18/06/2025
The (SC) has convicted a 68-year-old foreigner of r**e and qualified trafficking for s*xually exploiting a minor, holding that inviting and meeting with a minor for purposes of s*xual exploitation is qualified trafficking in persons. It also differentiated r**e from s*xual abuse.
In a Decision written by Associate Justice Antonio T. Kho, Jr., the SC En Banc sentenced the foreigner to 40 years in prison for r**e and life imprisonment for qualified trafficking in persons, after finding that he forced the victim to go to his apartment to engage in s*xual acts in exchange for money and under threat of uploading her n**e photos online if she refused.
The minor met the foreigner through Facebook Messenger and they later became online “sweethearts.” The foreigner began asking her for n**e photos, offering money in return. She initially complied, but later told him to stop. However, the foreigner threatened to upload her n**e photos if she refused. He then convinced her to meet him in person to have s*x, again promising her money.
The minor complied and went to the foreigner’s apartment, where the latter s*xually assaulted her. Despite the minor’s pleas for him to stop, he continued the assault. When the foreigner fell asleep, the minor escaped and immediately went to the police for help.
While the trial court and the Court of Appeals found the foreigner guilty of s*xual abuse under RA 7610 (Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act), and qualified trafficking under RA 9208 (Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003, as amended), the SC found the foreigner guilty of r**e under the Revised Penal Code (RPC) and not s*xual abuse under RA 7610.
Under Article 266-A(1)(A) of the RPC, the crime of r**e is committed when a man has s*xual in*******se with a woman through force, threat, or intimidation or when the victim is under 12 years of age.
On the other hand, under Section 5(b) of RA 7610, s*xual abuse includes s*xual in*******se or lascivious conduct committed against a child below 18 years old, who is either exploited in prostitution or subjected to other forms of s*xual abuse.
The SC noted that the charge against the foreigner did not allege that the minor was exploited in prostitution or subjected to s*xual abuse as defined under RA 7610. What was charged and proven during trial is that he used “force and intimidation,” an element of r**e under the RPC.
Read the full text of the Press Release on G.R. No. 256452, People v. Willem Johannes Peek, at:
https://tinyurl.com/445vaa2a.
Read the full text of the Decision at: https://tinyurl.com/y9c54rts.
Read the Concurring Opinion of Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen at https://tinyurl.com/2y7du4nd.
Read the Concurrence and Dissent of Associate Justice Amy C. Lazaro-Javier at https://tinyurl.com/58t2zbeu.
Read the Concurring Opinion of Associate Justice Japar B. Dimaampao at https://tinyurl.com/5mdk96hw.
Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.
