modus operandi and other concerns pertaining to illegal recruitment and human trafficking. Regular announcements and information should be published online in order to encourage applicant OFWs to verify online with the POEA the license status of recruitment agencies. 4. The progress of cases involving Illegal recruitment and human trafficking should be monitored at all levels from filing, prosecution up to conviction and execution of judgment. The execution of affidavits of desistance by the complaining OFW victims, should there be other evidence available, should not deter the prosecution from proceeding with the prosecution of illegal recruitment cases. 5. The number of judges, public prosecutors and public attorneys should be increased in order to achieve effective management of their case loads, including illegal recruitment and human trafficking cases. 6. Close coordination with the Anti Money Laundering Council should be established by the prosecution in order to seize assets of illegal recruiters and human traffickers that may be used to compensate the victims. 7. The rights-based and gender-sensitivity approach should be included in the training manual of the DOJ and the Supreme Court, in order to train all personnel, including judges and state prosecutors especially in illegal recruitment and human trafficking cases. 8. The failure to serve more than 20,000 warrants of arrest for large scale or syndicated illegal recruitment should be given special attention. Strict penalties for sheriff or arresting officer who will fail to serve warrant of arrest without justifiable reason should be imposed. 4.4 Disability and Death Benefits Two (2) observations that stand out in the OFW cases decided by the Supreme Court in the period 2015-2019 are the following: (a) First, OFW cases decided by the Supreme Court were predominantly cases involving sea-based workers. For the five-year period 2015-2019, on the average, cases involving sea-based workers accounted for 85.39% of the total number of OFW cases resolved by the Supreme Court per year, whereas sea-based OFWs account for only 20% of annual OFW deployment. (b) Second, the combined claims for total or partial disability benefits and claims for death benefits filed exclusively by sea-based OFWs accounted for 80.72% of the total number of OFW cases decided by the Supreme Court from 2015-2019. This trend is not limited to the period 2015-2019 only. An examination of OFW cases decided by the Supreme Court in previous years shows that cases involving disability and death benefit claims of seabased workers constitute the majority of OFW cases decided by the Supreme Court annually. 46