NINETEENTH CONGRESS OF THE 
) 
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES 
) 
Second Regular Session  
) 
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
House Bill No. _______ 
Introduced by REPRESENTATIVES LANI MERCADO-REVILLA, 
BRYAN B. REVILLA AND RAMON JOLO REVILLA III 
AN ACT 
REMOVING THE “THE FORGIVENESS CLAUSE” AS A GROUND TO 
EXTINGUISH LIABILITY FOR RAPE AND THE CRIMES OF SEDUCTION, 
ABDUCTION AND ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS, REPEALING FOR THE 
PURPOSE ARTICLE 266-C OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8353, OTHERWISE KNOWN 
AS “THE ANTI-RAPE LAW OF 1997”, AND AMENDING ARTICLES 23, 89 AND 344 
OF ACT NO. 3815, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS “THE REVISED PENAL CODE”  
EXPLANATORY NOTE 
Amid the unsettling backdrop of 7,197 reported rape cases from January 1 to 
November 13, 2022, it becomes imperative for us to persistently seek avenues to 
enhance the legal framework governing rape, as well as the related crimes of 
seduction, abduction, and acts of lasciviousness.   
This bill seeks to further strengthen the penal provisions of the above-stated 
crimes by removing loopholes that allow perpetrators to evade the rightful 
consequences of their heinous deeds, specifically through marriage with the victim, or 
the forgiveness of the perpetrator spouse.  
The instrumentalization of forgiveness against women is an injustice that must 
be rectified. We need to draw a clear line between forgiveness and exoneration, 
especially in the context of sexual abuse. Viewing the victim’s act of forgiveness 
through the lens of complete absolution for the perpetrator’s criminal responsibility is 
a perspective that does not fully acknowledge the victim’s vulnerable state. Amidst 
these circumstances wherein the victim is contending with profound trauma, the 
sudden consideration of marrying the perpetrator must raise questions about the 
voluntariness of her decision. It has been said that, surpassing even homicide, sexual 
August 31, 2023
9:40 am
9010


assault represents one of the most grievous forms of mistreatment inflicted upon a 
woman, as the act strips her of the core elements of self-worth, womanhood, and 
integrity. Thus, the act of forgiveness should not obligate anyone to embrace the 
notion of absolving wrongdoers from accountability.  
 
The same holds true with marital rape. A reparational marriage in the context 
of sexual abuse is not the marriage that can properly serve as the very foundation of 
the family, which the state is duty-bound to protect. Marriage does not strip women of 
their innate right to exercise control over her sexuality, nor does it grant husbands 
permission to commit violence against their wives, for the principles of human rights 
remain inviolable.  
 
The provisions outlined in Article 266-C of Republic Act No. 8353, otherwise 
known as “The Anti-Rape Law of 1997”, along with Articles 23, 89 and 344 of Act No. 
3815, also known as “The Revised Penal Code”, continue to reflect an antiquated 
perspective that violated women are a source of shame. Consequently, a significant 
number of women choose not to report their sexual assault due to the apprehension 
of bringing about dishonor and humiliation. These provisions also stem from the 
patriarchal notion that the marriage between a man and a woman implies a skewed 
sense of “ownership” that the man holds over his partner. Nothing can be more 
primitive than this at this day and age where women’s rights are accorded significant 
importance.  
 
In order for our country to genuinely embody progress in women’s rights, we 
must persistently seek avenues to eliminate regressive laws that undermine women’s 
well-being. We must remain mindful of the precepts enshrined in Article II, Section 11 
of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, which underscores the State’s commitment to 
upholding the dignity of every individual and safeguarding their human rights. 
Moreover, within the same Article, Section 14 emphasizes the State’s 
acknowledgment of women’s vital role in nation-building and its pledge to ensure the 
foundational equality of women and men under the law. Furthermore, Section 12 of 
Republic Act No. 9710, also known as the Magna Carta of Women, stipulates the need 
for amending or repealing discriminatory laws or provisions thereof. 1   
 
1 References: 
 
Bettencourt, M. F. (2018, September 26). How Forgiveness Has Been Weaponized Against Women. Harper’s Bazaar. 
Retrieved August 10, 2023, from https://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/politics/a23284069/metoo-sexual-abuse-
forgiveness-weaponized-against-women/.  
 
