5/28/2020
E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly
On appeal, the CA upheld the factual findings of the RTC. It agreed with the trial court
that all the elements of illegal recruitment, as defined under Article 13(b), in relation to
Article 34 of the of the Labor Code, were sufficiently established by the prosecution’s
evidence. The CA held that the appellant’s acts of promising the complainants that they
would be deployed for work abroad after they paid him their placement fees, and his
misrepresentations concerning his purported power and authority despite the lack of
license, are constitutive of illegal recruitment in large scale.
The CA also declared that appellant’s assurances that he could deploy the complainants
for employment in Hongkong constitutes estafa.
Our Ruling
We deny the appeal and affirm the appellant’s convictions. We however,
modify the penalties imposed in the five counts of estafa.
Illegal Recruitment In Large Scale
Article 38 of the Labor Code defines illegal recruitment as "any recruitment activities,
including the prohibited practices enumerated under Article 34 of (the Labor Code), to
be undertaken by non-licensees or non-holders of authority." The term "recruitment
and placement" refers to any act of canvassing, enlisting, contracting, transporting,
utilizing, hiring or procuring workers, including referrals, contract services, promising or
advertising for employment, locally or abroad, whether for profit or not, provided that
any person or entity which, in any manner, offers or promises for a fee employment to
two or more persons shall be deemed engaged in recruitment and placement. The law
imposes a higher penalty when the illegal recruitment is committed by a syndicate or in
large scale as they are considered an offense involving economic sabotage. Illegal
recruitment is deemed committed by a syndicate if carried out by a group of three (3)
or more persons conspiring and/or confederating with one another in carrying out any
unlawful or illegal transaction, enterprise or scheme. It is deemed committed in large
scale if committed against three (3) or more persons individually or as a group.[3]
For illegal recruitment in large scale to prosper, the prosecution has to prove three
essential elements, namely: (1) the accused undertook a recruitment activity under
Article 13(b) or any prohibited practice under Article 34 of the Labor Code; (2) the
accused did not have the license or the authority to lawfully engage in the recruitment
and placement of workers; and (3) the accused committed such illegal activity against
three or more persons individually or as a group.
In the present case, the appellant promised the five complainants that there were jobs
available for them in Hongkong; and that through his help, they could be deployed for
work within a month or two. He exacted money from them for the plane ticket, hotel
accommodation, processing of visa and placement fees. Notably, the prosecution
presented a Certification dated January 10, 2003 issued by Felicitas Q. Bay, Director II
of the Philippine Overseas Employment Agency (POEA) Licensing Branch, showing that
the appellant had no authority or license to lawfully engage in the recruitment and
elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/57046
2/5