Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT
Manila
SECOND DIVISION
G.R. No. 143726 February 23, 2004
PEOPLE OF THE PHLPPNES, appellee,
vs.
LETC! S!G!"!G!, !LM! SO, #CENTE SO "!N H!N a$% ORL!N&O 'URGOS, accused.
LETC! S!G!"!G!, appellant.
D E C I S I O N
C!LLE(O, SR., J.)
This is an appeal fo! the Decision
"
of the Re#ional Tial Cout of Manila, $anch %&, convictin#
the appellant 'eticia Sa#a(a#a of la#e scale ille#al ecuit!ent as defined in Section ), Republic
*ct No. +,-. and sentencin# he to suffe life i!pison!ent.
T*e $%+,-.e$-
The appellant /as cha#ed /ith la#e scale ille#al ecuit!ent in an Info!ation, the accusato(
potion of /hich eads0
That duin# the peiod fo! Octobe "112 to Dece!be "112 and so!eti!e pio o
subse3uent theeto, in the Cit( of Manila, Philippines, and /ithin the 4uisdiction of this
5onoable Cout, above6na!ed accused, conspiin#, confedeatin# and helpin# each
othe and epesentin# the!selves to have the po/e, capacit( and la/ful authoit( to
deplo( co!plainants as facto( /o7es in Tai/an, did then and thee /illfull(, unla/full(
and feloniousl( ecuit and po!ise e!plo(!ent to E'MER 8*NER, ERIC 9*RO' and
E'MER R*MOS fo and in consideation of a!ounts an#in# fo! P2,,,,,.,, to
P2&,,,,.,, /hich the( paid to said accused, /ithout the latte havin# deplo(ed and:o
ei!bused co!plainants of thei pa(!ents despite de!ands, to the da!a#e and
pe4udice of said co!plainants.
CONTR*R; TO '*<.
.
Onl( the appellant /as aested, dul( aai#ned, and, /ith the assistance of counsel, pleaded not
#uilt( to the ci!e cha#ed. The othe accused e!ained at la#e.
T*e Ca/e 0or -*e Pro/e,u-+o$
*s culled b( the Office of the Solicito =eneal, the facts /hich ti##eed the case in the tial cout
ae as follo/s0
Re) E1.er (a$er
So!eti!e in the last /ee7 of Octobe "112, El!e 8ane /ent to the office of *lvis
Place!ent Sevice Copoation located at *P $uildin# "&)% 9. *#oncillo St., cone
Pedo =il St., E!ita, Manila, to appl( fo oveseas e!plo(!ent as facto( /o7e in
Tai/an >pp. -, & and "-, TSN, Septe!be 2, "111?. *ppellant 'eticia Sa#a(a#a, afte
pesonall( eceivin# El!e@s application, e3uied hi! to sub!it the necessa(
docu!ents >p. &, TSN, Septe!be 2, "111?.
*ppellant futhe as7ed El!e to pa( sevent(6five thousand pesos >P2&,,,,.,,? as
place!ent fee >Id.?. El!e paid the said fee to appellant in thee >%? install!ents, the fist,
on Nove!be &, "112, in the a!ount of t/ent(6five thousand pesos >P.&,,,,.,,?A the
second, on Nove!be "%, "112, in the a!ount of five thousand pesos >P&,,,,.,,?A and
the thid, on Nove!be "1, "112, in the a!ount of fot(6five thousand pesos
>P-&,,,,.,,?. *ll the pa(!ents /ee !ade inside *lvis Place!ent *#enc( >p. ), id.?.
*s e3uied, El!e also had his !edical eBa!ination at the *n#eles Medical Clinic, the
esult of /hich confi!ed that he /as fit to /o7 >p. 1, Ibid.?. Theeafte, he /as told to
/ait fo the aival of the e!plo(e. *fte seven >2? !onths, no e!plo(e aived. Tied of
/aitin#, El!e de!anded that he be efunded of his !one( >Id.?. Despite appellant@s
po!ises to pa(, El!e /as not efunded of his !one(.
EBaspeated, El!e as7ed appellant fo a po!isso( note, /hich appellant eBecuted,
po!isin# to pa( El!e sevent(6five thousand >P2&,,,,.,,? on Ma( ), "11+ >pp. ", and
"", TSN, Septe!be 2, "111?. In said po!isso( note, appellant desi#nated heself as
the assistant #eneal !ana#e of the place!ent a#enc( >Id.?. <hen appellant failed to
efund the a!ount to El!e on the date stated in the po!isso( note, the latte /ent to
the Philippine Oveseas E!plo(!ent *d!inistation >POE*? and filed a s/on co!plaint
a#ainst appellant >p. "", TSN, Septe!be 2, "111?.
Re) Te/-+.o$y o0 Er+, Faro1
On Nove!be .,, "112, Eic 9aol fist !et appellant at *lvis Place!ent Sevice
Copoation /hen he applied fo an oveseas 4ob in Tai/an as a plastic facto( /o7e
>pp. %6-, TSN, Septe!be .,, "111?. *ppellant and he co6accused Vicente So ;an 5an
discussed /ith Eic about the latte@s 4ob application >Id.?. The( e3uied Eic to sub!it to
the! his passpot, National $ueau of Investi#ation >N$I? cleaance, !edical cleaance
and to pa( sevent(6five thousand pesos >P2&,,,,.,,? as place!ent fee >Id.?. Eic
sub!itted all the afoestated e3uie!ents and paid the sevent(6five thousand pesos to
appellant in t/o >.? install!ents, fo /hich the latte issued eceipts affiBin# he si#natue
theeon >pp. &61, TSN, Septe!be .,, "111?. *ppellant then po!ised Eic that he /ill be
leavin# fo Tai/an befoe Chist!as of "112. 9ailin# to fulfill he po!ise, appellant and
Vicente So ;an 5an told Eic to /ait up to the !onth of 8anua( "11+ >pp. ", and "",
Ibid.?. <hen appellant failed to co!pl( /ith he co!!it!ent to send Eic to Tai/an in
1
8anua( "11+, Eic de!anded fo! appellant the efund of his !one( >pp. "" and ".,
Ibid.?. *ppellant then issued to hi! a chec7 dated 9ebua( &, "11+, affiBin# he
si#natue theeon, fo the a!ount of sevent(6t/o thousand five hunded pesos
>P2.,&,,.,,?. $ut /hen Eic pesented the chec7 to the da/ee ban7 fo pa(!ent, the
sa!e /as dishonoed b( eason0 C*CCODNT C'OSEDC >pp. ""6"-, TSN, Septe!be
.,, "111?.
Insistent that he be efunded of his !one(, Vicente So ;an 5an #ave hi! cash a!ounts
on diffeent dates0 9ebua( ), "11+ 6 6 five thousand pesosA 9ebua( 2, "11+ 6 6 five
thousand pesosA and 9ebua( "2, "11+ 6 6 one thousand pesos >pp. "-6"+, TSN,
Septe!be .,, "111?. Eic /as told to etun on *pil -, "11+ fo the full pa(!ent of the
efund. 5o/eve, /hen Eic /ent bac7 on the fist /ee7 of *pil, appellant #ave hi! a
lette that the full efund of his !one( /ould be #iven on *pil %,, "11+ >p. "1, Ibid?. Eic
etuned to appellant on *pil %,, "11+, but still, appellant failed to efund the !one( >p.
.,, Id.?.
