17 Ortega vs People Digest

G.R. No. 151085

August 20, 2008

JOEMAR ORTEGA vs. PEOPLE FACTS: At the time of commission of rape, the accused was only 13 years old, while the victim AAA was 6, both minors. It was alleged that petitioner raped her three times on three different occasions in 1996. The lower courts convicted him of rape with criminal and civil liability imposed. The case was pending when Republic Act 9344 (R.A. No. 9344) or the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006, was enacted amending the age of criminal irresponsibility being raised from 9 to 15 years old. Said law took effect on May 20, 2006. At the time of the promulgation of judgment, the accused already reached the age of majority. The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) claimed that petitioner is not exempt from criminal liability because he is not anymore a child as defined by R.A. No. 9344. The OSG further claimed that the retroactive effect of said law is applicable only if the child-accused is still below 18 years old. ISSUE: Whether or not the petitioner is exempt in the crime alleged by reason of minority HELD: Yes, the petitioner is exempt from criminal liability. For one who acts by virtue of any of the exempting circumstances, although he commits a crime, by the complete absence of any of the conditions which constitute free will or voluntariness of the act, no criminal liability arises. Hence, while there is a crime committed, no criminal liability attaches. By virtue of the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006 (R.A. 9344), the age of criminal irresponsibility has been raised from 9 to 15 years old. Petitioner was only 13 years old at the time of the commission of the alleged rape. The first paragraph of Section 6 of R.A. No. 9344 clearly provides that, a child fifteen (15) years of age or under at the time of the commission of the offense shall be exempt from criminal liability. However, the child shall be subjected to an intervention program pursuant to Section 20 of this Act. The Court gives retroactive application insofar as it favors the persons guilty of a felony. While the law exempts the petitioner from criminal liability, however, he is not exempt from civil liability. For this reason, petitioner and/or his parents are liable to pay AAA civil indemnity.