<![CDATA[Children receive special legal protection against sexual intercourse committed through deceitful means, a series of lies, or persuasion. This article analyses the offence elements, proof, and sentencing reasoning in Decision Number 70/Pid.Sus-Anak/2024/PN Mdn while distinguishing the legal positions of the child victim and juvenile offender. Using normative legal research with statutory and case approaches, it argues that consent or a dating relationship should not be generalised as negating liability where legislation protects children from specified means used to obtain intercourse; nevertheless, such facts must be placed accurately within proof of the charged elements. Deceitful means, a series of lies, and persuasion are alternative elements requiring objective differentiation. Medical evidence establishes clinical findings within its competence but does not by itself prove persuasion or deception. Because the study examines one decision, it does not claim a national pattern of adjudication.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