On Ma( +, "11+, Eic filed a co!plaint a#ainst appellant and Vicente So ;an 5an at the
POE* >pp. .,6.", TSN, Septe!be .,, "111?.
Re) E1.er Ra.o/
O! Septe!be .2, "112, El!e Ra!os /ent to the office of *lvis Place!ent Sevices
Copoation to appl( fo oveseas e!plo(!ent as facto( /o7e in Tai/an >pp. + and 1,
TSN, Septe!be .2, "111?. Initiall(, he too7 up his application /ith Vicente So ;an 5an
/ho e3uied hi! to sub!it his passpot, N$I and !edical cleaances and to pa( sevent(
thousand pesos >P2,,,,,.,,? as place!ent fee >pp. ", and "", TSN, Septe!be .2,
"111?. El!e sub!itted the afoestated e3uie!ents and paid the place!ent fee in t/o
>.? install!ents0 t/ent( thousand pesos >P.,,,,,.,,? 6 6 paid to appellant and Vicente
So ;an 5an on Octobe .., "112A and fift( thousand pesos >P&,,,,,.,,? 6 6 paid to
Vicente So ;an 5an on Nove!be "., "112 >pp. ""6"&, TSN, Septe!be .2, "111?.
Vicente So ;an 5an then assued El!e that he /ould be included fo deplo(!ent in the
fist batch on the fist /ee7 of Dece!be "112 /hich, ho/eve, did not !ateialiEe >pp.
"1 and .,, TSN, Septe!be .2, "112?. El!e decided to /ithda/ his application. The
docu!ents sub!itted /ee etuned to El!e but not the place!ent fee he paid >pp. ."
and .., TSN, Septe!be .2, "111?. Instead, appellant issued a chec7 dated 9ebua( &,
"11+ fo the a!ount of sevent( thousand pesos >P2,,,,,.,,? >p. .., Id.?. <hen El!e
encashed the chec7 /ith the ban7, it /as dishonoed b( eason0 Cclosed accountC >p. .%,
Ibid.?.
On Ma( ), "11+, El!e /ent bac7 to the office of *lvis Place!ent Sevice Copoation to
de!and the efund of his !one(. El!e discussed the !atte /ith appellant, but the
latte failed to etun El!e@s !one(. The neBt da( >Ma( 2, "11+?, El!e /ent to the
POE* and filed a s/on co!plaint a#ainst appellant and Vicente So ;an 5an >pp. .&
and .), TSN, Septe!be .2, "111?. On Ma( 1, "11+, El!e a#ain tied to #et a efund
fo! appellant, but the latte onl( issued a po!isso( note assuin# El!e pa(!ent of
the sevent( thousand pesos on Ma( "- and "&, "11+ at %0,, o@cloc7 in the aftenoon
>pp. .2 and .+, Ibid.?. On Ma( "&, "11+, appellant #ave El!e the a!ount of onl( five
thousand pesos >P&,,,,.,,? >p. .1, Ibid.?.
%
T*e Ca/e 0or -*e !22e11a$-
The appellant estates he case as follo/s0
On diffeent dates in "112, the thee >%? co!plainin# /itnesses in this case >El!e
Ra!os, El!e 8ane and Eic 9aol? filed sepaate applications fo 4ob place!ent as
facto( /o7es in Tai/an /ith *'vis Place!ent Sevices Copoation, /ith business
addess at R!. &,2, *P $ld#., "&)% 9. *#oncillo co. Pedo =il Sts., E!ita, ManilaF,G
/hee the appellant 'eticia Sa#a(a#a /as then /o7in# as copoate teasue.
El!e Ra!os filed his application so!eti!e in Septe!be "112 /ith the copoation,
thou#h accused6at6la#e Vicente So ;an 5an. It /as the sa!e Vicente So ;an 5an /ho
as7ed hi! to sub!it the e3uied docu!ents >N$I and !edical cleaances, etc.?, and to
pa( the a!ount of P2,,,,,.,, as place!ent fee. 5e sub!itted the e3uied docu!ents,
and paid the place!ent fee in t/o >.? install!ents as follo/s0 P.,,,,,.,, /as paid b(
hi! on .. Octobe "112 to appellant 'etecia Sa#a(a#a and Vicente So ;an 5an on the
office of the copoationA and P&,,,,,.,, /as paid b( hi! on ". Nove!be "112 to
Vicente So ;an 5an. Then So ;an 5an info!ed hi! that he /ould be deplo(ed in
Tai/an in the fist /ee7 of Dece!be "112. The po!ised deplo(!ent o 4ob place!ent
neve ca!e. 5e then decided to /ithda/ his application and #et bac7 the docu!ents he
sub!itted and the !one( he had paid. 5e /as issued a chec7 fo the fee he had paid
but the chec7 /as dishonoed b( the ban7 fo the eason Caccount closed.C 9ailin# to #et
his !one( baFcG7, he filed a co!plaint /ith the Philippine Oveseas E!plo(!ent
*d!inistation /hee he eBecuted a CSinu!paan# Sala(sa(C on 2 Ma( "11+.
El!e 8ane filed his 4ob place!ent application /ith *lvis Place!ent Sevices
Copoation in the last /ee7 of Octobe "112. Si!ilal(, he /as e3uied to sub!it the
necessa( docu!ents and to pa( the a!ount of P2&,,,,.,, as place!ent fee. 5e
sub!itted the e3uisite docu!ents and paid the place!ent in thee >%? install!ents, as
follo/s0 5e paid P.&,,,,.,, on & Nove!be "112A P&,,,,.,, on "% Nove!be "112A
and P-&,,,,.,, on "1 Nove!be "112. Theeafte, he /as as7ed to /ait fo 2 !onths
fo his e!plo(e to aive. No e!plo(e aiveFdG. 5e decided to /ithda/ his application
and as7ed to be ei!bused the !one( he had paid. *ppellant 'eticia Sa#a(a#a #ave
hi! instead a C2ro.+//ory $o-eC indicatin# that the a!ount of P2&,,,,.,, /ill be paid to
El!e 8ane on ) Ma( "11+. <hen no pa(!ent /as !ade to hi! as po!ised, he filed a
co!plaint /ith the Philippine Oveseas E!plo(!ent *d!inistation and /hee he
eBecuted a CSinu!paan# Sala(sa(C on "% Ma( "11+.
Eic 9aol filed his 4ob place!ent application /ith *lvis Place!ent Sevices Copoation
on ., Nove!be "112. *fte sub!ittin# the e3uied docu!ents, he paid the place!ent
fee of P2&,,,,.,, in t/o >.? install!ents as follo/s0 5e paid the fist install!ent of
P"&,,,,.,, on ". Dece!be "112A and the balance of P),,,,,.,, /as paid b( hi! on
") Dece!be "112. The appellant 'eticia Sa#a(a#a po!ised that he /ould be able to
leave fo Tai/an befoe Chist!as of "112. <hen he /as not able to leave fo Tai/an
befoe the end of "112, he /as as7ed to /ait until 8anua( "11+. <hen he failed to leave
as po!ised, he decided to /ithda/ his application and as7ed that he be efunded the
a!ount of P2&,,,,.,, he had paid as place!ent fee. The chec7 #iven to hi! b( the
appellant bounced fo the eason Caccount closed.C 9oth/ith, Vicente So ;an 5an paid
2
hi! on diffeent dates the a!ounts of P&,,,,.,, on ) 9ebua( "11+, anothe P&,,,,.,,
on 2 9ebua( "11+, and P",,,,.,, on "2 9ebua( "11+. *nd as he /as not efunded
the full a!ount of the fee paid b( hi!, he filed a co!plaint /ith the Philippine Oveseas
E!plo(!ent *d!inistation and eBecuted a CSinu!paan# Sala(sa(C on 2 Ma( "11+.
