Senate Bill No. 1817: Anti-Prostitution Act of 2004 Constitutional or not?

Prostitution is an act of indulging in sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct and making it a habit in exchange for money or profit or its equivalent. In 2001, there were at least two (2) pending bills at the senate regarding anti-prostitution. While in 2002, there were at least three (3) house bills and one (1) resolution regarding prostitution. In 2004, a pending bill proposed and created by Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago entitled Anti-Prostitution Bill of 2004 which adheres to the decriminalization of prostitutes and passing their criminal liability to their recruiters, pimps, as well as, their clients. However, there are exemptions to this rule, and these exemptions can be seen in the heart of the Bill. Senator Santiago proposed some changes with regards to its punishable acts in contrary with Article 202 of the Revised Penal Code. She gave additional definitions and scope of punishments regarding the people involved in prostitution. Prostitutes can be classified into: Take Outs, Casa Workers, Streetwalkers, Child Prostitution, and Cyber Prostitutes. The main issue of this research is whether or not Senate Bill No. 1817 or the Anti-Prostitution Bill of 2004 is constitutional? Sub-issues were also formulated as guides to answer the main issue, in connection with Article II and XIII of the Philippine Constitution. The objective of the study is to call for the implementation of Senate Bill No. 1817, using the arguments and facts from both primary and secondary resource. Its significance is to further enhance or improve the law against prostitution limited to Philippine setting. The proposed changes under Senate Bill no. 1817 gives security to men, women, and children, as well as, defense against prostitution. It also provides answer to social injustices with vantage to the latter. It protects human rights and dignity of children, women, and the victims of prostitution. Based on the arguments and legal purpose, we conclude that this Bill deserves enactment. There are numerous actions taken by the government to answer this problem. However, we always blame them for any failure of actions. If these actions are still insufficient to answer this problem, maybe its time for us to think twice: shortcomings might not be coming from them, but from us