I. What Constitutes Statutory Rape Under Philippine Law

Statutory rape in the Philippines is committed when a person has carnal knowledge of a child below 16 years of age, regardless of whether the child “consented” or not. The law presumes absolute incapacity to give consent below this age.

The governing provision is Article 266-A, paragraph 1(d) of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 11648 (2022):

“By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a person under sixteen (16) years of age: Provided, That if the victim is under thirteen (13) years of age, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua in its maximum period to death.”

Key points:

Age of sexual consent is now 16 (raised from 12 by RA 11648).
Sexual intercourse with a child 15 years and 11 months or younger is statutory rape even if the child initiated, agreed, or even begged for the act.
There is no close-in-age or “Romeo and Juliet” exception in Philippine law. A 19-year-old who has consensual sex with a 15-year-old commits statutory rape.
If the child is below 13, the crime is qualified and carries a mandatory penalty of reclusion perpetua to death (although death penalty is currently abolished, the penalty remains reclusion perpetua without parole in heinous cases).

Sexual intercourse with a child below 18 through lascivious acts (not full penetration) may be prosecuted either as sexual assault under Art. 266-A(2) or as child abuse under Sec. 5(b) of RA 7610 (Anti-Child Abuse Law), depending on which charge gives the higher penalty (People v. Tulagan, G.R. No. 227363, 12 March 2019 – the Tulagan doctrine).

II. Nature of the Offense: Public Crime, Not Private Crime

Rape, including statutory rape, is a public crime (crime against the State), not a private crime.

Before Republic Act No. 8353 (Anti-Rape Law of 1997), rape was listed under Article 344 of the Revised Penal Code as one of the “private crimes” (seduction, abduction, rape, acts of lasciviousness) that could only be prosecuted upon complaint of the offended party and could be extinguished by subsequent marriage or pardon.

RA 8353 deliberately removed rape from Article 344 and reclassified it as a Crime Against Persons. The result:

The State is the real offended party.
Prosecution continues even if the victim or her family no longer wants to pursue the case.
Affidavit of desistance has no legal effect on the criminal action (People v. Amarela, G.R. Nos. 225642-43, 17 April 2019).

The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled:

“Rape is no longer considered a private crime. It is now regarded as a public crime that may be prosecuted de oficio. Consequently, an affidavit of desistance is viewed with suspicion and reservation, as it can easily be obtained through intimidation or monetary consideration.” (People v. Alcazar, G.R. No. 186494, 15 September 2010; reiterated in countless cases up to 2025)

III. Can the Case Be Settled or Compromised?

No. Settlement or amicable settlement that extinguishes the criminal liability is legally impossible.

Criminal liability cannot be compromised
Article 203 of the Revised Penal Code and Rule 110, Sec. 1 of the Rules of Court allow compromise only in crimes where the law permits it. Rape and violations of RA 7610/RA 11648 are not among them.
Payment of money in exchange for desistance is illegal
Such payments constitute obstruction of justice under Presidential Decree No. 1829 or violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act if public officers are involved. Prosecutors who dismiss cases in consideration of money commit grave misconduct and may be disbarred.
Affidavit of desistance or withdrawal of complaint is worthless in extinguishing criminal liability
The Supreme Court has consistently held that once a criminal complaint or information for rape has been filed, only an acquittal or conviction can terminate the case. Desistance is treated merely as evidence that the court may consider in evaluating credibility, but it does not stop the trial (People v. Baraoil, G.R. No. 194608, 9 July 2018; People v. De la Cruz, G.R. No. 243950, 24 February 2021).
Subsequent marriage between offender and victim does not extinguish liability
Before 1997, marriage extinguished the penalty for rape (old Article 344). RA 8353 removed this provision for rape. The Supreme Court has explicitly ruled that subsequent marriage no longer extinguishes criminal liability in rape cases, including statutory rape (People v. Jumawan, G.R. No. 187495, 21 April 2014 – though that case involved marital rape exemption which was later abolished; the principle applies a fortiori to statutory rape).

IV. What Can Actually Be Settled: Only the Civil Liability

The only thing that can be legally compromised is the civil liability (civil indemnity, moral damages, exemplary damages).

The victim or her parents may execute a waiver of civil liability or accept payment for damages. This is perfectly legal and common.

Effect:

The accused can still be convicted of the crime and sentenced to imprisonment.
But the civil liability is considered satisfied, so no additional money judgment will be rendered against him.
The court will usually still award the standard amounts (P100,000 civil indemnity, P100,000 moral, P100,000 exemplary for qualified statutory rape as of 2024-2025 jurisprudence), but will note that these have been settled or waived.

V. Practical Reality vs. Legal Reality

Despite the clear legal rule, in actual practice, especially in rural areas or where families want to avoid publicity:

Many statutory rape cases end up dismissed at the preliminary investigation stage when the complainant fails to appear or submits an affidavit of desistance.
Some prosecutors provisionally dismiss cases “without prejudice” when the complainant loses interest.
Trial courts sometimes acquit on reasonable doubt when the complainant becomes hostile or recants (though the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court often reverse such acquittals).

These outcomes are not “settlement” in the legal sense; they are either dismissal for lack of interest/evidence or acquittal after trial. The case remains on record, and the accused can still be re-filed against if new evidence appears (double jeopardy does not attach in dismissals before arraignment or provisional dismissals).

VI. Special Rule When the Accused Is Also a Minor

If the offender is below 18, the case falls under Republic Act No. 9344 (Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act, as amended by RA 10630).

The child in conflict with the law (CICL) may undergo intervention or diversion at the barangay, prosecutor, or court level.
Diversion may include restitution, payment to the victim, or community service.
If diversion is successful, the case is dismissed and the minor has no criminal record.

This is the only instance where something resembling “settlement” is legally sanctioned and can result in outright dismissal without trial.

VII. Conclusion

Under Philippine law as of December 2025, statutory rape is a non-compoundable, non-extinguishable public crime. No amount of money, affidavit of desistance, withdrawal of complaint, or subsequent marriage can legally terminate the criminal prosecution once it has commenced.

The only lawful compromise is on the civil liability (damages). Everything else is either illegal or merely a practical workaround that does not carry legal force.

Any lawyer who tells a client that statutory rape can be “settled” in exchange for money and the case will disappear is either ignorant or committing malpractice. The State will prosecute, and the offender faces a minimum of reclusion temporal (12–20 years) up to reclusion perpetua (20–40 years or life without parole if qualified).

The law prioritizes the protection of children over family convenience, financial considerations, or romantic relationships. There is no legal escape hatch.