*s supplied b( the unebutted testi!on( of the appellant, the pesons /ho had effective
and actual contol, !ana#e!ent and diection of the business and tansactions of *lvis
Place!ent Sevices Copoation /ee the accused6spouses Vicente So ;an 5an and
*l!a So. *s Teasue of the copoation, he duties /ee li!ited to eceivin# !one( o
fees paid to the a#enc( b( applicants and to deposit the sa!e in the ban7 in the na!e
and fo the account of the copoation. *lthou#h she >appellant? eceived !one( fo! the
co!plainants El!e 8ane and Eic 9aol, the sa!e /as deposited b( he /ith the ban7
unde the account of the copoation. *nd if eve she si#ned po!isso( notes in behalf
of the copoation and issued chec7s to the co!plainants, she did so upon the instuction
and assuance of accused6spouses So ;an 5an and *l!a So that said notes and
chec7s /ould have sufficient funds on thei due dates. *nd said chec7s and notes /ee
neve paid because the accused6spouses disappeaed and left fo un7no/n addesses.
-
*fte tial, the tial cout endeed 4ud#!ent convictin# the appellant of the ci!e cha#ed, the
dispositive potion of /hich eads0
<5ERE9ORE, 4ud#!ent is endeed ponouncin# accused 'ETICI* S*=*;*=* #uilt(
be(ond easonable doubt of ille#al ecuit!ent in la#e scale and sentencin# said
accused to suffe the penalt( of 'I9E IMPRISONMENT and to pa( a fine of P2&,,,,,.,,,
and the costs.
The accused is futhe odeed to efund to El!e 8ane the su! of P2&,,,,.,,A to Eic
V. 9aol the a!ount of P)",&,,.,,A and to El!e Ra!os the a!ount of P)&,,,,.,,.
SO ORDERED.
&
The appellant assails the decision of the tial cout contendin# that0
6 I 6
T5E 'O<ER CODRT SERIODS'; ERRED IN 5O'DIN= T5*T CNO <EI=5T C*N $E
=IVEN TO T5E CONTENTION O9 T5E *CCDSED T5*T S5E IS NOT CRIMIN*'';
'I*$'E $EC*DSE S5E 5*D NO P*RTICIP*TION IN T5E OPER*TION O9 T5E *'VIS
P'*CEMENT SERVICE CORPOR*TION, *ND S5E 5*D NO HNO<'ED=E *$ODT
ITS RECRDITMENT *CTIVITIES.C
6 II 6
T5E 'O<ER CODRT SERIODS'; ERRED IN 5O'DIN= T5*T *S TRE*SDRER O9
*'VIS P'*CEMENT SERVICE CORPOFRG*TION, T5E *CCDSED6*PPE''*NT C<*S
IN C5*R=E >O9? T5E M*N*=EMENT *ND CONTRO' O9 T5E 9IN*NCI*' *99*IRS
*ND RESODRCES O9 T5E CORPOR*TION.C
6 III 6
T5E 'O<ER CODRT SERIODS'; ERRED IN 5O'DIN= T5*T *S T5E VICE6
PRESIDENT:TRE*SDRER *ND *SSIST*NT =ENER*' M*N*=ER O9 *'VIS
P'*CEMENT SERVICE CORPOR*TION, T5E *CCDSED6*PPE''*NT <*S * TOP
R*NHIN= O99ICER O9 S*ID CORPOR*TION, <IT5 *DT5ORIT; TO P*RTICIP*TE
DIRECT'; IN T5E CONTRO', M*N*=EMENT OR DIRECTION O9 ITS $DSINESS
*99*IRS.
6 IV 6
T5E 'O<ER CODRT SERIODS'; ERRED IN 5O'DIN= T5*T *CCDSED6
*PPE''*NT <*S =DI'T; O9 I''E=*' RECRDITMENT CIN '*R=E SC*'EC *ND IN
SENTENCIN= 5ER TO SD99ER T5E PEN*'T; O9 C'I9E IMPRISONMENT.C
)
The appellant aves that she is not ci!inall( liable fo the ci!e cha#ed because the posecution
failed to pove that she had a diect o actual contol, !ana#e!ent o diection of the business and
ecuit!ent activities of the *lvis Place!ent Sevices Copoation >*PSC?. She assets that she
had no 7no/led#e of the ecuit!ent activities of *PSC and had no paticipation /hatsoeve in its
opeation. In dealin# /ith the pivate co!plainants, she /as !eel( pefo!in# outina( office
/o7 as a !ee e!plo(ee. 5e paticipation as an e!plo(ee of *PSC /ith espect to the
e!plo(!ent application of El!e Ra!os fo Tai/an /as to eceive his place!ent fee of
P.,,,,,.,,. 5ence, the appellant aves, she cannot be held ci!inall( liable fo ille#al ecuit!ent
in la#e scale. If, at all, she can be held liable onl( /ith espect to the e!plo(!ent applications of
8ane and 9aol. Thus, accodin# to the appellant, the tial cout eed in sentencin# he to life
i!pison!ent.
The appeal has no !eit.
Dnde Section ) >!? of Rep. *ct No. +,-.,
2
ille#al ecuit!ent !a( be co!!itted b( an( peson,
/hethe a non6licensee, non6holde of authoit(, licensee o holde of authoit(, thus0
>!? 9ailue to ei!buse eBpenses incued b( the /o7e in connection /ith his
docu!entation and pocessin# fo puposes of deplo(!ent, in cases /hee the
deplo(!ent does not actuall( ta7e place /ithout the /o7e@s fault....
+
Dnde the last paa#aph of the said section, those ci!inall( liable ae the pincipals, acco!plices
and accessoies. In case of a 4uidical peson, the offices havin# contol, !ana#e!ent o diection
of the business shall be ci!inall( liable.
In this case, the appellant, as sho/n b( the ecods of the POE*, /as both the *PSC Vice6
Pesident6Teasue and the *ssistant =eneal Mana#e. She /as a hi#h copoate office /ho had
3
diect paticipation in the !ana#e!ent, ad!inistation, diection and contol of the business of the
copoation. *s the tial cout aptl( declaed in its decision0
*#ain, no /ei#ht can be #iven to the contention of the accused. The te!s Ccontol,
!ana#e!ent o diectionC used in the last paa#aph of Section ) of Republic *ct No.
+,-. boadl( cove all phases of business opeation. The( include the aspects of
ad!inistation, !a7etin# and finances, a!on# othes.
9o! the ecods of the POE*, the accused appeas as the Vice Pesident
>V.P.?:Teasue of the *lvis Place!ent Sevice Copoation >EBhibit *?. Moeove, in the
po!isso( note dated *pil %,, "11+ >EBhibit H?, /hich the accused issued to El!e
8ane, she desi#nated he position in the said copoation as its C*sst. =eneal Mana#eC
>EBhibit H6"?. Dndoubtedl(, the positions of vice6pesident, teasue, and assistant
#eneal !ana#e ae hi#h an7in# copoate positions in an( copoate bod(. These
positions invest on the incu!bent the authoit( of !ana#in#, contollin# and diectin# the
copoate affais.
