T
Tiittlle e FFaacctts s IIssssuuee//s s RRuulliinng g DDooccttrriinnee//ss People v. Valenciano People v. Valenciano GR No. 180926 GR No. 180926 10 December 2008 10 December 2008 Velasco, Jr., J. Velasco, Jr., J. Lo
Loururdedes s ValValenencicianano, o, TeTereresisitata Mar
Marquequez z aka aka TerTeresiesita ta ImpImperiaerial,l, Ro
Romemeo o MaMarqrqueuez z akaka a RoRodadantntee Imperial, and Rommel Marquez aka Imperial, and Rommel Marquez aka Ro
Rommmmel el ImImpeperirial al pupurprporortetedd the
themsemselvelves s to to be be conconnecnected ted witwithh Middle East International Manpower Middle East International Manpower Resources, Inc. and obtained money Resources, Inc. and obtained money fr
from om fofour ur pepeopople le whwhom om ththeyey pr
promiomised to sed to recrecruiruit t for work at for work at aa fa
factctorory y in in TaiTaiwawan. n. VaValelencnciaianono receiv
received ed the payments, but the payments, but turneturnedd the
them m oveover r to the to the MarqMarquezuezes es whowho issued receipts.
issued receipts.
While the Marquezes remain at large, While the Marquezes remain at large, Valenciano was caught and tried. She Valenciano was caught and tried. She was found guilty by the
was found guilty by the lower courtlower court of illegal recruitmen
of illegal recruitment t in large in large scale.scale. The CA affirmed the decision. The CA affirmed the decision. Valenc
Valenciano iano appealappealed, ed, claimclaiming ing thatthat she was an ordinary employee of the she was an ordinary employee of the Middle East International Manpower Middle East International Manpower Resources, Inc., and that her promise Resources, Inc., and that her promise th
that at ththe e fofour ur rerecrucruitits s wowoululd d bebe emplo
employed in Taiwan was yed in Taiwan was made inmade in good faith, and in the performance of good faith, and in the performance of her duties as a clerk in the company. her duties as a clerk in the company.
W/N Valenc
W/N Valencianiano o was was engengageaged d inin illegal recruitment.
illegal recruitment.
YES. Valencian
YES. Valenciano’s claim o’s claim that shethat she was a
was a mermere e empemployloyee of ee of her co-her co-accu
accused does sed does not relienot relieve ve her of her of liability. An employee of a company liability. An employee of a company or
or corcorporporatiation on engengageaged d in in illillegaegall recr
recruituitmenment t may may be be helheld d lialiable asble as principal, together with his employer, principal, together with his employer,
if
if it is it is shoshown that wn that the emplothe employeeyee actively and consciously participated actively and consciously participated in illegal recruitment.
in illegal recruitment.
1.
1.
As As teteststififieied d to to by by ththee complcomplainantainants, s, accused accused--app
appelellalant nt wawas s amamonongg t h
t hoos e s e w hw ho o mme t e t a na ndd tr
transansactacted ed wiwith th ththemem r e
r eggaarrddiinng g tthhe e jjoobb placement offers. In some placement offers. In some
insta
instances, she nces, she made themade the effort to go to their houses effort to go to their houses to recruit them. She to recruit them. She eveneven gave assurances that they gave assurances that they wo
woululd d be be abable le to to fifindnd emplo
employment abroad yment abroad andand leave for Taiwan after the leave for Taiwan after the ffiilliinng g oof f tthheeiir r app
appliclicatiationsons. . AccAccuseused- d-app
appelellalant nt wawas s clcleaearlrlyy eng
engaged aged in in recrrecruituitmenmentt activities, notwithstanding activities, notwithstanding her gratuitous protestation her gratuitous protestation th
that at heher r actactioions ns wewerere merely done in the course merely done in the course of her employment as a of her employment as a clerk. clerk. 2 . 2 . I t i s s uI t i s s uf ff fi ci ci ei en t t hn t t ha t t ha t t hee ac
accucusesed d prpromomisises es or or o
offffeerrs s ffoor r a a ffeeee emp
employloymenment t to to warwarrantrant con
convivictctioion n fofor r ilillelegagall recr
recruituitmenment. t. AccAccuseused- d-aappppeellllaannt t mmaaddee re
reprpresesenentatatitionons s ththatat com
complplaiainannants ts wowoululdd re
receceivive e ememplployoymementnt abroad, and
abroad, and this sufficesthis suffices for her conviction, even if for her conviction, even if her name does not appear her name does not appear on the receipts issued to on the receipts issued to complainants as evidence complainants as evidence
On
One e cancannonot t esescapcape e liliababililitity y byby claim
claiming that he is ing that he is not aware thatnot aware that before working for his employer in before working for his employer in
the recruitmen
the recruitment t agencyagency, , he he shoulshouldd first be
first be regisregistered with the tered with the POEA.POEA. Illeg
Illegal recruitment in al recruitment in large scale islarge scale is malum prohibitum
malum prohibitum, not, not malum in semalum in se.. Good faith is not a defense. Good faith is not a defense. M
Mo no ne y e y iis s n on ot t mma ta te re riia l a l t o t o aa prosecution for illegal recruitment, as prosecution for illegal recruitment, as
the definitio
the definition n of “recruitmeof “recruitment nt andand p
plalacemcemenent” t” in in ththe e LaLabobor r CoCodede inclu
includes the des the phrasphrase, e, “whet“whether her for for profit or not.”
