GR 123146; (June, 2003) (Digest)
G.R. No. 123146; June 17, 2003
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs. ALONA BULI-E and JOSEFINA (JOSIE) ALOLINO, Appellants.
FACTS
Appellants Alona Buli-e and Josefina Alolino were charged with Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale and eight counts of Estafa. The prosecution established that from 1991 to 1992, Buli-e, operating from her Baguio City residence, recruited eight complainants for jobs in Taiwan. She represented that she could secure overseas employment for a fee, collecting advance payments and requiring submission of application documents. Buli-e identified her superiors as spouses Jose and Josefina Alolino, claiming they were licensed recruiters. She accompanied complainants to Manila for medical exams and introduced some to Jose Alolino, who assured them of deployment. Josefina Alolino was presented as being connected to a licensed agency but was actively involved, meeting with complainants, assuring them of jobs, and directly receiving payments.
The complainants, after paying substantial sums and completing requirements, were never deployed abroad. Jose Alolino remained at large. Appellants denied the charges, claiming Buli-e was merely a cashier for a licensed agency and Josefina was a mere employee. They asserted the money collected was for processing fees with a legitimate agency.
ISSUE
Whether appellants are guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale and multiple counts of Estafa.
RULING
Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the convictions. For illegal recruitment, the elements are: (1) the accused undertook recruitment activities; and (2) they did not have the required license or authority from the POEA. The evidence conclusively showed both appellants engaged in acts of recruitment—canvassing, soliciting, and promising overseas jobs to multiple individuals. The POEA certification confirmed neither appellant possessed the necessary license. The number of victims (three or more) qualified the crime as large scale, which is economic sabotage. Their defense of working for a licensed agency was unavailing; personal lack of authority is the determining factor.
For Estafa under Article 315(2)(a) of the Revised Penal Code, the elements of deceit and damage were proven. Appellants employed false pretenses by misrepresenting their capacity to secure overseas employment, inducing complainants to part with their money as placement fees. The failure to deploy the workers and refund the payments constituted clear damage. Each transaction with a distinct complainant constituted a separate felony, justifying the eight convictions. The defense of good faith was rejected, as their continued collection of fees without fulfilling their promises evidenced fraudulent intent. Conspiracy was evident from their coordinated actions in perpetuating the scheme.