The clai! of the accused that he desi#nation in the cetification of the POE* >EBhibit *?
as the vice6pesident of *lvis Place!ent Sevice Copoation has supised he because,
accodin# to he, the vice6pesident /as Vicente So ;an 5an >TSN, Ma. "%, .,,,, pp.
")6"2?, hadl( inspies belief. If this /ee tue, she /ould have no difficult( in secuin#
fo! the POE* an authenticated cop( of the list of all officials of the copoation /hich
the( /ee e3uied to file /ith the said Office. 9o no stated eason, ho/eve, the
defense o!itted to secue such list and sub!it it to this Cout.
*t an( ate, the accused has eBpessl( ad!itted in the couse of he testi!on( that she
/as at the ti!e the Teasue of thei ecuit!ent a#enc(. *s such she /as in cha#e of
the !ana#e!ent and contol of the financial affais and esouces of the copoation.
She /as in cha#e of collectin# all its eceivables, safel( 7eepin# the!, and disbusin#
the!. She testified that it /as pat of he duties to eceive and collect the !onies paid b(
applicants >TSN, Ma. "%, .,,,, p. &?. 5e disbusin# authoit( has been cleal(
de!onstated b( he co6si#nin# the chec7s EBhibits D6. and =.
1
The appellant is #uilt( of ille#al ecuit!ent as a pincipal b( diect paticipation, havin# dealt
diectl( /ith the pivate co!plainants. In fact, she eceived thei place!ent fees and even si#ned,
in he capacit( as the *ssistant =eneal Mana#e of the *PSC, the po!isso( note on Ma( ),
"11+ in favo of pivate co!plainant El!e 8ane, obli#in# the *PSC to pa( to hi! the a!ount of
P2&,,,,.,,. 5o/eve, despite the pivate co!plainants@ de!ands, thei place!ent fees /ee not
ei!bused in full. In People vs. Cabais,
",
/e held thus0
*ccused6appellant contends that she /as not involved in ecuit!ent but /as !eel( an
e!plo(ee of a ecuit!ent a#enc(. *n e!plo(ee of a co!pan( o copoation en#a#ed in
ille#al ecuit!ent !a( be held liable as pincipal, to#ethe /ith his e!plo(e, if it is
sho/n that he activel( and consciousl( paticipated in ille#al ecuit!ent. Recuit!ent is
Can( act of canvassin#, enlistin#, contactin#, tanspotin#, utiliEin#, hiin# o pocuin#
/o7es, and includes efeals, contact sevices, po!isin# o advetisin# fo
e!plo(!ent, locall( o aboad, /hethe fo pofit o not0 Povided, That an( peson o
entit( /hich, in an( !anne, offes o po!ises fo a fee e!plo(!ent to t/o o !oe
pesons shall be dee!ed en#a#ed in ecuit!ent and place!entI
""
In this case, the ove/hel!in# evidence on ecod indubitabl( sho/s that the appellant en#a#ed in
ille#al ecuit!ent. *s aptl( uled b( the tial cout0
The fist line of defense invo7ed b( the accused to eBoneate heself of the ci!inal
cha#e is cleal( and conclusivel( /ithout !eit. Thee is no dispute about the fact that
the thee co!plainants en#a#ed >sic? the *lvis Place!ent Sevice Copoation, a
ecuit!ent a#enc( dul( authoiEed b( the POE* /heein the accused /as one of its top
offices, to deplo( the! as facto( /o7es in Tai/an. *d!ittedl(, the( incued
eBpenses, desi#nated as place!ent fees, in connection /ith thei docu!entation and
pocessin# fo puposes of thei deFplGo(!ent. El!e 8ane paid to the accused, /ho
eceived the pa(!ent, the total a!ount of P2&,,,,.,, fo his place!ent fee >EBhibit 8A
TSN, Sept. 2, "111, pp. )6+?. Eic 9aol paid also to the accused a si!ila a!ount fo the
sa!e pupose >EBhibit EA TSN, Sept. .,, "111, pp. &6+?. El!e Ra!os paid to the
a#enc( the su! of P2,,,,,.,, of /hich P.,,,,,.,, /as eceived b( the accused, and
the balance of P&,,,,,.,, /as eceived b( Vicente So ;an 5an >EBhibit 9A TSN, Sept.
.2, "111, pp. ",6"+?. In the couse of he testi!on(, the accused ad!itted that she
eceived these pa(!ents b( the co!plainants of thei place!ent fees.
5o/eve, the eBpected deplo(!ent of the co!plainants as facto( /o7es in Tai/an, o
even else/hee, did not ta7e place, /ithout an( fault on thei pat. Thee is absolutel( no
evidence eflectin# that the failue to deplo( the! /as i!putable to thei faults.
The evidence has satisfactoil( established that the co!plainants have not been
ei!bused the full a!ount of thei place!ent fees, not/ithstandin# thei pesistent
de!ands. Not a sin#le peso of his place!ent fee /as etuned to El!e 8ane. Instead,
on *pil %,, "11+, the accused eBecuted a po!isso( note >EBhibit H? in behalf of the
*lvis Place!ent Sevice Copoation, undeta7in# to pa( El!e 8ane the a!ount of
P2&,,,,.,, on Ma( ), "11+. 5o/eve, the a!ount coveed b( the po!isso( note /as
not paid >TSN, Sept. 2, "111, p. ""?.
On the othe hand, althou#h Eic 9aol and El!e Ra!os /ee ei!bused of
P"",,,,.,, and P&,,,,.,, in cash, espectivel(, and the balance of thei place!ent fees
/ee coveed b( chec7s >EBhibits D6. and =?, these tansactions did not elieve the
accused of he ci!inal liabilit(. The ei!buse!ent conte!plated b( paa#aph >!? of
Section ) of Republic *ct No. +,-. is full ei!buse!ent of the eBpenses incued b( the
/o7e in connection /ith the docu!entation and pocessin# of his deplo(!ent. To ule
othe/ise /ould be offensive to the ad!inistation of 4ustice, as ille#al ecuites could
easil( escape ci!inal liabilit( /ith i!punit( b( si!pl( etunin# an insi#nificant potion of
the a!ount the( collected fo! the /o7e. The chec7s da/n and issued b( the accused
to these t/o co!plainants, ho/eve, did not poduce the effect of pa(!ent, fo the( /ee
both dishonoed b( the da/ee ban7 on the #ound of closed account. Pusuant to the
second paa#aph of *ticle ".-1 of the Civil Code, C>t?he delive( of po!isso( notes
pa(able to ode, o bills of eBchan#e o othe !ecantile docu!ents shall poduce the
effect of pa(!ent onl( /hen the( have been cashed, o /hen thou#h the fault of the
cedito the( have been i!paied.C
".
4
The appellant@s bae denial of he involve!ent in the !ana#e!ent, ad!inistation, contol and
opeation of *PSC cannot pevail ove he 4udicial ad!issions, the positive testi!onies of the
pivate co!plainants and the docu!enta( evidence adduced b( the posecution.
Section ) of Rep. *ct No. +,-. povides that ille#al ecuit!ent shall be consideed an offense
involvin# econo!ic sabota#e if co!!itted in la#e scale, viz, co!!itted a#ainst thee >%? o !oe
pesons individuall( o as a #oup, the i!posable penalt( fo /hich is life i!pison!ent and a fine
of not less than P&,,,,,,.,, no !oe than P",,,,,,,,.,,.
"%
In this case, thee ae thee pivate
co!plainants, na!el(, El!e 8ane, Eic 9aol and El!e Ra!os. The tial cout, thus, coectl(
convicted the appellant of la#e scale ille#al ecuit!ent and sentenced he to suffe life
i!pison!ent.
