GR 127159; (May, 1999) (Digest)
G.R. No. 127159 . May 5, 1999.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. REMEDIOS ENRIQUEZ y AGUILAR, accused-appellant.
FACTS
Accused-appellant Remedios Enriquez was charged with Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale. The Information alleged that from December 1993 to May 1994, in Pasay City, she, conspiring with others, recruited at least forty-two individuals for employment in Taiwan without the required license from the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA). Six complainants—Alfredo Evangelista, Regina Evangelista, Josefino Mendoza, Sheila Lahay Lahay, Felix Azul, and Lorna Pasagui—testified in court. They uniformly stated that they went to Enriquez’s residence after learning she was recruiting for Taiwan. She personally interviewed them, promised employment, specified documentary requirements, and collected processing fees ranging from P3,370 to P5,000. Despite compliance and follow-ups, none were deployed. They later discovered Enriquez was detained for her recruitment activities.
ISSUE
Whether the accused-appellant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale.
RULING
Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The legal logic rests on two key principles. First, the testimonies of the six complainants were consistent, credible, and positively identified Enriquez as the person who undertook recruitment activities by promising overseas jobs and collecting fees. Their collective testimony established the element of recruitment of three or more persons, constituting large scale illegal recruitment. The defense of denial and the claim that she was merely assisting her common-law husband were rejected. The Court emphasized that the failure to present the alleged principal recruiter (the husband) risked the adverse presumption that such evidence would be unfavorable if produced.
Second, the Court ruled that illegal recruitment is a malum prohibitum offense. The law penalizes the very act of recruitment without a license, regardless of intent to defraud. Thus, the prosecution only needed to prove that the accused engaged in recruitment and that she had no POEA license or authority. The presentation of a POEA certification confirming her lack of license was conclusive. Her lack of criminal intent was therefore immaterial. The penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of P100,000.00 was upheld, with modifications to the amounts of indemnity awarded to some complainants.