profit or not.”
To prove illegal recruitment in large To prove illegal recruitment in large scale, the prosecution is burdened to scale, the prosecution is burdened to prov
prove e three essential elementsthree essential elements: : (1)(1) the
the perperson son chachargerged d undundertoertook ok aa recrui
recruitment activity tment activity under Articleunder Article 13(
13(b) b) or or any any proprohibhibiteited d prapracticticece under Article 34 of the Labor Code; under Article 34 of the Labor Code; (2) accused did not have the license (2) accused did not have the license or authority to lawfully engage in the or authority to lawfully engage in the re
recrucruititmement nt and and plplacacememenent t of of workers; and (3) accused committed workers; and (3) accused committed th
the e sasame me agagaiainsnst t ththree ree or or momorere persons individually or as a group. persons individually or as a group.
that payment was made. that payment was made. 3.
3. CeCertrtifificicatatioions mns madade by te by thehe P
POOEEA A ssttaatteed d tthhaatt accused
accused-appel-appellant lant in in her her personal capacity was not personal capacity was not licensed or authorized to licensed or authorized to re
recrcruiuit t woworkrkerers s fofor r overseas employment and overseas employment and th
that at anany y recrecruruititmementnt activi
activities ties undertundertaken aken byby her are
her are illillegalegal, , and thatand that her name does not appear her name does not appear on the list
on the list of employeeof employeess submitted by Middle East submitted by Middle East Intern
Internationational al ManpoManpower wer Resources, Inc. Resources, Inc. Accused-appellant thus could point appellant thus could point to
to no no authoauthority allowingrity allowing h
heer r tto o rreeccrruuiitt compl
complainantainants, as s, as she wasshe was n o
n ot t a n a n e me mp lp looy ey ee e o f o f Middle East, nor was she Middle East, nor was she allowed to do so in her allowed to do so in her p
perersosonanal l cacapapacicityty.. F
Fuur tr thheer mr moorree, , sshhee und
undertertook ook recrrecruituitmenmentt act
activivititieies s ououtstsidide e ththee premises of the office of a premises of the office of a
li
licencensesed d recrecruruititmementnt agency, which can only agency, which can only be done with
be done with the prior the prior approval of the POEA. approval of the POEA. People v. Hu People v. Hu GR No. 182232 GR No. 182232 6 October 2008 6 October 2008 Chico-Nazario, J. Chico-Nazario, J. N
Nenenitita a Hu Hu is is ththe e PrPresesididenent t of of Brighturn International Services, Inc. Brighturn International Services, Inc. a land-based recruitment agency duly a land-based recruitment agency duly licensed by the POEA to engage in licensed by the POEA to engage in the
the busbusininess ess of of recrrecruituitmenment t andand place
placement of ment of workerworkers s abroadabroad. . EthelEthel Genoves, on the other hand, worked Genoves, on the other hand, worked as a consultant and marketing officer as a consultant and marketing officer of Brighturn. Aside from her stint at of Brighturn. Aside from her stint at Brigh
Brighturn, she turn, she was also was also connecconnectedted with Riverland Consultancy Service, with Riverland Consultancy Service, an
anototheher r rerecrcruiuitmtmenent t agagenencycy.. Brighturn was authorized to recruit, Brighturn was authorized to recruit, pr
proceocess, ss, and and depdeploy loy lanland-bd-baseasedd wo
workrkerers s fofor r ththe e pepeririod od of of 1818 Dec
Decembember er 1991999 9 to to 17 17 DecDecembember er 2001.