N LGHT OF !LL THE FOREGONG, the appeal is DENIED. The Decision of the Re#ional Tial
Cout of Manila, $anch %&, is *99IRMED. Costs a#ainst the appellant.
SO OR&ERE&.
5
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
SECOND DIVISION
G.R. No/. 143014416 February 5, 2004
PEOPLE OF THE PHLPPNES, appellee
vs.
ROSE &U(U! 6a- 1ar7e89 E&TH! S. SNG 6a- 1ar7e89 GULLERMO :;LL": S!MSON 6a-
1ar7e89 R!MON S!MSON &U(U!, accused,
R!MON S!MSON &U(U!, appellant.
D E C I S I O N
TNG!, J.:
Ra!on Du4ua appeals fo! the decision of the Re#ional Tial Cout >RTC of Manila, $anch &"?,
findin# hi! #uilt( of Ille#al Recuit!ent in 'a#e Scale and of t/o counts of estafa.
Ra!on, his !othe Rose Du4ua, his aunt Editha Sin#h, and his uncle =uille!o C<ill(C Sa!son
/ee cha#ed in Ci!inal Case No. 1.6",+1",, /ith Ille#al Recuit!ent in 'a#e Scale in an
Info!ation alle#in# J
That in o about and duin# the peiod co!pised bet/een *u#ust, "11" and Mach "-, "11.,
inclusive, in the Cit( of Manila, Philippines, the said accused, conspiin# and confedeatin#
to#ethe and helpin# one anothe, bein# then pivate individuals and epesentin# the!selves to
have the capacit( to contact, enlist, and tanspot 9ilipino /o7es fo e!plo(!ent aboad, did
then and thee /illfull( and unla/full(, fo a fee, ecuit and po!ise e!plo(!ent:4ob place!ent to
the follo/in# applicants, na!el(0 8ai!e Cabus ( Co, $eldon S. Caluten, 9enando P. Cunanan,
Paulino $. Coea, Matin D. Nacion, Ro!ulo Patos ( Tuan#co, 8esus $. $ia#as, *tuo Toes,
Robeto *. Pelas, Ronald *lvaeE and Vivencio '. $ati3uin /ithout fist havin# secued the
e3uied license o authoit( fo! the Depat!ent of 'abo as e3uied b( la/.
CONTR*R; TO '*<.
"
The fou /ee also cha#ed in Ci!inal Case Nos. 1.6",+1". and 1.6",+1., /ith sepaate counts
of estafa co!!itted a#ainst Robeto Pelas and 8ai!e Cabus. EBcept fo the date of the
co!!ission, the na!e of the victi!, and the a!ount involved, the t/o Info!ations in the estafa
cases !a7e si!ila alle#ations a#ainst the accused. The Info!ation in Ci!inal Case No. 1.6
",+1". states0
That on o about Octobe .+, "11", in the Cit( of Manila, Philippines, the said accused conspiin#
and confedeatin# to#ethe and helpin# one anothe, did then and thee /illfull(, unla/full( and
feloniousl( defaud Robeto *. Pelas in the follo/in# !anne, to /it0 the said accused, b( !eans
of false !anifestations and faudulent epesentation /hich the( !ade to said Robeto *. Pelas to
the effect that the( had the po/e and capacit( to ecuit and e!plo( hi! aboad and could
facilitate the pocessin# of the petinent papes if #iven the necessa( a!ount to !eet the
e3uie!ents theeof, and b( !eans of othe si!ila deceits, induced and succeeded in inducin#
said Robeto *. Pelas to #ive and delive, as in fact #ave and deliveed to said accused the
a!ount of P"2,,,,.,, on the sten#th of said !anifestations and epesentations, said accused
/ell 7no/in# that the sa!e /ee false and faudulent and /ee !ade solel( to obtain, as in fact
the( did obtain the a!ount ofP"2,,,,.,, /hich a!ount once in possession, /ith intent to defaud
the(, /illfull(, unla/full( and feloniousl( !isappopiated, !isapplied and conveted to thei o/n
pesonal use and benefit, to the da!a#e and pe4udice of said Robeto *. Pelas in the afoesaid
a!ount of P"2,,,,.,,, Philippine cuenc(.
CONTR*R; TO '*<.
.
That in Ci!inal Case No. 1.6",+1., eads0
That in o about and duin# the co!pised FpeiodG bet/een Octobe "11" and Mach "-, "11.,
inclusive, in the Cit( of Manila, Philippines, the said accused conspiin# and confedeatin# to#ethe
and helpin# one anothe did then and thee /illfull(, unla/full( and feloniousl( defaud 8ai!e
Cabus ( Co in the follo/in# !anne, to /it0 the said accused, b( !eans of false !anifestations and
faudulent epesentation /hich the( !ade to said 8ai!e Cabus ( Co to the effect that the( had the
po/e and capacit( to ecuit and e!plo( hi! aboad and could facilitate the pocessin# of the
petinent papes if #iven the necessa( a!ount to !eet the e3uie!ents theeof, and b( !eans of
othe si!ila deceits, induced and succeeded in inducin# said 8ai!e Cabus ( Co to #ive and
delive, as in fact he #ave and deliveed to said accused the a!ount of P-2,,,,.,, on the sten#th
of said !anifestations and epesentations, said accused /ell 7no/in# that the sa!e /ee false
and faudulent and /ee !ade solel( to obtain, as in fact the( did obtain the a!ount of P-2,,,,.,,
/hich a!ount once in possession, /ith intent to defaud the(, /illfull(, unla/full( and feloniousl(
!isappopiated, !isapplied and conveted to thei o/n pesonal use and benefit, to the da!a#e
and pe4udice of said 8ai!e Cabus ( Co in the afoesaid a!ount ofP-2,,,,.,,, Philippine cuenc(.
CONTR*R; TO '*<.
%
Of the fou accused, onl( Ra!on Du4ua /as aested and aai#ned. 5is !othe, aunt and uncle
e!ain at la#e. Ra!on enteed a plea of not #uilt( to each of the cha#es, /heeupon tial
co!!enced. <hile the Info!ation fo ille#al ecuit!ent na!ed seveal pesons as havin# been
po!ised 4obs b( the accused, onl( fou of the! testified.
In *u#ust "11", pivate co!plainant $eldon Caluten, acco!panied b( his cousin, /ent to the
accusedKs office, the <old Pac7 Tavel and Tous located in Suite .+, Manila Midto/n *cade,
*diatico Steet, E!ita, Manila.
-
Dpon $eldonKs in3ui(, Ra!on Du4ua said that he sends
applicants aboad and #ave $eldon an application fo!. $eldon filled up the fo! and sub!itted it
to Ra!on, /ho told hi! that he !ust pa( a pocessin# fee and !a7e an advance pa(!ent.
&
$eldon /as po!ised /o7 as a facto( /o7e in 8apan.
)
On *u#ust "&, "11", he paid Ra!on the
pocessin# fee of P",,,,.,, and, the neBt da(, an advance pa(!ent of P",,,,,.,,.
2
$eldon paid
6
Ra!on an additionalP"&,,,,.,, on *u#ust .", "11" as place!ent fee.
+
9o these pa(!ents,
$eldon /as issued eceipts
1
si#ned b( Ra!onKs !othe Rose Du4ua.
",
On the last /ee7 of *u#ust
"11", $eldon #ave anothe P",,,,,.,, to $enita Valdes, anothe applicant in the accusedKs office,
but no eceipt /as issued fo the a!ount.