Commission on Human Rights, Position Paper on the Amendment of the Anti-Rape Law and Other Relevant Laws (Senate Bill 
No. 2332) (2021). Retrieved August 8, 2023, from https://chr.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Position-Paper-on-
the-Amendment-of-the-Anti-Rape-Law-and-Other-Relevant-Laws-Senate-Bill-No.-2332.pdf.  
 
Constitutional Amendments and Revision of Codes, & Villar, M. B. [Bill], Senate of the Philippines (2006). Retrieved August 8, 
2023, from https://legacy.senate.gov.ph/lisdata/55054557!.pdf.  
 
Dela Peña , K. (2023, January 12). Rape declines, but numbers don’t tell the story: sexual violence still pervasive. Inquirer 
News. Retrieved August 10, 2023, from https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1715756/rape-declines-but-numbers-dont-tell-the-
story-sexual-violence-still-pervasive.  
 




NINETEENTH CONGRESS OF THE 
) 
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES 
) 
Second Regular Session  
) 
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
HOUSE BILL NO. _______ 
Introduced by REPRESENTATIVES LANI MERCADO-REVILLA, 
BRYAN B. REVILLA AND RAMON JOLO REVILLA III 
AN ACT 
REMOVING THE “THE FORGIVENESS CLAUSE” AS A GROUND TO 
EXTINGUISH LIABILITY FOR RAPE AND THE CRIMES OF SEDUCTION, 
ABDUCTION AND ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS, REPEALING FOR THE 
PURPOSE ARTICLE 266-C OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8353, OTHERWISE KNOWN 
AS “THE ANTI-RAPE LAW OF 1997”, AND AMENDING ARTICLES 23, 89 AND 344 
OF ACT NO. 3815, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS “THE REVISED PENAL CODE”  
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in 
Congress assembled: 
SECTION 1. Article 266-C of Republic Act No. 8353, otherwise known as “The 
Anti-Rape Law of 1997”, commonly referred to as the “forgiveness clause”, is hereby 
repealed.  
SECTION 2. Article 23 of Act No. 3815, otherwise known as “The Revised 
Penal Code”, is hereby amended as follows: 
Article 23. Effect of pardon by the offended party. – A pardon of the 
offended party shall not extinguish criminal action [except as provided in 
Article 344 of this Code]; but civil liability with regard to the interest of the 
injured party is extinguished by his express waiver.   
SECTION 3. Article 89 of the Revised Penal Code is hereby further amended 
as follows: 
Article 89. How criminal liability is totally extinguished. – Criminal liability 
is totally extinguished: 
9010


                                                     xxx 
 
7. By the marriage of the offended woman, as provided in Article 344 of 
this Code.] 
 
SECTION 4. Article 344 of the Revised Penal Code is hereby further amended 
as follows: 
 
Article 344. Prosecution of the crimes of adultery, concubinage, 
seduction, abduction, rape and acts of lasciviousness. – xxx 
 
                                                      xxx 
 
[In cases of seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness and rape, the 
marriage of the offender with the offended party shall extinguish the 
criminal action or remit the penalty already imposed upon him. The 
provisions of this paragraph shall also be applicable to the co-principals, 
accomplices and accessories after the fact of the above-mentioned 
crimes.] 
 
SECTION 5. All other laws, decrees, orders, other issuances, rules and 
regulations, or parts thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby 
repealed, modified, or amended accordingly. 
 
SECTION 6. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its publication in 
the Official Gazette or in a newspaper of general circulation. 
 
Approved,