Is Impotence a Defense in Rape?

Image via Wikipedia

Impotence connotes an idea of man’s inability to attain genital or penile erection; a usual health problem of any man aging from 60 and above. Since there is no erection, sexual activity, through genital penetration is very difficult, if not impossible, on the part of the man.

On the other hand, rape connotes an idea of sexual intercourse or penetration of penis into the vagina by the use of force and violence and usually against the will of the woman.

Browsing on the initial concept of impotence in relation to rape, it can readily be inferred that it is a defense since it denotes physical and/or biological inability of man’s penis to attain erection; a precondition for the desired penetration. However, there are jurisdictions that do not require complete penetration of the woman’s genital in order to consummate the crime of rape. In the Philippines, the decision of the Supreme Court on this instance is very clear. Even a mere touch of the tip of the penis to the “lavia majora” or the outer lips of the woman’s genital, against the will of the latter, already constituted the crime of consummated rape. Hence, in this instance, impotence is not considered a defense.

The crime of rape, in the Philippines, is considered a crime against honor and punishable by death.