""
9inall(, $eldon #aveP-",,,,.,, to Rose Du4ua but
/hen $eldon as7ed fo a eceipt fo the latte pa(!ent, Rose said she alead( #ave hi! one.
".
<hen, despite such pa(!ents, the po!ise to send $eldon to /o7 in 8apan e!ained unfulfilled,
$eldon as7ed Ra!on to #ive hi! bac7 his !one(.
"%
$eldon neve ecoveed his pa(!ents,
ho/eve, po!ptin# hi! and his fello/ applicants to file a co!plaint at the National $ueau of
Investi#ation >N$I?.
"-
Pivate co!plainant 8ai!e Cabus /as intoduced to Ra!on on the fist /ee7 of Octobe "11" b(
8ai!eKs nei#hbo /ho /o7ed in font of the accusedKs office.
"&
Ra!on said the( /ee deplo(in#
/o7es to Tai/an and that if 8ai!e could affod the place!ent fee of P-&,,,,.,,, plus the
passpot and pocessin# fee, he could leave fo Tai/an in a fe/ /ee7s.
")
The follo/in# da(, 8ai!e #ave Ra!on P.,,,,.,, at the latteKs office, the <old Pac7 Tavel and
Tous at Suite .+, Manila Midto/n *cade, *diatico St., E!ita, Manila, fo the pocessin# of his
passpot.
"2
8ai!e /as not issued a eceipt fo his pa(!ent but /as assued that the passpotKs
pocessin# /ould ta7e 4ust t/o da(s.
"+
Indeed, 8ai!e /as able to see his passpot.
"1
In the latte pat of Octobe "11", 8ai!e paid P",,,,,.,, as do/n pa(!ent fo the place!ent
fee.
.,
8ai!e #ave Ra!on the su! inside the accusedKs office.
."
On Mach "), "11-, /hen the(
/ee about to leave fo the aipot 8ai!e handed Rose P-2,,,,.,, epesentin# the balance of the
place!ent fee.
..
*t the aipot, Ra!on told 8ai!e that the tic7ets /ee still bein# pocessed.
.%
9eelin# that his and
the othe thit( applicantsK fli#ht /ould not push thou#h, 8ai!e as7ed fo a efund. Ra!on and his
!othe efused to pa( hi! bac7
.-
because the !one( /as supposedl( #oin# to be used in the
pocessin# of thei tic7ets.
.&
Rose assued hi!, thou#h, that the( /ould be able to leave the
follo/in# da(.
.)
The fli#ht and the 4ob neve !ateialiEed, ho/eve, so afte a /ee7 8ai!e decided to file a
co!plaint /ith the N$I.
.2
*nothe co!plainant, Robeto Pelas, /as intoduced to Ra!on Du4ua b( his co!pade,
co!plainant 8ai!e Cabus, in the fist /ee7 of Octobe "11".
.+
Robeto /ent to the accusedKs office
at Midto/n PlaEa in E!ita to appl( fo a 4ob aboad.
.1
Ra!on told hi! that the( /ee deplo(in#
facto( /o7es to Tai/an.
%,
Convinced, Robeto acco!plished the bio6data fo! #iven b( Ra!on.
%"
Robeto also paid a total
of P%,,,,,.,, as place!ent fee.
%.
On sepaate occasions, Robeto #ave Ra!on P2,,,,.,,
and P",,,,,.,,, fo /hich he /as issued the coespondin# eceipts b( Rose Du4ua.
%%
The balance
of the P%,,,,,.,, he late #ave to Rose, /ho did not issue a eceipt theefo because at the ti!e a
lot of people /ee !illin# about.
%-
Not/ithstandin# pa(!ent, Robeto /as not able to leave fo Tai/an.
%&
Rose and Ra!on 7ept on
tellin# hi! that he /ould leave the follo/in# da( but Robeto /aited in vain.
%)
The !one( he #ave
/as neve efunded.
%2
9inall(, he decided to file a co!plaint a#ainst the accused.
%+
In *u#ust "11", pivate co!plainant Ro!ulo Patos /as intoduced to Ra!on Du4ua at the latteKs
office at the <old Pac7 Tavel and Tous in the Manila Midto/n *cade, *diatico St., Manila, b(
one $ab( Ra!os.
%1
$ab(, li7e Ro!ulo, /as an applicant fo deplo(!ent to Tai/an.
-,
Ra!on told
Ro!ulo about Cthe /o7 in Tai/an and in 8apan.C Ra!on said that Ro!ulo /ould #et the 4ob he
/as appl(in# fo and leave /ithin a /ee7 if he paidP-&,,,,.,,.
Ro!ulo and his /ife Melodea Villanueva then decided that Ro!ulo /ould /ithda/ his application
and that Melodea /ould be the one to leave fo aboad.
-"
The a!ount of P-&,,,,.,, that Ro!ulo
/as supposed to pa( /as chan#ed to P.&,,,,.,,, pa(able upon application.
-.
Ro!ulo also had to
pa( P&,,,,,.,, upon the elease of the visa and anothe P2&,,,,.,, upon depatue.
-%
Ro!ulo paid Ra!on P"+,,,,.,, fo his /ifeKs application, and Rose Du4ua issued the
coespondin# eceipt.
--
Subse3uentl(, Ro!ulo #ave anothe P2,,,,.,, to co!plete the
e3uied P.&,,,,.,,.
-&
No eceipt /as issued fo the latte pa(!ent.
-)
Ro!uloKs /ife aised anothe P&,,,,,.,,, /hich /as #iven to Rose, fo he 8apanese visa.
-2
*s
nothin# ca!e about of the e!plo(!ent po!ised, Ro!ulo decided to file a co!plaint /ith the
N$I.
-+
The posecution also pesented a Cetification
-1
dated Mach .2, "11+, issued b( 5e!o#enes C.
Mateo, Diecto II, 'icensin# $anch of the POE*, statin# that Ra!on Du4ua is not licensed o
authoiEed b( the POE* to ecuit /o7es aboad. *nothe Cetification,
&,
of even date sho/s that
neithe is the <old Pac7 Tavel and Tous authoiEed to ecuit /o7es aboad.
The accused Ra!on Du4ua ad!itted havin# !et pivate co!plainants
&"
but denied that he /as a
ecuite.
&.
5e clai!ed that he /as a !ee 4anito, !essen#e and eand bo( of the <old Pac7
Tavel and Tous, /hee he /o7ed fo! Octobe .+, "11" up to 8une .,, "11..
&%
The co!pan( is
o/ned b( his aunt, Editha Sin#h, and !ana#ed b( his !othe Rose Du4ua.
&-
<hile ad!ittin# that he did not have a license to ecuit,
&&
Ra!on ac7no/led#ed eceivin# the
!one( #iven b( co!plainants but denied 7no/in# /hat it /as fo.
&)
5e said, ho/eve, that his
!othe onl( as7ed hi! to count the !one(.
&2
5e futhe !aintained that he did not si#n an( eceipt
elative to the pa(!ents !ade b( pivate co!plainants.
&+
The accused clai!ed that he /as bein#
cha#ed onl( because co!plainants /ee an#( /ith his !othe.
&1
Lenaida PeeE, /ho used to /o7 fo <old Pac7 Tavel and Tous, cooboated Ra!onKs clai!
that he /as a 4anito:!essen#e in said office.
