G.R. No. 238754, June 16, 2021
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Celia Dela Cruz y Bucaling, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Celia Dela Cruz y Bucaling was charged with two counts of Qualified Trafficking in Persons under Republic Act No. 9208. The Informations alleged that on April 14, 2014, in the City of █████, she recruited, harbored, and provided two minors, AAA (17 years old) and BBB (15 years old), to customers for prostitution and sexual exploitation at her restaurant/bar. She employed them as waitresses with the additional duty of entertaining customers and having sex with them for a fee. On said date, she provided them to police officers posing as customers for sexual intercourse after receiving payment of P1,000.00 each.
The prosecution presented the minor victims, AAA and BBB, and several police officers involved in the entrapment operation. AAA testified she was recruited to work as a waitress and Guest Relations Officer (GRO) at accused-appellant’s bar, where “VIP service” meant having sex with customers for a fee split with accused-appellant. On April 14, 2014, accused-appellant instructed AAA and BBB to entertain two male customers (the police officers), confirmed the VIP service included sexual intercourse for P1,000.00 each, collected the payment, and directed them to rooms upstairs. BBB corroborated this account, stating accused-appellant arranged for them to provide VIP service after the customers paid. The police officers testified they conducted an entrapment after verifying reports of illegal sex trade of minors at the bar. PO3 Abonita and PO2 Villanueva posed as customers, and accused-appellant explicitly offered them girls for “panandaliang aliw” or sexual intercourse for a fee, collected the money, and directed the minors to rooms with the officers.
The defense presented accused-appellant as its sole witness. She claimed she owned a sing-along videoke bar offering VIP rooms for privacy, charging P800.00 to P1,000.00 for drinks and lady companionship, with a percentage going to the waitresses. She insisted she strictly prohibited the waitresses from having sex with customers and required them to be “palaban.” She asserted AAA and BBB submitted biodatas stating they were 18 years old, and she was unaware they were minors.
The Regional Trial Court convicted accused-appellant of two counts of Qualified Trafficking in Persons. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified the award of moral damages to P500,000.00 for each victim.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming accused-appellant’s conviction for two counts of Qualified Trafficking in Persons.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the appeal and AFFIRMED the Decision of the Court of Appeals with MODIFICATION, increasing the award of moral damages to P1,000,000.00 for each count of Qualified Trafficking in Persons.
The Court held that all elements of Qualified Trafficking in Persons under Section 6 of R.A. No. 9208 were proven beyond reasonable doubt: (1) the acts of recruiting, harboring, and providing the minors; (2) for the purpose of prostitution and sexual exploitation; and (3) the commission of the acts through the use of fraudulent means and taking advantage of the victims’ vulnerability as minors. The testimonies of the minor victims and the police officers were credible, consistent, and corroborative. They established that accused-appellant managed the bar, offered the minors for sexual services, negotiated the price, collected the fee, and directed them to rooms for the purpose. The defense of denial and claim of ignorance of the minors’ ages were unavailing. The law presumes the offender knows or is in a position to know the age of the victim. The presentation of falsified documents indicating majority age does not negate this presumption. The qualifying circumstances of the victims being minors and the use of fraudulent means were duly alleged in the Informations and proven during trial. The award of moral damages was increased to P1,000,000.00 for each victim in line with prevailing jurisprudence.