2001.
W/N Hu was engaged in recruitment W/N Hu was engaged in recruitment in large scale.
in large scale.
NO
NO. . A A conconvicvictiotion n for for larlarge ge scascalele illegal recruitment must be based on illegal recruitment must be based on a
a finfindinding g in each in each cascase e of of illillegalegal recruitment of three or more persons recruitment of three or more persons whether individually or as a group. whether individually or as a group. While it is true that the law does not While it is true that the law does not requ
require ire thathat t at at lealeast st thrthree ee vicvictimtimss testify at the trial, nevertheless, it is testify at the trial, nevertheless, it is necess
necessary that ary that there is there is a a suffisufficientcient eviden
evidence ce proviproving that ng that the offensethe offense was committed against three or more was committed against three or more p
persersonons. s. In In ththe e cascase e at at babar, r, ththee p
prorosesecucutition on faifaileled d to to adadduducece suf
sufficificient ent evievidendence ce to to proprove ve thathatt illeg
illegal al recruitrecruitment ment was was commcommitteditted against three or more persons. The against three or more persons. The illeg
illegal al recruitrecruitment ment was was commcommitteditted agai
against nst onlonly y one one perpersonson: : GarcGarcia,ia, Ill
Illegal egal recrrecruituitmenment t is is comcommitmittedted when two elements concur: (1) the when two elements concur: (1) the off
offendender er has no has no valvalid id liclicensense e or or authority required by law to enable authority required by law to enable hi
him m to to lalawfuwfulllly y enengagage ge in in ththee re
recrucruititmement nt and and plplacacememenent t of of workers; and (2) he undertakes any workers; and (2) he undertakes any ac
actitivivity ty wiwiththin in ththe e memeananining g of of “recruitment and placement” defined “recruitment and placement” defined und
under er ArtArticlicle e 13(13(b) b) of of the Labor the Labor Code.
Code. The criThe crime becomme becomes Illeges Illegalal Recruitment in Large Scale when the Recruitment in Large Scale when the foregoing two elements concur, with foregoing two elements concur, with the addition of a third element—the the addition of a third element—the recruiter committed the same against recruiter committed the same against three or more persons, individually or three or more persons, individually or as a group.
Genoves and Hu were charged with Genoves and Hu were charged with Illeg
Illegal al RecruiRecruitment in tment in Large ScaleLarge Scale fol
followlowing ing the the comcomplaplaint int from from 66 people that they promised the latter people that they promised the latter
emplo
employmentyment/job /job placemplacement ent abroadabroad an
and d cocollllectected ed feefees s frfrom om ththemem.. However, when the job placements However, when the job placements never materialized, the complainants never materialized, the complainants demanded that the money they gave demanded that the money they gave as
as plaplacemcement fees ent fees be be retreturnurned ed toto them. Hu was not able to refund the them. Hu was not able to refund the same.
same. Fou
Four r of of thethese se comcomplaplainainants nts werweree prom
promised ised emploemployment during yment during thethe val
validiidity ty of of BriBrightghturnurn’s ’s liclicensense.e. Garcia applied on April
Garcia applied on April 2002, when2002, when Bri
Brightghturnurn’s ’s liclicensense e had had alralreadeadyy expir
expired. She ed. She was referred to was referred to BestBest One, another recruitment agency, but One, another recruitment agency, but her placem
her placement fee ent fee was paid was paid witwithh Brighturn.
Brighturn.
For her defense, Hu
For her defense, Hu cited that thecited that the re
receiceiptpts s ththat at ththe e cocompmplalaininanantsts s h
s ho wo we d e d h eh er r w ew er e r e iis ss suue d e d bbyy Riv
Riverlaerland. nd. She She dendenied ied knoknowinwingg Genoves.