),
On 9ebua( .+, .,,", the RTC endeed its Decision convictin# Ra!on Du4ua of ille#al
ecuit!ent in la#e scale, co!!itted a#ainst 8ai!e Cabus, $eldon Caluten and Robeto Pelas,
and of t/o counts of estafa, co!!itted a#ainst Cabus and Pelas. The dispositive potion of the
RTC Decision eads0
7
<5ERE9ORE, the Cout, findin# the accused Ra!on Du4ua #uilt( be(ond easonable doubt of the
offense in Ci!inal Case 1.6",+1", /hich is fo Ille#al Recuit!ent fo Violation of *t. %+ >a and
b? in elation to *t. %1 of PD --., as a!ended b( PD "-". and futhe a!ended b( PD "1., and
PD .,"+, heeb( sentences hi! to suffe the penalt( of life i!pison!ent and to pa( fine in the
a!ount of P",,,,,,.,,. 5e is futhe odeed to pa( the pivate co!plainants a? 8ai!e Cabus the
a!ount of P-2,,,,.,,A b? $enton FsicG C. Caluten the a!ount ofP.),,,,.,,A and c? Robeto Pelas
the a!ount of P"2,,,,.,,. In so fa as Ro!ulo Patos is concened, his case is dis!issed. <ith
costs.
<ith espect to Ci!inal Case No. 1.6",+1". and Ci!inal Case No. 1.6",+1., involvin# pivate
co!plainants Robeto Pelas and 8ai!e Cabus, espectivel(, the Cout, findin# the accused
Ra!on Du4ua #uilt( be(ond easonable doubt of the ci!e cha#ed /hich is fo Estafa, heeb(
sentences hi! to suffe the indete!inate penalt( of t/o >.? (eas, eleven >""? !onths and eleven
>""? da(s of pision coeccional as !ini!u! to fou >-? (eas and t/o >.? !onths of pision
coeccional as !aBi!u! fo each of the cases. Considein# that the accused had been odeed to
pa( pivate co!plainant Robeto Pelas the a!ount of P"2,,,,.,, and pivate co!plainant 8ai!e
Cabus the a!ount of P-2,,,,.,, in Ci!inal Case No. 1.6",+1", fo Ille#al Recuit!ent the(
should not be a/aded a#ain the said a!ounts in these Estafa cases. <ith costs.
Considein# that the accused Ra!on Du4ua is a detention pisone, he shall be cedited in the
sevice of his sentence /ith the full ti!e duin# /hich he has unde#one peventive i!pison!ent.
*s a#ainst accused Rose Du4ua, Editha S. Sin# FsicG and =uille!o C<ill(C Sa!son /ho e!ained
at6la#e, thei cases /ee achieved FsicG >Ode dated Nove!be .%, "11.?.
SO ORDERED.
)"
See7in# the evesal of his conviction, Ra!on Du4ua contends that the posecution failed to pove
be(ond easonable doubt that he co!!itted the ci!es of ille#al ecuit!ent in la#e scale and
estafa.
The essential ele!ents of the ci!e of ille#al ecuit!ent in la#e scale ae0 >"? the accused
en#a#es in acts of ecuit!ent and place!ent of /o7es defined unde *ticle "%>b? o in an(
pohibited activities unde *t. %- of the 'abo CodeA >.? the accused has not co!plied /ith the
#uidelines issued b( the Seceta( of 'abo and E!plo(!ent, paticulal( /ith espect to the
secuin# of a license o an authoit( to ecuit and deplo( /o7es, eithe locall( o oveseasA and
>%? the accused co!!its the unla/ful acts a#ainst thee o !oe pesons, individuall( o as a
#oup.
).
*ll thee ele!ents have been established be(ond easonable doubt.
9ist, the testi!onies of the co!plainin# /itnesses satisfactoil( pove that appellant po!ised
the! e!plo(!ent and assued the! place!ent oveseas. Co!plainants /ee fi! and cate#oical.
*ll of the! positivel( identified appellant as the peson /ho ecuited the! fo e!plo(!ent aboad.
Thei testi!onies dovetail each othe on !ateial points. Thee is no ade3uate sho/in# that an( of
the! /as i!pelled b( an( ill !otive to testif( a#ainst appellant. Thei testi!onies /ee
stai#htfo/ad, cedible and convincin#. *s a#ainst the positive and cate#oical testi!onies of the
thee co!plainants, appellantKs !ee denials cannot pevail.
)%
It is ielevant /hethe o not co!plainantsK clai!s ae suppoted b( eceipts. The absence of
eceipts in a case fo ille#al ecuit!ent does not /aant the ac3uittal of the appellant and is not
fatal to the posecutionKs case. *s lon# as the posecution is able to establish thou#h cedible
testi!onial evidence that the appellant has en#a#ed in Ille#al Recuit!ent, a conviction fo the
offense can ve( /ell be 4ustified.
)-
Second, appellant did not have an( license o authoit( to ecuit pesons fo oveseas /o7, as
sho/n b( the Cetification issued b( the POE*. Neithe did his e!plo(e, the <old Pac7 Tavel
and Tous, possess such license o authoit(.
Thid, it beas claif(in# that althou#h Ro!ulo Potos /as na!ed as a!on# those ecuited b(
appellant the evidence eveals that Ro!ulo /ithde/ his application in lieu of /hich his /ife
Melodea Villanueva applied fo place!ent /ith appellant. Villanueva, ho/eve, is not na!ed as
one of appellantKs victi!s.
Nevetheless, it has been alle#ed and poven that appellant undetoo7 the ecuit!ent of not less
than thee pesons, na!el(, Cabus, Caluten and Pelas.
The RTC, theefoe, aptl( !eted upon appellant the penalt( of life i!pison!ent and to pa( a fine
of P",,,,,,.,,, in accodance /ith *ticle %1>a? of the 'abo Code.
The follo/in# ele!ents of estafa, as defined b( *ticle %"& >.? >a? ae also pesent in this case, to
/it0 >"? the accused has defauded the offended pat( b( !eans of abuse of confidence o b(
deceitA and >.? as a esult, da!a#e o pe4udice, /hich is capable of pecunia( esti!ation, is
caused to the offended pat( o thid peson. *ppellant !isepesented hi!self to 8ai!e Cabus and
Robeto Pelas as one /ho can !a7e aan#e!ents fo 4ob place!ents in Tai/an and 8apan and,
b( eason of such !isepesentations, the t/o co!plainants /ee induced to pat /ith thei !one(,
causin# the! da!a#e.
The RTC, ho/eve, eed in i!posin# upon appellant, fo each count of estafa, the penalt( of t/o
>.? (eas, eleven >""? !onths and eleven >""? da(s of pision coeccional, as !ini!u!, to fou >-?
(eas and t/o >.? !onths of pision coeccional, as !aBi!u!. *ticle %"& of the Revised Penal
Code povides that0
*RT. %"&. Swindling >estafa?. M *n( peson /ho shall defaud anothe b( an( of the !eans
!entioned heeinbelo/ shall be punished b(0
1st. The penalt( of prision correccional in its !aBi!u! peiod to prision mayor in its !ini!u!
peiod, if the a!ount of the faud is ove ".,,,, but does not eBceed ..,,,, pesos, and if such
a!ount eBceeds the latte su!, the penalt( povided in this paa#aph shall be i!posed in its
!aBi!u! peiod, addin# one (ea fo each additional ",,,,, pesosA but the total penalt( /hich
!a( be i!posed shall not eBceed t/ent( (eas. In such case, and in connection /ith the accesso(
8
penalties /hich !a( be i!posed and fo the pupose of the othe povisions of this Code, the
penalt( shall be te!ed prision mayor o reclusion temporal, as the case !a( be.
