GR 128112; (May, 2000) (Digest)
G.R. No. 128112 , May 12, 2000
People of the Philippines vs. Dioscora Mercado de Arabia and Francisca Littaua Tomas
FACTS
Accused-appellants Dioscora Mercado de Arabia and Francisca Littaua Tomas were charged with Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale. The prosecution presented complainants Lourdes Pastor, Romeo Pastor, Imelda Corre, and Lilibeth Mabalot, who testified that Mercado, representing herself as a fortune teller, promised them factory jobs in Taiwan for a fee ranging from P7,000 to P17,500 each, collected between November and December 1992. Mercado assured them of departure by January 1993 and failed to issue receipts, claiming direct hiring. When the promised departure did not materialize, Mercado orchestrated a scheme where she brought the complainants to the NBI and had them execute affidavits falsely accusing another individual, Rebecca Sipagan, to deflect blame. Tomas was implicated as Mercado’s companion who was present during some transactions and who assisted in collecting fees from one complainant.
ISSUE
The core issue is whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that both accused-appellants are guilty of Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of Dioscora Mercado de Arabia but acquitted Francisca Littaua Tomas. For Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale, the prosecution must prove (1) the accused undertook recruitment activities, and (2) did so without the required license or authority from the DOLE, and (3) that the offense was committed against three or more persons. The Court found the testimonies of the four complainants consistent and credible in establishing that Mercado personally promised them overseas employment for a fee. Her actions, including collecting fees and making specific job promises, constitute recruitment and placement under the Labor Code. Her lack of license was also established.
However, the evidence against Tomas was insufficient to prove conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt. While she was present during some transactions and received money from one complainant, her mere presence and association with Mercado, without clear evidence of a prior agreement to jointly pursue the criminal purpose, do not constitute conspiracy. Her act of collecting money could be interpreted as merely following Mercado’s instructions without shared criminal intent. Thus, she was acquitted on reasonable doubt but ordered to reimburse one complainant based on the civil aspect of the case. The penalty of life imprisonment and indemnification imposed on Mercado were affirmed.