Genoves.
b
becaecaususe e Hu Hu refrefererred red GaGarcrcia ia toto another agency without the license or another agency without the license or authority to do so. Illegal recruitment authority to do so. Illegal recruitment cann
cannot ot sucsuccescessfusfully lly attattach ach to to thethe allega
allegations of tions of the others since theythe others since they testified that they accomplished their testified that they accomplished their p
prere-em-emplployoymement nt rereququirirememenentsts through Brighturn from June 2001 up through Brighturn from June 2001 up to October of the same year, a period to October of the same year, a period wh
whereerein in BrBrigighthtururn’n’s s lilicecensnse e toto engage in recruitment and placement engage in recruitment and placement was still in full force and effect. was still in full force and effect. Howeve
However, r, failurfailure e of of the prosecutiothe prosecutionn to prove the guilt of
to prove the guilt of Hu beyonHu beyondd reason
reasonable doubt able doubt does not does not absolabsolveve her of her civil obligation to return her of her civil obligation to return the money she
the money she colcolleclected from ted from thethe com
complaplainainantsnts. . NeiNeithether r doedoes s her her acqu
acquittittal al herherein ein exeexempt mpt her her fromfrom subsequent criminal prosecution for subsequent criminal prosecution for estafa provided that deceit, which is estafa provided that deceit, which is an essential elemen
an essential element of t of estafaestafa, be, be proven by the prosecution.
proven by the prosecution.
The act of referral, which means the The act of referral, which means the act of passing along or forwarding an act of passing along or forwarding an applicant after an initial interview to applicant after an initial interview to a
a selectselected ed emploemployer, placement or yer, placement or bureau, is included in recruitment. bureau, is included in recruitment.
The absence of receipts in the case of The absence of receipts in the case of illegal recruitment does not warrant illegal recruitment does not warrant the acquittal of the appellant and is the acquittal of the appellant and is not fatal to the prosecution’s case. As not fatal to the prosecution’s case. As lon
long g as as the prosethe prosecutcution is ion is ablable e toto es
estatablblisish h ththrorougugh h crecredidiblble e anandd te
teststimimononiaial l evevididenence ce ththat at ththee app
appellellant ant had had engengageaged d in in illillegalegal rec
recruiruitmetment, nt, a a conconvicvictiotion n for for thethe offense can be very well justified. offense can be very well justified. Obiter:
Obiter:
Ei incumbit probation qui dicit non Ei incumbit probation qui dicit non qui negat – he who asserts, not he qui negat – he who asserts, not he who denies, must prove.
who denies, must prove.
Villar v. People Villar v. People GR No. 176169 GR No. 176169 14 November 2008 14 November 2008 Tinga, J. Tinga, J.
In January 1993, Rosario Villar and In January 1993, Rosario Villar and Dolor
Dolores es Placa represenPlaca represented to ted to NilaNila Panilag that they would be able to Panilag that they would be able to find her a job abroad and obtained find her a job abroad and obtained from the latter P6,500 as placement from the latter P6,500 as placement fee, but they did not have any license fee, but they did not have any license or authority to do so. An Information or authority to do so. An Information was filed against Villar and was filed against Villar and PlacaPlaca wit
with h the the tittitle le desdesignignatiating ng thetheir ir off
offensense e undunder er RA RA 8048042. 2. In In 2002002,2, after the trial, the RTC held Villar after the trial, the RTC held Villar lia
liable ble for the for the offoffensense e of of illillegalegal recruitment under the Labor Code. recruitment under the Labor Code. Vil
Villar lar appappealeealed d to to the CA, the CA, whiwhichch found that Villar should have found that Villar should have onlyonly been
been charged charged under Article 13(b) of under Article 13(b) of the Labor Code and not under RA the Labor Code and not under RA 8042. It then held
8042. It then held that Villar wasthat Villar was liable under Article 38 of the Labor liable under Article 38 of the Labor Code, in relation to Article 13(b) and Code, in relation to Article 13(b) and Articl
Article 39 e 39 of the same Code. It thenof the same Code. It then
W/N RA 8042 was retroactively used W/N RA 8042 was retroactively used as basis for filing a criminal action as basis for filing a criminal action against Villar for illegal recruitment. against Villar for illegal recruitment.
W/
W/N N ViVillllar ar is is guguililty ty of of ilillelegagall recruitment.
recruitment.
