Short answer. No. Article 339 of the Revised Penal Code punishes acts of lasciviousness with the consent of the offended party — the statute's title itself makes clear that consent is present and the act is still criminal. Consent reduces the severity of the offense compared to forced acts, but it does not eliminate criminal liability.
What the law says
Acts of lasciviousness with the consent of the offended party. -The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed to punish any other acts of lasciviousness committed by the same persons and the same circumstances as those provided in articles 337 and 338.
Revised Penal Code, Article 339 — Lasciviousness With Consent. Read the full provision →
Consent here is not a defense
Article 339 is explicit in its title and text: it punishes acts of lasciviousness with the consent of the offended party. The presence of consent is already factored into the provision — it is what distinguishes Article 339 from the more serious offense of acts of lasciviousness committed without consent, or by force, threat, or intimidation, which the Code punishes far more heavily elsewhere. Consent does not eliminate the crime; it determines which provision applies and what penalty follows. When Article 339 applies, the law still imposes a penalty.
Who Article 339 covers
Article 339's coverage is defined by reference to "the same persons and the same circumstances as those provided in articles 337 and 338." One of those referenced provisions covers qualified seduction, which involves persons in positions of authority, trust, or ascendancy over the victim. Article 338 covers simple seduction of a single or widowed woman of good reputation, over twelve but under eighteen years of age, committed by deceit. Article 339 therefore addresses lascivious acts committed in those same contexts and involving those same categories of persons, but where the offended party consented. The law recognizes that consent given by someone in a dependent or vulnerable position — a domestic employee, a ward, a young person seduced by someone with authority over them — is still insufficient to lawfully justify the conduct.
The penalty is lighter than for forced acts
Article 339 imposes arresto mayor as the penalty — a correctional penalty involving imprisonment for a period of one month and one day to six months. This is considerably lighter than the penalties for acts of lasciviousness without consent, which can carry higher terms depending on the circumstances. The difference in penalties reflects the law's recognition that consent is a mitigating factor in the sense that it places the conduct in a different, less grave category. But the criminal character of the act is not removed — the offender can still be prosecuted and convicted.
Important context for those involved in such situations
If someone is asking this question because they are personally involved — either as a complainant or as someone accused — the answer has practical significance. For a complainant: even if you did not resist or even appeared to agree, this provision exists precisely because the law recognizes that apparent consent in certain relationships or situations does not make the act lawful. For someone accused: the fact that the other party consented does not provide a complete defense under Article 339 when the surrounding circumstances place you within the articles it references. The specific facts of any situation are what determine whether and how the law applies, and legal advice tailored to those facts is important.