not more than twelve (12) years and a fine of not less than Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) nor more than One million pesos (P1,000,000.00). "If the offender is an alien, he or she shall, in addition to the penalties herein prescribed, be deported without further proceedings. "In every case, conviction shall cause and carry the automatic revocation of the license or registration of the recruitment/manning agency, lending institutions, training school or medical clinic." The changes introduced by R. A. 8042 and R. A. 10022 on the definition and scope of illegal recruitment have practically covered all forms of fraud that may be committed against applicant OFWs. New acts of exploitation or fraud committed against applicant OFWs not previously included in the formal definition of illegal recruitment are now being punished as prohibited acts with the corresponding criminal penalties. The new prohibited acts numbers (1), (2), and (3) are meant to address the problem of debt bondage faced by OFWs. The penalties of fines and imprisonment for illegal recruitment and the other prohibited acts were also raised significantly under the present laws. A textual analysis of the present laws on illegal recruitment shows that the law has practically covered all possible scenarios and there are no perceivable gaps in the legal protection for OFWs against illegal recruitment. Notwithstanding the enactment into law of R. A. 8042 and R. A. 10022, however, the problem on illegal recruitment continue to persist. Even in the face of stringent laws against illegal recruitment imposing imprisonment up to twenty (20) years and fines up to Five Million Pesos, illegal recruiters continue to victimize overseas job applicants, sometimes even including experienced migrant workers. The fifteen (15) cases of illegal recruitment, mostly illegal recruitment in large scale or committed by a syndicate, were decided by the Supreme Court during the period 20152019. These were offenses committed after the enactment of R. A. 8042. In all these cases, the perpetrators did not have any valid license to recruit and yet, they were still able to defraud the victims.66 On the other hand, the victims were not diligent enough to verify first with the POEA if the recruiters were licensed entities. In fact, in one case, the victims even admitted that they knowingly went through the process despite awareness that the perpetrator had no recruitment license because they were counting on the illegal recruiter’s capacity to land them a job abroad.67 In a 2011 PIDS Discussion Paper, it was observed that notwithstanding the fact that laws are in place to protect OFWs, the implementation of the law leaves much to be desired. 66 67 In the case of “People of the Philippines vs. Delia Molina y Cabral,” G.R. No. 207811, June 01, 2016, the Accused-Appellant was the President of a POEA-licensed recruitment agency but at the time the illegal recruitment took place, the license of her agency was suspended and her agency had no authority to recruit workers to Korea as it had no valid job order to do so. “People of the Philippines vs. Owen Marcelo Cagalingan and Beatriz B. Cagalingan,” G.R. No. 198664, November 23, 2016 42