4/29/2020
E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly
attributed to their mere presence in Thailand at the time when the private complainants
were also there. They assert that it was Azul, based on the testimonies of the private
complainants, who promised employment abroad and who received payment from
them. Rea avers that delivering a voucher, meeting people at the airport and sleeping
in the house of Tendenilla can hardly qualify as recruitment activities.
The OSG defends the trial court’s evaluation of the credibility of the prosecution
witnesses.
The OSG posits that the testimonies of private complainants clearly
establish that Tendenilla made representations that she could provide employment
abroad. The OSG also implicates Rea as a co-conspirator by her presence when private
complainants paid their placement fees and at the training center during the orientation
of private complainants; and by accompanying private complainants to Thailand.
The crime of illegal recruitment in large scale is committed upon concurrence of these
(3) elements, namely: (1) the offenders undertake any activity within the meaning of
recruitment and placement defined in Article 13(b) or any prohibited practices
enumerated in Article 34 of the Labor Code; (2) the offenders have no valid license or
authority required by law to enable them to lawfully engage in the recruitment and
placement of workers; and (3) the offenders commit the acts against three or more
persons, individually or as a group.[17]
Recruitment and placement is defined in Article 13(b) of the Labor Code as "any act of
canvassing, enlisting, contracting, transporting, utilizing, hiring, or procuring worker;
and includes referrals, contract services, promising or advertising for employment,
locally or abroad, whether for profit or not."
Simply put, illegal recruitment is committed by persons who, without authority from the
government, give the impression that they have the power to send workers abroad for
employment purposes.[18]
That Tendenilla made misrepresentations concerning her purported power to recruit for
overseas employment; and personally, or through Azul but on her behalf, collected
placement fees from private complainants were clearly established from the testimonies
of private complainants themselves, to wit:
Testimony of Alvaro Trinidad:
Q:
A:
Q:
A:
Q:
A:
Q:
A:
Q:
Then you follow it up to her and again on June 2005 you
went back also and she asked you to give her what amount?
Php114,000, your Honor.
This is for what?
For another placement of another work in London, your
Honor.
Where you able to deliver the Php114,000?
Yes, your Honor.
Where did you get this money?
I withdraw from the bank, your Honor.
In other words the Php114,000 you gave to Ginette, how did
elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/55927
5/23