People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. YYY, Accused-Appellant.
FACTS
On July 13, 2016, the U.S. FBI tracked emails of YYY involving the sale of nude photos of minor girls. An FBI undercover agent communicated with YYY, who provided payment details and access to sexual webcam shows and photos of minors. The FBI traced the activity to Angeles City, Pampanga, and notified the PNP. Police verified the report and conducted surveillance at YYY’s house in Mabalacat City, Pampanga, posing as buyers. They observed minor girls, a computer set with a webcam, and other items matching the FBI’s information. On August 11, 2016, a search warrant was issued. On August 16, 2016, law enforcers implemented the warrant, seized items including a computer set and a cellphone, and rescued three minor children, including AAA. AAA, YYY’s niece, testified that YYY ordered her to undress, stand naked in front of a computer with a webcam where an old man was watching, and touch her genitalia while YYY recorded videos. YYY sold these materials to a foreign customer. A digital forensic examination extracted nude photos and videos of AAA and conversations about their sale. YYY was charged with violation of Sections 4(a), (b), and (c) of Republic Act No. 9775 (Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009) in relation to Section 16 of the same law and Section 4(c)(2) of Republic Act No. 10175 (Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012). The RTC convicted YYY, sentencing her to reclusion perpetua, a fine of P2,000,000.00, and damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. YYY appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the repeal of RA 9775 by RA 11930 (Anti-Online Sexual Abuse or Exploitation of Children [OSAEC] and Anti-Child Sexual Abuse or Exploitation Materials [CSAEM] Act) extinguished her criminal liability.
ISSUE
Whether the repeal of Republic Act No. 9775 by Republic Act No. 11930 extinguished YYY’s criminal liability for child pornography committed through the use of a computer system.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court held that the repeal of RA 9775 by RA 11930 did not extinguish YYY’s criminal liability. RA 11930 is a reenactment of the child pornography provisions under RA 9775, with enhancements and modifications. The repeal of a penal law by its reenactment, even without a saving clause, does not destroy criminal liability for acts committed under the old law, as the reenactment is considered a continuation of the former statute. The essence of the offense-the sexual abuse and exploitation of children-remains punishable. The Court found the elements of child pornography under RA 9775, qualified by the use of a computer system under RA 10175, were sufficiently proven. AAA’s credible testimony and the digital evidence established that YYY, as AAA’s aunt and guardian, willfully used the minor to produce child pornography through a computer system for consideration. The search warrant was validly issued based on personal knowledge and examination of witnesses. The penalty of reclusion perpetua and the fine were affirmed, with modifications to the awards of moral and exemplary damages.
