G.R. No. 131777 November 16, 1999
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ROSALINDA ARIOLA, ELVIRA OBANA, BABY CASTILLO, LEODEGARIO LAGARAS, MILOGENE HALINA and JOVITO BERMUDES, accused, ELVIRA OBANA, accused-appellant.

FACTS

The evidence established that Rosalinda Ariola, Elvira Obana, and their co-accused represented themselves as connected with the Manila Booking Agency, offering overseas jobs in Papua New Guinea to complainants Conrado Punsalang, Adriano Nagrama, Merly Cascayan, and Donato Busmente. The complainants were enticed to apply and paid substantial recruitment fees, with Punsalang, Nagrama, and Cascayan paying P5,000.00 each, and Busmente making a downpayment of P3,500.00 towards a total of P13,500.00. The accused failed to deploy the complainants. Upon verification, the complainants discovered the office was actually the Afro-Asian Development and Services Corporation, Ariola was not a licensed recruiter, and the Manila Booking Agency had not authorized her. Separate complaints for illegal recruitment were filed. Only Ariola and Obana were arrested and tried, with Ariola not appealing her conviction.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that accused-appellant Elvira Obana conspired with Rosalinda Ariola in committing illegal recruitment in large scale.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed Obana’s conviction. The crime of illegal recruitment in large scale under Articles 38 and 39 of the Labor Code requires: (1) the offender lacks a valid license or authority to recruit; (2) the offender undertakes recruitment activities or any prohibited act; and (3) the act is committed against three or more persons. All elements were proven. A POEA certification confirmed Ariola and her group had no license, and the crime victimized four individuals. The Court upheld the trial court’s finding of conspiracy, rejecting Obana’s defense of mere denial. The complainants’ consistent testimonies revealed a delineation of roles: Ariola as coordinator, Lagaras and Bermudes as field recruiters, and Obana, Castillo, and Halina as assistants during applicant orientations. These cooperative acts towards the common criminal objective of defrauding applicants demonstrated unity of purpose and concerted action. Direct proof of prior agreement is unnecessary; conspiracy can be inferred from the accused’s conduct before, during, and after the crime. Thus, Obana, as a co-conspirator, is equally liable for the acts of her co-accused. The penalty of life imprisonment and fine was affirmed.