Practice question
In2026, an adult commits the sexual conduct specified by amended RA7610 Section5(b) against a fourteen-year-old child subjected to sexual exploitation. The close-in-age exception is expressly inapplicable. Defense counsel insists the old under-twelve proviso must control because an unamended copy says so. Which is best?
- The old printed threshold always overrides amendments
- RA11648 did not address any child-protection provision
- The child’s exploitation makes age legally irrelevant in every case
- The current amended under-sixteen proviso must be considered; the old threshold cannot be applied as unchanged law
- Every such case must be dismissed without identifying the proper offense
Legal references
- RA11648 Section3, amending RA7610 Section5(b): https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2022/ra_11648_2022.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.