Seduction. Past, present and future

• Author: Gheorghe Ivan - Claudia Ivan Mari
• Position: Science Research Associate, 'Andrei Radulescu' Institute for Judicial Research within the Romanian Academy; Ph.D. Assistant Professor, 'Dunarea de Jos' University of Galati, Faculty of Judicial, Social and Political Science; Chief Prosecutor - Galati Regional Department, National Anticorruption Directorate - Bachelor of Laws, University of ...
• Pages: 302-305

SEDUCTION. PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE

Gheorghe Ivan

Mari Claudia Ivan

Abstract

The new Penal Code of Romania (Law 286/2009) no longer incriminates seduction, thus giving

expression to the cr iticisms made at its a ddress and to the opinion that seduction is consider ed a s a tota l

ana chronistic incrimination.

In this study the authors ha ve shown the need to carry on incr iminating the act of seduction.

Key words: seduction, offence, the new penal Code of Romania.

Introduction

From a ncient times man has been p reoccupied with protecting the basic socia l relations so a s to ensure

his survival. Among these, there have been mentioned those r elating to the sexual freedom of females that have

not rea ched the age of 18, with a great impact on the development of their persona lity (both psychological a nd

moral)1.

I. Legislative tradition with regard to this matter.

Article 424 of the 1936 Penal Code of Romania incriminated the seduction as follows: The male person

who, by formal promises of marriage, determines a female person under 18 years old to have sexual intercourses

with him, commits the offence of seduction and shall be punished with correctional impri sonment for up to 1 to

3 years.

II. Analysis of the offence as stipulated by the Penal Code of Romania in force (1969 Penal Code).

1. Concept and definition.

The offence consists of the d eed of a male person who, by promises of marriage, determines a female

person under 18 years old to have sexual intercourses with him (art. 199 1 st ¶, Penal Code).

2. Special juridical object.

The offence o f seduction has as special juridical object the social relatio ns related to the sexual liberty

of the female person who is under 18 years old.

3. The Material object is represented by the body of a female person under 18 years old.

4. The active subject can be only a male person. The active subject must have the physiological capacity to

perform a normal sexual intercourse. Should this condition be fulfilled, the age and the marital status o f the male

person are irrelevant. A minor male person can be the active s ubject o f the seduction offence, despite the fact

that he is not allowed to get married2. Even if the minor male person may be, in principle, subject of the

seduction offence, however it is necessary to establish, in each case, if the promises made by him have or have

not a decisive role in obtaining the consent o f the female person, because it is possible that these pro mises shall

not have been take n seriously due to the age of the person making them. In this case they do not play a decisive

role and the dee d will not represent an offence of seduction. A married man may be the subject of the seduction

offence, taking the d eception committed by a married man to be even more obvious, more cynic than the

deception committed by a single man3. The seduction offence is however removed if the minor female person

knew that the perpetrator was married, because, in such a case, the promises of marriage made could not be

taken seriously and, consequently, they do not play a decisive role in obtaining her consent for a sexual

intercourse4.

The penal participation is possible under the form of instigation or complicity. T he instigator and the

accomplice may be even female persons. The co-authorship is not po ssible becau se the seduction offence is a

 Science Research Associate, “Andrei Radulescu” Institute for Judicial Research within the Romanian Academy; Ph.D. Assistant Professor,

“Dunarea de Jos” University of Galati, Faculty of Judicial, Social and Political Science; Chief Prosecutor – Galati Regional Department,

National Anticorruption Directorate; ivan_gheorghe_p@yahoo.com; ivan.gheorghe@ugal.ro.

 Bachelor of Laws, University of Bucharest, Faculty of Law; MA student, “Titu Maiorescu” University, Faculty of Law, B ucharest;

mariclaudia_i@yahoo.com

1. Gheorghe Ivan, Criminal Law. Special Pa rt. With Reference to the New Pena l Code, C. H. Beck Publishing House, Bucharest, 2010, p.

203.

2. Iasi Regional Law Court, criminal department, decree no. 148/1966, Romanian Law Review no. 12/1968, p. 161.

3. Traian Pop, Comments, in Const. G. Ratescu, I. Ionescu-Dolj, I. Gr. Perieteanu, Vintil Dongoroz, H. Aznavorian, Traian Pop, Mihail I.

Papadopolu, N. Pavelescu, Carol II Pena l Code annotated, Tome II, Special Pa rt, Socec & Co. Library and Printing House, Bucharest, 1937,

p. 656.

4. Vintil Dongoroz, Siegfried Kahane, Ion Oancea, Rodica Mihaela Stnoiu, Iosif Fodor, Nicoleta Iliescu, Constantin Bulai, Victor Roca,

Theoretical Explanations of the Romanian Pena l Code. Special Pa rt, Tome III, Romanian Academy Publishing House Bucharest, 1971, p.

377.