GR No. 195419 Oct 12, 2011 People of the Philippines vs Hadja Lalli

GR No. 195419 Oct 12, 2011

People of the Philippines vs Hadja Lalli

Facts:

On June 3, 2005 in the City of Zamboanga, Lolita Plando who was on her to the house of her grandfather, met Ronnie Aringoy and Rachel Canete. On the day they met, Ronnie proposed to Lolita a work in Malaysia. She was interested and so she gave her mobile number. On the next day, Lolita and Ronnie met again to discuss further the job he was offering in Malaysia. She was told that she will work as a restaurant entertainer and will be paid 500 Malaysian ringgits. She only need to have a passport and she’s good to go on June 6, 2005. On the following day, Ronnie introduced Lolita to Hadja Lalli, the person who will be helping her and three other girls to go to Malaysia to work. On June 6, 2005, Lolita together with Hadja Lalli, Nestor who the financier, and the 3 other girls went on board and travelled to Malaysia. Upon arriving the girls were introduced to a Chinese Malay who will be their Boss. When they arrived at the Pipen club, they were informed that they will be work as entertainers. Lolita was forced. She had customers night after night who used her and forced her to have sexual intercourse. Some even physically abused her. One night, Lolita was able to contact her sister who is in Malaysia and asked for help. Lolita was able to escape – she was rescued and was able to go back to Zamboanga City. Lolita was advised to file a complaint against Hadja Lalli and Ronnie Arngoy with the police regarding her ordeal in Malaysia.

Issue/s:

Whether or not the accused are guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crimes of illegal recruitment and trafficking in persons for their acts

Ruling:

The Court of Appeals and RTC found accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crimes of Illegal recruitment and Trafficking in Persons.

Section 6 of RA 8042 defines illegal recruitment, as follows:

[I]llegal recruitment shall mean any act of canvassing, enlisting, contracting, transporting, utilizing, hiring, or procuring workers and includes referring, contact services, promising or advertising for employment abroad, whether for profit or not, when undertaken by a non-licensee or non-holder of authority contemplated under Article 13(f) of Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended, otherwise known as the Labor Code of the Philippines.

In this case, the trial court, as affirmed by the appellate court, found Lalli, Aringoy and Relampagos to have conspired and confederated with one another to recruit and place Lolita for work in Malaysia, without a POEA license. The three elements of syndicated illegal recruitment are present in this case, in particular: (1) the accused have no valid license or authority required by law to enable them to lawfully engage in the recruitment and placement of workers; (2) the accused engaged in this activity of recruitment and placement by actually recruiting, deploying and transporting Lolita to Malaysia; and (3) illegal recruitment was committed by three persons (Aringoy, Lalli and Relampagos), conspiring and confederating with one another.

Section 3(a) of Republic Act No. 9208 (RA 9208), otherwise known as the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003, defines Trafficking in Persons, as follows: Trafficking in Persons refers to the recruitment, transportation, transfer or harboring, or receipt of persons with or without the victims consent or knowledge, within or across national borders by means of threat or use of force, or other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or of position, taking advantage of the vulnerability of the person, or, the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person for the purpose of exploitation which includes at a minimum, the exploitation or the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of organs.