Supreme Court extends suspended sentence of child convicted of qualified rape
SUPREME Court
Daily Tribune images.
The Supreme Court has extended the suspended sentence of a child in conflict with the law (CICL) who was convicted of qualified rape, reaffirming the intent of the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act to prioritize rehabilitation and reintegration over punishment.
In a decision penned by retired Associate Justice Mario V. Lopez dated 2 April 2025, the SC En Banc denied the appeal of the accused and upheld his conviction for qualified rape of a minor. The court imposed a prison term of 12 years to 14 years, eight months, and one day.
Records showed that the accused was 15 years old at the time of the offense, which involved his five-year-old playmate.
The prosecution said the accused invited the victim and seven other children to his home, removed the victim’s clothes, told her to lie on the bed, and sexually molested her.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) initially found him guilty of statutory rape after he reached the age of 18 and imposed the same penalty. However, the sentence was suspended pursuant to Section 38 of Republic Act No. 9344, which allows minors at the time of the offense to benefit from sentence suspension.
The RTC later issued a warrant of arrest, and the accused was detained at the New Bilibid Prison. The Court of Appeals subsequently denied his appeal.
Although the accused, now 25 years old, is currently held at the Davao Prison and Penal Farm, the SC extended the suspension of his sentence to uphold the law’s legislative intent, which emphasizes the child offender’s restoration, rehabilitation, and reintegration into society.
Citing its 2011 ruling in People v. Jacinto, the high court explained that the offender’s age at the time of judgment is secondary to the fact that he was a minor when the crime was committed.
The SC stressed that CICLs must be “given a chance to live a normal life and become a productive member of the community.”
The case was remanded to the RTC to arrange for the accused’s confinement in an agricultural camp or other suitable training facility, as provided under Section 51 of RA 9344.