What is the difference between kidnapping with rape and forcible abduction with rape? With the ongoing war between and among nations in the world, a poignant fact that war between communities in a nation also exists. In the country, Kidnapping and Abduction are commonly entwined with the Abu Sayyaf officially known and regarded by ISIL/ISIS as the Islamic State which operates in the East Asia Province.
One of the most famous Kidnapping and Abduction incidents in the Philippines is the Dos Palmas Kidnapping, wherein some members of the terrorist group, Abu Sayyafs, seized twenty hostages on a private island in Honda Bay, Palawan.
According to reports, it resulted in the deaths of at least five of the original hostages, including two American citizens. Rapes were also committed against the women abducted. At least twenty-two Filipino soldiers were killed in attempts to apprehend the captors and free the hostages in the 12 months following the initial hostage-taking.
What is the difference between Kidnapping and Abduction?
In a usual situation relating to a specific person or persons, the crimes of Kidnapping and Abduction may be similar, in the sense of taking away the person of the victim, without the latter’s consent or against his/her will.
However, if you dig deeper, charges allotted against the suspect may be different. As regards female victims, these crimes are also commonly accompanied by the offense of rape. So what is the difference between the two? Simply, it lies on the criminal intention of the accused at the time of the abduction.
Kidnapping occurs when the person has been taken against his or her will usually through aggressive means. This is usually accompanied by trickery, threat, force, duress, or intimidation.
Sometimes, in relation to the felony of kidnapping, the accused often asked for money for financial gain. Harm or injury may happen and the person may expect prolonged detention.
Abduction is considered to be when a person has been taken away from his or her original location by urging him or her, by some act of deception, or in a powerful way that may include ferocity.
If with lewd design, it is a complex crime of rape through forcible abduction; if without, then it is a special complex crime of kidnapping with rape.
What is the difference between kidnapping with rape and forcible abduction with rape?
One of the basic differences between Kidnapping with Rape and Forcible Abduction with Rape is that the former is a Special Complex Crime while the latter is a Complex Crime under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code.
Article 48 of the said code provides that:
Penalty for complex crimes. – When a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies, or when an offense is a necessary means for committing the other, the penalty for the most serious crime shall be imposed, the same to be applied in its maximum period.1
As regards criminal intent or mens rea, in Kidnapping with Rape, the initial mens rea is to deprive the offended party her liberty. While in Forcible Abduction with Rape, the criminal intent all through out is to have carnal knowledge with the victim. Abduction is merely a necessary means to commit Rape.
Related Jurisprudence: Kidnapping with Rape
People vs. Mirandilla, G.R. 186417, July 27, 2011, J. Perez
During a fiesta, AAA went out of the dancing hall to buy candies. While going back to the crowd, a man grabbed her hand, his arm wrapped her shoulders, with a knife pointed at her side. She was told not to ask for help. Three other men came, one of whom had a gun. They boarded a tricycle and upon passing the Albay Cathedral, AAA was left alone with the respondent. The former was dragged inside a house. With a gun pointed at her, she was ordered to remove her pants. When she defied him, he hit her and forced his hands inside her pants, into her panty, and upon reaching her vagina, slipped his fingers and rotated them inside. Her pants were then pulled down and lifting her legs, pushed and pulled his penis inside.2
At around midnight the next day, the gang arrived. Mirandilla ordered her to open her mouth wherein he forced his penis. Afterwards, they went to Bogtong, Legazpi. AAA’s mouth was gagged with cloth and her underwear was gone. The respondent’s penis got inside her vagina. A little while, the other members of the gang drove away. AAA was thrown inside a nipa hut where she was raped again. The same thing happened to her at different places. She was raped 27 times.3
In Guinobatan, AAA succeeded in opening the cell door while the gang was busy playing cards. She ran and stayed of people’s sight for two nights. Finally, she found a road that led her to Evelyn Guevarra who brought her to the police station. The police presented him pictures of suspected criminals. There, he recognized Mirandilla.4
The Supreme Court found the respondent guilty of kidnapping and illegal detention with rape. No matter how many rapes were committed, the resultant crime was only one kidnapping with rape because these composite acts were regarded as single and indivisible offense.
Related Jurisprudence: Forcible Abduction with Rape
A gang grabbed a 17-year-old girl and dragged her to a vacant lot. There, she was brutally ravished.
People vs. Garcia et al., G.R. No. 141125, February 28, 2002, Per Curiam
As the victim was going home from school, she saw a white van approaching so she stopped to let it pass. Suddenly, it stopped in front of her.5
She was then pulled into the van. Something was sprayed on her face. She shouted, but she felt a fist blow which made her unconscious. When she woke up, she was undressed on a bed. In the room with her were four men. Garcia burned her chin with a cigarette while one of them was having a sexual intercourse with her, while two men were holding her feet. Then they took turns. Something was again sprayed on her face which made her vision blurred. After that, she blacked out. When she regained consciousness, she was by the roadside with her clothes on.6
As held by the Supreme Court, the Regional Trial Court did not err in convicting the accused of the complex crime of Forcible Abduction with Rape. As defined in Art. 342 of the Revised Penal Code, the elements of forcible abduction are: (1) taking of a woman against her will and (2) with lewd designs. The crime of forcible abduction with rape is a complex crime that occurs when there is carnal knowledge with the abducted woman under the following circumstances: (1) by using force or intimidation; (2) when the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and (3) when the woman is under twelve years of age or demented.7
In this case, all the elements of forcible abduction were present. Carnal knowledge was committed through force and intimidation.
There can only be one complex crime of forcible abduction with rape. Forcible abduction was only necessary for the first rape. The subsequent acts of rape should be independent of the forcible abduction. Therefore, the accused-appellant was convicted of one complex crime of forcible abduction with rape and three separate acts of rape.
People vs. Amaro, G.R. No. 199100, July 18, 2014, J. Perez
A 7-year-old girl was walking on her way home from school when she passed by Boots and Maya store. She met the respondent there and asked her to buy cigarettes. After doing so, she was given food. After eating, she became dizzy and passed out.8
She was brought to Amaro’s house. When she regained consciousness, the appellant was naked. He undressed her, kissed her, and inserted his penis into her vagina. She was detained for six days and was raped five times.9
The elements of the crime of forcible abduction, as defined in Art. 342 of the Revised Penal Code, are: (1) the person abducted is any woman, regardless of her age, civil status, or reputation; (2) she is taken against her will; and (3) the abduction is with lewd designs. On the other hand, rape under Art. 266-A is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman by: (1) force or intimidation, or (2) when the woman is deprived of reason or is unconscious, or (3) when she is under twelve years of age.11
All the aforementioned elements were proven. The victim was a 7-year-old girl who was taken against her will by Amaro. Against her will because had it not been for the deception the accused employed, he would not have succeeded in luring the victim to come with him.12
The accused told the girl that the former knew the victim’s mother and that he would bring her home. At her tender age, she was easily deceived. The presence of lewd designs in forcible abduction was established by the actual rape of the victim.13
Therefore, the appellant was properly charged with the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape. The abduction was a necessary means to commit rape.
- Article 48, Revised Penal Code
- G.R. No. 186417, July 27, 2001
- G.R. No. 141125, February 28, 2002
- G.R. No. 199100, July 18, 2014