Aguilar indictable for child abuse
Lawyer Fernando Perito filed a complaint against Freddie Aguilar for the crime of qualified seduction for his affair with a 16-year-old (“Freddie Aguilar on seduction rap: PH has bigger problems,” Metro, 10/25/13). Qualified seduction is defined under Article 337 of the Revised Penal Code as follows: “The seduction of a virgin over twelve years and 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 woman seduced, shall be punished by prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods.”
Based on the foregoing definition, Aguilar, not being a person in authority, priest, home servant, domestic, guardian teacher or a person entrusted with his 16-year-old “girl friend,” cannot be prosecuted for qualified seduction.
The correct designation, by statute, of Aguilar’s offense as spelled out in Perito’s complaint is child prostitution and abuse, which is punished under Article III, Section 5 of Republic Act No. 7610 (Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act) which states: “Children, whether male or female, who for money, profit, or any other consideration or due to the coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or group, indulge in sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct, are deemed to be children exploited in prostitution and other sexual abuse.”
Article continues after this advertisementUnder the law, based on Perito’s complaint, the prosecuting fiscal is nevertheless authorized to file an indictment for the crime of child abuse upon a finding of probable cause.
The parents of the minor, by categorically consenting to such reprehensible act of Aguilar, are by the above definition considered complicit in what is by law deemed to be exploitation in prostitution. They should have been included in the criminal complaint.
No matter how this “romantic affair” is massaged or finessed by Aguilar, there is nothing which can justify his and the mischief of the child’s parents.
Article continues after this advertisementIronically, this sordid situation would not have come to light if Aguilar did not flaunt it. To paraphrase “Anak’s” classic plaintive line: Freddie, bakit ka ba nagkaganyan?
—CARNELL VALDEZ,