Under which law should Villar be Under which law should Villar be held accountable?
held accountable?
NO. Petitioner was charged in 1998 NO. Petitioner was charged in 1998
u n
u nd ed er r a n a n I nI nf of or mr ma ta tiio n o n t ht ha ta t erroneously designated the offense as erroneously designated the offense as covered by RA
covered by RA 8042, but alleged in8042, but alleged in its body
its body acts which are acts which are punispunishablehable und
under the er the LabLabor Code. As or Code. As it wasit was prove
proven that n that she had she had commcommitted theitted the acts she was charged with, she was acts she was charged with, she was properly convicted under the Labor properly convicted under the Labor
Code, and not under RA 8042. Code, and not under RA 8042. YES.
YES. The The prosecprosecution establishution establisheded b
beyeyonond d reareasosonanablble e dodoububt t ththatat petit
petitioner had ioner had perforperformed the med the actsacts consti
constitutintuting g the offense the offense defindefined ed inin Art. 38, in relation to Art. 13(b) and Art. 38, in relation to Art. 13(b) and pu
punisnished by hed by ArtArt. . 39 of 39 of the Labothe Labor r Code, as alleged in the body of the Code, as alleged in the body of the Information.
Information.
THE LABOR CODE. A criminal act THE LABOR CODE. A criminal act is punishable under the laws in force is punishable under the laws in force
The real nature of
The real nature of the crime chargedthe crime charged is determined, not from the caption or is determined, not from the caption or preamble of the information nor from preamble of the information nor from the specification of the law alleged to the specification of the law alleged to have been violated, but by the actual have been violated, but by the actual recit
recital of al of facts in the facts in the complcomplaint or aint or information. What controls is not the information. What controls is not the designation but the description of the designation but the description of the off
offensense e chachargerged. d. If If the the accaccuseusedd pe
perforformermed d the the actacts s allalleged in eged in thethe bo
body dy of of the the infinformormatiation, in on, in thethe manner stated, the then he ought to manner stated, the then he ought to b
be e ppu nu niis hs he d e d a na nd d ppu nu ni si sh eh edd ade
adequaquateltely, y, whawhatevtever er may may be be thethe name of the crime which those acts name of the crime which those acts constitute.
affirmed the trial court’s decision. affirmed the trial court’s decision. Villar appealed, claiming that the CA Villar appealed, claiming that the CA fai
failed to led to conconsidsider er thathat t RA RA 80480422 cannot be given retroactive effect and cannot be given retroactive effect and the decision of the RTC constitutes a the decision of the RTC constitutes a vi
viololatatioion n of of ththe e coconsnstititututitiononalal prohibition against
prohibition against ex post factoex post facto law.law. W /
W /N N RRA A 8 08 0442 2 wwa s a s a pa pp lp liie de d retroactively in Villar’s case. retroactively in Villar’s case.
at the time of its commission. Thus, at the time of its commission. Thus, Villar can only be charged and found Villar can only be charged and found guilty under the Labor Code which guilty under the Labor Code which was in force in 1993 when the acts was in force in 1993 when the acts attributed to her were committed. attributed to her were committed. NO. Neither the trial court nor the NO. Neither the trial court nor the
app
appellellate ate coucourt rt givgive e RA RA 8048042 2 aa retroactive application because both retroactive application because both courts passed upon Villar’s case only courts passed upon Villar’s case only under the aegis of the Labor Code. under the aegis of the Labor Code. The proceedings before the trial court The proceedings before the trial court and the appellate court did not and the appellate court did not violateviolate the prohibition against
the prohibition against ex post factoex post facto la
law w nonor r ininvovolvlved ed a a reretrtroaoactctivivee application of RA 8042 in any way. application of RA 8042 in any way. People v. Diaz People v. Diaz GR No. 112175 GR No. 112175 26 July 1996 26 July 1996 Torres, Jr., J. Torres, Jr., J. Three women
Three women (Navarr(Navarro, o, FabriFabricante,cante, and Ramirez) were enrolled at and Ramirez) were enrolled at thethe Henich
Henichi i Techno Exchange Techno Exchange CultCulturalural Foundation in Davao City, studying Foundation in Davao City, studying Niponggo, when they were informed Niponggo, when they were informed by their teacher, Mrs. Aplicador, that by their teacher, Mrs. Aplicador, that she knew of a Mr. Paulo Lim who she knew of a Mr. Paulo Lim who also knew of one
also knew of one EnginEngineer Erwineer Erwin Diaz who
Diaz who was recruiting applicanwas recruiting applicantsts for Brunei.
for Brunei.
