A reminder to know the law or risks

[Dave Hounddriver]

1 hour ago, JDDavao said:

The definition has been broadened.

According to the law MikeB linked to,  this is the definition of:

Quote

Section 7. Child Trafficking. – Any person who shall engage in trading and dealing with children including, but not limited to, the act of buying and selling of a child for money, or for any other consideration, or barter, shall suffer the penalty of reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua. The penalty shall be imposed in its maximum period when the victim is under twelve (12) years of age.

Pretty much all encompassing.  Any "dealing with children" (17 year olds are considered children) and you are automatically guilty.

EDIT:  It is also worth noting all the requirement surrounding "Section 12. Employment of Children".  If someone wanted to get around the rules by saying she is a "working, live in student" or "just a maid" he better have all the paperwork in order.

EDIT 2:  And further to my point from earlier in this thread:

4 hours ago, Dave Hounddriver said:

Many years ago, resort staff looked at it like it was not their business who your guests were in your hotel room.  In today's Philippines there are a lot of resorts that report foreigners when bringing anyone who looks underage to your room.

MikeB posted a link to the law and I noticed it has been on the books since June 17, 1992.  It certainly has not been enforced for that long and until now it is specifically enforced against foreigners.  The only local person I have heard of having this law thrown at him was Freddy Aquilar who got around the rules by turning Muslim.

Edited November 6, 2017 by Dave Hounddriver

[bigpearl]

36 minutes ago, Jollygoodfellow said:

Since the law only applies to foreigners l wonder how they protect the children from their own people. Can a non realitive of a Filipno who is a minor visit a hotel room ? 

Does the law only apply to foreigners and or should it apply or does it apply to Filipinos also. I ask is it the responsibility of parents as it appears to be here in Oz though not many can control what minors get up to and apparent acceptable norms and tolerances  within any culture tend to wane, wax even. 

Children are quick, opportunists are quicker, calculating. Education and care, awareness for our loved ones thwarts immediate threat, we thin,we hope. Lower socio economic situations opens doors to predators. Abused yes. Policed?

Cheers, Steve

[Clermont]

13 hours ago, Jollygoodfellow said:

 

A foreigner who is caught in the company of a minor who is not his relative violates Republic Act (RA) 7610, or the Special Protection of Children against Abuse, Exploitation, and Discrimination Act. Section 10 (b) of RA 7610 prohibits any person to be in the company of “a minor, 12 years or under or who is 10 years or more his junior in any public or private place, hotel, motel, beer joint, discotheque, cabaret, pension house, sauna or massage parlor, beach and/or other tourist resort or similar places.” Vergara said they will file human trafficking charges against the foreigner.

http://www.sunstar.com.ph/cebu/local-news/2017/11/02/suspected-pedophile-arrested-cebu-beach-resort-572632

This is a mixed bag, I have seen many a young PI go into hotels in Manila area and not a word said, sad. But if they were to strictly enforce the law, how many would be nabbed, ( ten years or more his junior ). That opens a can of worms. 

[Mike J]

Is it just me that is confused or have a whole lot of us inadvertently  violated the law????  Below is a clip from R.A. 7610.  

<clip>

(b)    Any person who shall keep or have in his company a minor, twelve (12) years or under or who in ten (10) years or more his junior in any public or private place, hotel, motel, beer joint, discotheque, cabaret, pension house, sauna or massage parlor, beach and/or other tourist resort or similar places shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period and a fine of not less than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000): Provided, That this provision shall not apply to any person who is related within the fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity or any bond recognized by law, local custom and tradition or acts in the performance of a social, moral or legal duty

<end clip>

When I came to the Philippines some 13 or so years ago I was single and 55 years old.  My future Filipina wife was 39 years old, a difference of 16 years but far beyond being a child or minor.  We spent a week together in Boracay.  Could I have been arrested, fined, imprisoned, black listed?  Holy &^%#  

Am I reading or interpreting the law wrong, or is this a part of the law that defies common sense and is being ignored (for now) by law enforcement?  I cannot imagine what the purpose was for this "10 years junior" part of the statute.  Is there an alternate explanation that makes sense, or did someone(s) have a bad case of cranial rectitus when the law was written? 

[Jack Peterson]

10 minutes ago, Mike J said:

I cannot imagine what the purpose was for this "10 years junior" part of the statute.  Is there an alternate explanation

 Unless I am mistaken, there is a Cut of at age 25 to this part of the law in that, any Filipino under 25 still has to have Parental Guidance  & in some regions Permission to marry, after 25 they are on there own

Such is my Understanding 

 Jack

 Morning All, ( back to something like Normal after a Looooong Week or so of  this Culture thing ,  Birthdays and All souls and wot nots 

[Dave Hounddriver]

19 minutes ago, Mike J said:

(b)    Any person who shall keep or have in his company a minor, twelve (12) years or under or who in ten (10) years or more his junior

A minor (comma) who is 10 years or more his junior:  I take that to mean they would not have as severe a punishment for someone who is 18 dating a 17 year old as they would with someone who is 66 and dating a 17 year old.  But, as always, JMHO

[Tukaram (Tim)]

15 minutes ago, Mike J said:

Is it just me that is confused or have a whole lot of us inadvertently  violated the law????  Below is a clip from R.A. 7610.  

<clip>

(b)    Any person who shall keep or have in his company a minor, twelve (12) years or under or who in ten (10) years or more his junior

This is a typically poorly worded law. My understanding of that sentence is that the statute applies to minors.  Then the caveats: either 12, or 10 yrs your junior. So if the minor is 12 or under, you are in the wrong no matter your age.  If the minor is 13-17 it depends on your age.  If you are 50, the minor will always be too young. If you are 20, and the minor is 16, it seems to me that this statute does not apply. There may be other statutes that do... 

The family was confused by me when I first got here. I would not stay at the house if all the adults were leaving.  I was with what they called my nieces and nephews, but were not really (you know how they claim everyone as family).  But I was 50 and the kids were between 2 and 15.  I doubt anyone would report me staying at the family house watching tv... but I would not take the chance. 

[Jack Peterson]

29 minutes ago, Tukaram (Tim) said:

This is a typically poorly worded law. My understanding of that sentence is that the statute applies to minors.

Quite agree Tim, if the Law was about any 10 year gap we would all be under the Radar from applying for a marriage license to applying for the Marriage Contract which is administered by the halls of Justice So, I do think it all needs rewriting  In my case a Judge Married us ages on all the documents, I am sure this would have been picked up along the way if it was Unlawful  But as we know It is what it is here

Edited November 7, 2017 by Jack Peterson
a little punctuation if you don't mind

[Reboot]

Any 66 year old lechering on a 17 year old is begging for trouble. Dirty old men that think they can do whatever they like as soon as they've left their nation's borders. If it was my daughter I'd save the Danish government many years' worth of funding for his pension.

There has been a massive crackdown across the US since Trump became president. Thousands arrested in human trafficking and kiddie porn rings since the election. May Duterte follow the same course and lock up the trash.

Hollywood is burning down right now with hidden things coming to light. Good riddance.

Edited November 7, 2017 by Reboot

[Reboot]

13 hours ago, MikeB said:

Typically poor writing; it's unclear who's making this quote but it's dead wrong. The law does not apply exclusively to foreigners, but if it's intent is to say the law is selectively enforced against foreigners that would be correct.

And the headline is bullshit. It's not pedophilia with a 17 year old.