People vs Buemio : 114011 : December 16, 1996 : J. Kapunan : First D... http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/dec1996/114011.htm solemnly taken before the courts of justice simply because the witnesses who had given them, later on, changed their mind for one reason or another, for such rule would make solemn trial a mockery and place the investigation of truth at the mercy of unscrupulous witness(es). Complaints Bernardo Salazar and Richard Quillope may have a change of heart insofar as the offense wrought on their person is concerned when they executed their joint affidavit of desistance but this will not affect the public prosecution of the offense itself. It is relevant to note that the right of prosecution and punishment for a crime is one of the attributes that by a natural law belongs to the sovereign power instinctly charged by the common will of the members of society to look after, guard and defend the interest of the community, the individual and social rights and liberties of every citizen and the guaranty of the exercise of his rights. The cardinal principle which states that to the State belongs the power to prosecute and punish crimes should not be overlooked since a criminal offense is an outrage to the sovereign State. As provided by the Civil Code of the Philippines: Art. 2034. There may be a compromise upon the civil liability arising from an offense; but such compromise shall not extinguish the public action for the imposition of the legal penalty. While the trial court included the eleven estafa cases in the docket numbers appearing on the face of the decision to identify the cases under consideration, it omitted any mention about them. A thorough search on the records for a reason for such omission yielded a negative result. Notably, the Solicitor General failed to notice the same omission in his brief. The settled rule is that where other crimes or felonies are found to have been committed by an accused charged with violation of another law, conviction under the latter law does not preclude punishment under [39] the other statutes. WHEREFORE, the Decision of the trial court finding appellant Vevina Buemio guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of illegal recruitment in large scale under Arts. 38 and 39 of the Labor Code and imposing on her the penalty of life imprisonment and the payment of a fine of P100,000.00 is hereby AFFIRMED, subject to the modification that she shall refund the amounts she had unlawfully collected while committing the acts constituting illegal recruitment to Cecilia Baas, Eliseo Principe, Ramon Villanueva and Eduardo Gutierrez. Cost against the appellant. SO ORDERED. Padilla, Bellosillo, Vitug, and Hermosisima, Jr., JJ., concur. [1] Rollo, p. 24. [2] The NBI then obtained a certification from the Philippine Overseas Employment Agency (POEA) that Vevina did not appear in the list of personnel submitted by the Continental Marine Phils. Corp., a manning agency (Records, p. 5). [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] Exhibit C. Exhibit D. Exhibit E. Exhibit B. Records, p. 1. [8] Criminal Case No. 92-0130, Records, p. 10. The other informations are found in pages 17, 21, 27, 33, 39, 45, 51, 57, 63 & 69 of the Record. 9 of 10 1/20/2016 5:32 PM