Article III of Republic Act No. 7610 should be AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION anent the proper penalty as held in the ponencia.[6] Entitled "AN ACT PROVIDING FOR STRONGER DETERRENCE AND SPECIAL PROTECTION AGAINST CHILD ABUSE, EXPLOITATION AND DISCRIMINATION, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES," approved on June 17, 1992. [1] See deliberations on Senate Bill No. 1209 dated April 29, 1991, Records of the Senate, Vol. IV, No. 111, p. 191. [2] See deliberations on Senate Bill No. 1209 dated April 29, 1991, Records of the Senate, Vol. IV, No. 111, pp. 191-192. [3] See deliberations on Senate Bill No. 1209 dated April 29, 1991, Records of the Senate, Vol. IV, No. 111, p. 192. [4] [5] League of Cities of the Philippines v. COMELEC, 623 Phil. 531, 564-565 (2009). [6] See ponencia, pp. 22-23. SEPARATE OPINION LEONEN, J.: I concur with the majority. The accused has been properly charged and convicted for violation of Article III, Section 5 of Republic Act No. 7610. I add however, that I entertain serious doubts as to whether he could have been convicted of violation of Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code (Acts of Lasciviousness) due to a lacuna in Republic Act No. 8353 or the Anti-Rape Law. That law properly reclassified rape as a crime against persons, thereby leaving Article 336 in a different title without the provisions it used to refer to. However, in view of the resolution of this case, this issue need not be considered. It should however, be the subject of a more serious deliberation in the proper case, where it becomes salient and is fully argued by the parties. ACCORDINGLY, I vote to AFFIRM petitioner's conviction.