G.R. No. 140895 ; July 17, 2003
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. ALMA BISDA y GAUPO and GENEROSA “JENNY ROSE” BASILAN y PAYAN, appellants.

FACTS

Appellants Alma Bisda and Generosa “Jenny Rose” Basilan were charged with kidnapping for ransom. On September 3, 1998, they abducted five-year-old Angela Michelle Soriano outside her school in Marikina City. Posing as persons authorized to fetch her, they lured Angela by claiming her parents were waiting at a restaurant. Upon her refusal, they used force by holding her hand tightly and poking a knife at her. They then brought her to a house where she was detained, her clothes were changed, and her earrings were taken.
During Angela’s six-day captivity, the appellants made ransom demands to her father, William Soriano, initially for five million pesos. The Presidential Anti-Organized Crime Task Force (PAOCTF) conducted surveillance. On September 8, 1998, a successful entrapment operation led to Basilan’s arrest after she collected marked money from William at a designated fast-food restaurant. Her confession led the operatives to the house where Angela was detained, resulting in Bisda’s arrest and the victim’s safe recovery.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the appellants’ guilt for the crime of kidnapping for ransom under Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 7659 .

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The prosecution successfully established all elements of kidnapping for ransom: (1) the victim was a minor; (2) she was deprived of her liberty; (3) the abduction was carried out by means of deceit and intimidation; and (4) the act was committed for the purpose of extorting ransom. Angela’s credible and consistent testimony, given with the clarity expected of a child witness, detailed the abduction and detention. Her familiarity with appellant Basilan, who was a visitor to her home, made the initial deceit effective.
The appellants’ actions constituted kidnapping, not mere illegal detention, as the deprivation of liberty began at the moment of abduction from the school. The subsequent ransom demands, coupled with the appellants’ direct participation in collecting the money and holding the victim, confirmed the purpose of the crime. The defense of denial and frame-up was rejected for being inherently weak and unsupported by evidence. The arrest of Basilan in a valid entrapment and the subsequent rescue operation based on her voluntary statements were lawful. However, the penalty was modified. While the crime was punishable by death, the enactment of R.A. No. 9346 prohibited its imposition. Consequently, the Court imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole, in accordance with prevailing law.