituting rape, commits any act of lasciviousness against another person. The elements generally include:

An act of lasciviousness or lewdness was committed.
It was committed under one of the following circumstances:
- By using force or intimidation;
- When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; or
- When the offended party is under 12 years of age (which may also bring in more serious charges under other statutes).

The penalty under Article 336 is usually prisión correccional (6 months and 1 day to 6 years). However, factors such as the age of the victim or aggravating circumstances can affect the penalty imposed.

2.2. RA 7610 (Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation, and Discrimination Act)

When the offended party is a minor (below 18 years old), the case typically falls under the coverage of Republic Act No. 7610, which imposes harsher penalties and adds special considerations aimed at protecting children. RA 7610 reflects the State’s policy to provide children special protection from all forms of abuse, including sexual abuse.

2.3. Classification of the Offense: Private vs. Public Crime

Traditionally, crimes like Rape, Seduction, and Abduction were classified as “private crimes,” requiring the complaint of the offended party for prosecution. Acts of Lasciviousness, while sometimes treated similarly, is often prosecutable once a complaint is filed by the offended party or their representative (in case of a minor or incapacitated person).

However, even if it begins as a private complaint, once the criminal action has commenced in court (upon the filing of charges by the prosecutor), the prosecution of the offense may continue in the name of the People of the Philippines, meaning it is treated as a public offense. This dual nature can complicate attempts at private settlement.

3. Amicable Settlement in Criminal Cases

3.1. General Rule: Criminal Liability is Not Subject to Compromise

The longstanding rule in Philippine criminal law is that criminal liability cannot be the subject of compromise—only the civil aspect of the offense can be settled amicably. This principle is based on the notion that an offense is committed against the State, not just against a private individual. Hence, no private agreement can absolve the offender from the criminal liability once the State has taken cognizance of the offense.

Civil Liability: The offended party may demand payment of damages for the harm suffered. If the parties come to an agreement on monetary or other forms of reparation, they may sign a document (e.g., a “Quitclaim,” “Release and Waiver,” or “Affidavit of Desistance”) regarding the civil aspect.
Criminal Liability: Even if the offended party executes an “Affidavit of Desistance” or enters into a private settlement, the prosecutor or the court is not automatically bound to dismiss the criminal action if there is sufficient evidence of guilt.

3.2. Effect of an Affidavit of Desistance

An Affidavit of Desistance is a common document in which the offended party formally states that they are no longer interested in pursuing the complaint. However:

No Automatic Dismissal: Courts and prosecutors are guided primarily by evidence of criminal wrongdoing. An affidavit of desistance may be considered but is not conclusive in terminating the criminal prosecution. If the prosecutor or the court finds enough evidence to proceed, the case may continue in the name of the People of the Philippines.
Practical Effects: In some instances, especially if the case is heavily dependent on the testimony of the private complainant, an affidavit of desistance can weaken the prosecution’s position, making it more difficult to obtain a conviction.

3.3. Settlement of the Civil Aspect

Even if the criminal case is not dismissed, the accused and the offended party may enter into a settlement regarding the civil indemnity or damages. This is often seen in practice to address financial compensation for moral damages, actual damages (if any), and other forms of restitution. Still, this does not expunge the criminal offense itself.

4. Special Considerations for Minor Victims

Where the offended party is a minor, the situation becomes more restrictive:

Non-Droppable Public Nature: Under RA 7610 and related laws protecting minors, once a complaint is filed, the welfare of the child becomes paramount. Prosecutors and the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) are typically involved.
Mandatory Reporting: In certain circumstances, teachers, social workers, or medical professionals who become aware of abuse are mandated to report it. The State may pursue charges regardless of any attempts at private settlement.
Court Approval: Even if the family of the minor decides to “settle,” the courts (and the prosecutor’s office) still have the discretion and the duty to determine whether to continue the criminal prosecution in the interest of public policy and child protection.

5. The Role of Barangay Conciliation

Some offenses can undergo barangay conciliation under the Katarungang Pambarangay Law (Presidential Decree No. 1508, later amended). However:

Crimes Punishable by Imprisonment Over One Year: Offenses with penalties exceeding one year of imprisonment generally fall outside the mandatory coverage of barangay conciliation. Acts of Lasciviousness, with a penalty typically up to 6 years, sometimes overlaps with this threshold.
Public Offenses: Public offenses (which include most crimes against persons and chastity) are not usually subject to barangay settlement. Lascivious conduct tends to be considered a public offense once a formal complaint is initiated.

Thus, for Acts of Lasciviousness, barangay conciliation is not commonly the forum for settling the criminal aspect, although some parties may attempt an arrangement concerning the civil aspect or an attempt to discuss the matter informally.

6. Possible Outcomes of an Attempted Settlement

Affidavit of Desistance: The offended party may sign an affidavit stating they no longer wish to pursue the case. This may influence but does not guarantee the dismissal of the criminal charges.
Compromise on Civil Damages: The parties may settle the civil liability portion. The accused might pay damages, after which the private complainant acknowledges satisfaction for the injury suffered. Still, the criminal case can proceed if the prosecutor believes there is enough evidence for conviction.
Withdrawal of Complaint: If the complaint has not yet been acted upon by the prosecutor or the court (i.e., still in the early investigative stage), the offended party can sometimes withdraw it. If the evidence is insufficient without the private complainant’s participation, the prosecutor may dismiss the case. But if other evidence exists, it can still proceed.
Dismissal or Continuation: Ultimately, the court will decide if the criminal action should be dismissed or continue, based on the totality of evidence and the interest of the State in prosecuting the offense.

7. Practical Insights

Legal Counsel: Both the offended party and the accused should consult lawyers before drafting any settlement or desistance document, to fully understand legal consequences.
Plea Bargaining: In some cases (especially if the offense might be reclassified or the accused is willing to plead to a lesser offense), the accused and prosecutor could explore plea bargaining. However, the offended party’s consent is typically considered, especially for private crimes or crimes involving child victims.
Public Policy: Courts and prosecutors are increasingly vigilant in protecting victims of sexual offenses. Thus, reliance on purely private settlements has grown more difficult, particularly in cases involving minors or repeated offenders.

8. Conclusion

Acts of Lasciviousness in the Philippines are treated seriously by both the Revised Penal Code and special laws like RA 7610. While parties can negotiate an amicable settlement regarding the civil aspect (e.g., damages), criminal liability is not subject to compromise. Once the State takes notice and prosecution is underway, it becomes a matter of public interest, especially in cases involving minors.

Hence, while there may be practical avenues to reduce or even discontinue litigation—such as filing an Affidavit of Desistance or settling damages—these do not categorically guarantee dismissal of the criminal case. Ultimately, the prosecution’s duty is to ensure that justice is served, and the court retains full discretion to proceed if the evidence so warrants.

Note: For those facing questions about filing or defending against a charge of Acts of Lasciviousness—and possible settlement options—seek professional legal advice. Each case has unique facts and legal nuances that require detailed evaluation by a lawyer well-versed in criminal litigation and Philippine jurisprudence.