Accompanied by Mrs. Aplicador, the Accompanied by Mrs. Aplicador, the three women went to Mr. Lim who three women went to Mr. Lim who tol
told d thethem m thathat t his childhis children hadren had already applied with Engr. Diaz. The already applied with Engr. Diaz. The four women were then accompanied four women were then accompanied by Mr.
by Mr. Lim to Lim to the CIS the CIS DetDetententionion Center where Engr. Diaz was already Center where Engr. Diaz was already bein
being g detaidetained. After ned. After NavarrNavarro o andand Rami
Ramirez had rez had alreadalready y given 20k asgiven 20k as placement fee, Fabricante went to the placement fee, Fabricante went to the office of the POEA and found out the office of the POEA and found out the En
Engrgr. . DiDiaz az wawas s nonot t lilicencensesed.d. Fabricante informed the two women Fabricante informed the two women abo
about ut her discovher discovery ery and they and they allall withd
withdrew rew their their appliapplicationcations. s. Engr.Engr. Diaz refunded their payments. Diaz refunded their payments. The trial court held Engr. Diaz guilty The trial court held Engr. Diaz guilty of illegal recruitment in large scale. of illegal recruitment in large scale.
W/N Diaz
W/N Diaz was engagwas engaged ed in in illillegalegal recruitment.
recruitment.
YES. Diaz was neither a licensee nor YES. Diaz was neither a licensee nor a holder of authority to qualify him a holder of authority to qualify him to lawfully engage in recruitment and to lawfully engage in recruitment and placement activity. Appellant told the placement activity. Appellant told the three women that he was recruiting three women that he was recruiting co
contntraract ct woworkrkerers s fofor r ababroroadad,, parti
particularlcularly y BruneiBrunei, , and and promipromisedsed them job
them job opporopportunittunities if ies if they canthey can produ
produce ce variouvarious s amounamounts of ts of moneymoney for
for expexpensenses es and and proprocescessinsing g of of documents. He manifestly gave the documents. He manifestly gave the impression to the three women that impression to the three women that he had
he had the ability to send workersthe ability to send workers abroad. Misrepresenting himself as a abroad. Misrepresenting himself as a recruit
recruiter er of workers for of workers for BruneBrunei, hei, he promised them work for a fee and promised them work for a fee and
convin
convinced them to ced them to give their moneygive their money fo
for r ththe e pupurprposose e of of gegettttining g anan employment overseas.
employment overseas.
The crime of illegal recruitment, as The crime of illegal recruitment, as de
defifinened d unundeder r ArArtiticlcle e 3838(a(a) ) inin relation to Articles 13(b) and 34 and relation to Articles 13(b) and 34 and pe
penalnalizeized d undunder er ArtArticlicle e 39 39 of of thethe Labor Code, as amended by PD 1920 Labor Code, as amended by PD 1920 and PD
and PD 2012018, 8, is is any recruiany recruitmetmentnt activ
activity, ity, incluincluding ding the the prohibprohibitedited pract
practices ices enumeenumerated rated under under ArticlArticlee 34, undertaken by a non-licensee or 34, undertaken by a non-licensee or non-holder of authority.
non-holder of authority. A
A pepersrson on is is guguililty ty of of ilillelegagall re
recrucruititmement nt whwhen en he he gigiveves s ththee impression that he has the power to impression that he has the power to send workers abroad.
send workers abroad.
People v. Chowdury People v. Chowdury GR No. 129577-80 GR No. 129577-80 15 February 2000 15 February 2000 Puno, J. Puno, J. Bul
Bulu u ChoChowduwdury, ry, a a conconsulsultantant t of of Cra
Craftraftrade de OveOverserseas as DevDeveloeloperpers,s, interv
interviewed iewed potentpotential ial appliapplicants cants for for work at a
work at a factorfactory in y in South KoreSouth Korea,a,
W/N Chowdury should be held liable W/N Chowdury should be held liable for illegal recruitment in large scale. for illegal recruitment in large scale.
