What is Stealthing?

“Stealthing”, or nonconsensual condom removal (“NCCR”), occurs when someone deliberately removes their condom during sexual activity without their partner’s consent or awareness. Stealthing was made a criminal offence in Singapore in 2019, as part of the updates to the Penal Code.  

Stealthing is a serious offence because it exposes victims to higher risks of pregnancy and/or sexually transmitted diseases. It is a violation of the victim’s bodily autonomy and can result in psychological and emotional harm. 

This article explains the elements of the offence of stealthing, highlights the challenges of obtaining evidence to prove a stealthing claim and sets out the avenues that victims can turn to for help.

The Offence

Stealthing is a criminal offence under s 376H of the Penal Code, under the section entitled “Procurement of sexual activity by deception or false representation”. The crux of the offence is the deception used to obtain consent for the sexual activity, which was conditional on the use of a sexually protective measure.

To be found guilty for stealthing under s 376H Penal Code, it must be proven that:

1. The accused fraudulently obtained the victim’s consent for the sexual activity in question by means of deception or false representation regarding the use of any sexually protective measure; and 

2. The accused knew or had reason to believe the victim’s consent was given in consequence of such deception or false representation.

Where the sexual activity involved penetration, an offender may be punished upon conviction with imprisonment of up to 10 years, or a fine, or caning, or any combination of such punishments.

To date, there have been no reported stealthing convictions. In Australia, the case of DPP v Diren involved an accused, Diren, who pleaded guilty to a charge of procuring a sexual act by fraud. Prior to engaging in sexual intercourse, the victim directed Diren to wear a condom and watched as he put the condom on. At some point during sexual intercourse, Diren removed his condom without the victim’s knowledge or agreement.

The court found that Diren’s behaviour involved deception and/or amounted to a false representation. The victim had insisted Diren wear a condom. It was clear she did not wish to have sex without that condition being met. Diren’s initial agreement was a representation he would wear a condom during sexual penetration and he did not. The court noted Diren made a “conscious decision” that “effectively changed the rules for [his] own gratification” without any consideration for the victim’s wishes. Diren was convicted and sentenced to 5 years’ imprisonment, which was the maximum prison sentence under Australia’s law on stealthing. 

Challenges in establishing a stealthing claim

A key obstacle victims face is gathering sufficient evidence to prove the accused removed the condom during sexual intercourse. Victims often only have their own testimony to rely on to prove the offence, the nature of sexual activity makes it difficult to collect evidence at the point where it took place, and sometimes victims are not even aware until after the act.

In Singapore, where an eyewitness’s uncorroborated testimony forms the sole basis for a conviction, the complainant’s case must be of an “unusually convincing” standard. A victim’s testimony, on its own, may in certain instances be sufficient to prove the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt if it meets the “unusually convincing” threshold. As mentioned earlier, there have are no reported stealthing convictions in Singapore to date. In other Commonwealth jurisdictions, stealthing victims have relied on recordings of conversations or chat messages between the accused and the victim where the accused admitted to removing the condom, to secure a conviction for stealthing. 

Avenues for Help

If you are a victim of stealthing or any form of sexual crime, please see AWARE Sexual Care Centre’s website (https://sacc.aware.org.sg/) for more information on the legal remedies available to you, information on what you should do within the first 72 hours of the incident, and the legal, counselling and other forms of help available for victims of sexual assault or harassment. 

Written by Same But Different, with special thanks to Stephanie Chok and Adel Hamzah