NO. The persons criminally liable for NO. The persons criminally liable for illegal recruitment are the principals, illegal recruitment are the principals, accomplices, and accessories. In case accomplices, and accessories. In case of
of jurjuridiidical cal perspersonsons, , ththe e offofficeicersrs
The existence of the corporate entity The existence of the corporate entity does not shield from prosecution the does not shield from prosecution the corpor
corporate ate agent who agent who knowiknowingly andngly and inten
namely Aser
namely Aser SasisSasis, , EstrelEstrella la CalleCalleja,ja, and Melvin Miranda. The three were and Melvin Miranda. The three were charge
charged d processprocessing fees ing fees which werewhich were received by one Josephine Ong. They received by one Josephine Ong. They were promised that they would be were promised that they would be able to work abroad, but they were able to work abroad, but they were never deployed. They tried to refund never deployed. They tried to refund their money from Craftrad their money from Craftrade e to noto no av
avaiail, l, and and fifileled d a a cascase e agagaiainsnstt Chowdury for illegal recruitment. Chowdury for illegal recruitment. It
It apappepears ars ththat at CrCraftaftradrade e wawass previously licensed to recruit workers previously licensed to recruit workers for abroad, and the license expired on for abroad, and the license expired on 15 December 1993. It was granted a 15 December 1993. It was granted a te
tempmpororarary y lilicencense se efeffecfectitive ve 1616 Decemb
December er 1993 until 11 1993 until 11 SepteSeptember mber 1994. From 11 September, the POEA 1994. From 11 September, the POEA granted Craftrade another temporary granted Craftrade another temporary aut
authorhority ity to to proprocescess s the the expexpiriiringng visas of overseas workers who have visas of overseas workers who have al
alreready ady bebeen en dedeplployoyed. ed. On On 1414 Decemb
December er 1994, POEA 1994, POEA suspensuspendedded Cra
Craftraftrade’de’s s temtemporporary ary liclicensense.e. Cho
Chowduwdury, for ry, for his part, was his part, was anan interv
interviewer for iewer for CraftCraftrade until rade until hishis resignation on 12 November 1994. resignation on 12 November 1994. The
The tritrial al coucourt rt foufound nd ChoChowduwduryry guilty of illegal recruitment in large guilty of illegal recruitment in large scale.
scale.
hav
having ing concontrotrol, l, manmanageagemenment t or or direct
direction of ion of their businetheir business shall ss shall bebe liable. An employee of a company or liable. An employee of a company or co
corprpororatatioion n enengagageged d in in ilillelegagall recr
recruituitmenment t may may be be helheld d lialiable asble as principal, together with his employer, principal, together with his employer, if it is shown that he actively and if it is shown that he actively and consci
consciouslously y partiparticipated in cipated in illegillegalal recruit
recruitment. However, at ment. However, at the timethe time Ch
Chowowdudury ry wawas s ememplployoyed ed byby Cr
Crafaftrtradade, e, ththe e cocompmpanany y wawass op
opereratatining g unundeder r a a tetempmpororararyy aut
authohoririty ty gigiveven n by by ththe e POPOEAEA pending renewal of its license. The pending renewal of its license. The
tem
temporporary ary liclicensense e incincludluded ed thethe aut
authohoririty ty to to recrecruiruit t woworkrkersers.. Although Craftrade failed to register Although Craftrade failed to register Chowdury’s name in the POEA as an Chowdury’s name in the POEA as an emplo
employee, yee, ChowdChowdury ury was was unawarunawaree of that fact. of that fact. to commit a crime. to commit a crime. T h T he e e me mp lp lo yo ye e e e o r o r a ga ge ne nt t oof f aa cor
corporporatiation on engengaged aged in in unlunlawfawfulul business naturally aids and abets in business naturally aids and abets in the carrying on of such business and the carrying on of such business and will be prosecuted as principal if with will be prosecuted as principal if with kn
knowowleledgdge e of of ththe e bubusisinenessss, , ititss purp
purpose ose and and effect, he effect, he consciconsciouslyously contributes his efforts to its conduct contributes his efforts to its conduct and promotion
and promotion, , howevhowever er slighslight t hishis contribution may be.