I.
.. $( !eans of an( of the follo/in# false petenses o faudulent acts eBecuted pio to o
si!ultaneousl( /ith the co!!ission of the faud0
>a? $( usin# fictitious na!e, o falsel( petendin# to possess po/e, influence, 3ualifications,
popet(, cedit, a#enc(, business o i!a#ina( tansactionsA o b( !eans of othe si!ila deceits.
In Ci!inal Case No. 1.6",+1.,, the posecution alle#ed and poved that appellant defauded
co!plainant 8ai!e Cabus in the a!ount of P-2,,,,.,,, /hich eBceeds the su! of P..,,,,.,,.
Thus, the penalt( pescibed, i.e., pision coeccional in its !aBi!u! peiod >- (eas, . !onths
and " da( to ) (eas? to pision !a(o in its !ini!u! peiod >) (eas and " da( to + (eas?, shall
be i!posed in its !aBi!u! peiod.
The penalt( pescibed b( *ticle %"&, ho/eve, is co!posed of onl( t/o, not thee, peiods, in
/hich case *ticle )& of the Revised Penal Code e3uies the division into thee e3ual potions the
ti!e included in the penalt(, fo!in# one peiod of each of the thee potions. *ppl(in# this
povision, the !ini!u!, !ediu! and !aBi!u! peiods of the penalt( pescibed ae0
MaBi!u! 6 ) (eas, + !onths, ." da(s to + (eas
Mediu! 6 & (eas, & !onths, "" da(s to ) (eas, + !onths, ., da(s
Mini!u! 6 - (eas, . !onths, " da( to & (eas, & !onths, ", da(s
Thus, the !aBi!u! peiod is ) (eas, + !onths and ." da(s to + (eas.
*ticle %"& futhe states that one (ea shall be added fo each additional P",,,,,.,, defauded in
eBcess ofP..,,,,.,,. The a!ount defauded, P-2,,,,,.,,, less P..,,,,.,, is P.&,,,,.,,, o t/o
additional a!ounts ofP",,,,,.,,. These t/o (eas shall be added to the !aBi!u! peiod of )
(eas, + !onths and ." da(s to + (eas of pision !a(o fo a total of + (eas, + !onths and ."
da(s to ", (eas of pision !a(o.
In i!posin# a pison sentence fo an offense punished b( the Revised Penal Code, the
Indete!inate Sentence 'a/ e3uies couts to i!pose upon the accused an indete!inate
sentence.
)&
The !aBi!u! te! theeof shall be that /hich, in vie/ of the attendin# cicu!stances,
could be popel( i!posed unde the ules of the said Code.
))
In this case, such !aBi!u! te! is
/ithin the peiod of + (eas, + !onths and ." da(s to ", (eas of pision !a(o.
On the othe hand, the !ini!u! te! shall be /ithin the an#e of the penalt( neBt lo/e to that
pescibed b( the Code fo the offense.
)2
The penalt( neBt lo/e to that pescibed b( *ticle %"& is
pision coeccional in its !ini!u! peiod >) !onths, " da( to . (eas and - !onths? to pision
coeccional in its !ediu! peiod >. (eas, - !onths and " da( to - (eas and . !onths?.
Thus, the Cout sentences appellant, fo the ci!e of estafa co!!itted a#ainst pivate co!plainant
Cabus, to a !ini!u! peiod of fou >-? (eas of pision coeccional to a !aBi!u! peiod of nine
>1? (eas of pision !a(o.
In Ci!inal Case No. 1.6",+1"., appellant /as cha#ed and poven to have defauded pivate
co!plainant Pelas in the a!ount of P"2,,,,.,,. Thus, the penalt( pescibed shall be i!posed in
its !ediu! peiod, o & (eas, & !onths, "" da(s to ) (eas, + !onths, ., da(s, as the a!ount
defauded does not eBceed P..,,,,.,, and as no a##avatin# o !iti#atin# cicu!stances ae
pesent. 9o! this peiod shall be ta7en the !aBi!u! te! fo puposes of the Indete!inate
Sentence 'a/.
*s in the case of the estafa co!!itted a#ainst Cabus, the !ini!u! shall be /ithin the an#e of
pision coeccional in its !ini!u! peiod to pision coeccional in its !ediu! peiod.
*ccodin#l(, the Cout sentences appellant, fo the estafa co!!itted a#ainst pivate co!plainant
Pelas, to a !ini!u! peiod of fou >-? (eas of pision coeccional to a !aBi!u! peiod of seven
>2? (eas of pision !a(o.
<5ERE9ORE, the decision of the cout a quo findin# appellant Ra!on Sa!son Du4ua #uilt(
be(ond easonable doubt of Ille#al Recuit!ent in 'a#e Scale and Estafa is *99IRMED /ith the
follo/in# !odifications0
In Ci!inal Case No. 1.6",+1". fo estafa involvin# pivate co!plainant Robeto Pelas, the Cout
sentences appellant Ra!on Sa!son Du4ua to suffe a !ini!u! peiod of fou >-? (eas of pision
coeccional to a !aBi!u! peiod of seven >2? (eas of pision !a(o.
In Ci!inal Case No. 1.6",+1.,, fo estafa, involvin# pivate co!plainant 8ai!e Cabus, the Cout
sentences appellant Ra!on Sa!son Du4ua to suffe a !ini!u! peiod of fou >-? (eas of pision
coeccional to a !aBi!u! peiod of nine >1? (eas of pision !a(o.
SO ORDERED.
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
9
9IRST DIVISION
G.R. NO. 14<137 (a$uary 16, 2003
PEOPLE OF THE PHLPPNES, appellee,
vs.
&OMNG! CORR!LES FORTUN!, appellant.
#TUG, J.)
On .1 Septe!be "11+, Do!in#a Coales 9otuna, heein appellant, /as cha#ed /ith ille#al
ecuit!ent in la#e scale unde Section ), paa#aph >!?, of Republic *ct No. +,-., said to have
been co!!itted thusl(0
CThat so!eti!e in the !onth of 8ul(, "11+, in the Cit( of Cabanatuan, Republic of the
Philippines and /ithin the 4uisdiction of this 5onoable Cout, the above6na!ed accused
/ho is neithe a licensee no holde of authoit( in the oveseas pivate ecuit!ent o
place!ents activities, did then and thee, /illfull(, unla/full( and feloniousl( undeta7e a
ecuit!ent activit( b( inducin# and convincin# RE$ECC* P. DE 'EON, *NNIE M.
NDNDE, NENIT* *. *ND*S*N, *N=E';N N. M*=P*;O, 'IN* N. =*NOT and
ED=*RDO C. S*'V*DOR, that she could secue fo the! a 4ob in Tai/an, and as a
esult of such entice!ent, said Rebecca P. De 'eon, *nnie M. Nu3ue, Nenita *.
*ndasan, *n#olan N. Ma#pa(o, 'ina N. =anot and Ed#ado C. Salvado, /ho /ee
inteested to have such e!plo(!ent, #ave and deliveed to the accused the total su! of
T5IRT; T<O T5ODS*ND 9ODR 5DNDRED PESOS >P%.,-,,.,,?, Philippine
Cuenc(, epesentin# !edical fees in connection theeof, to the latteKs da!a#e and
pe4udice as the( /ee not able to #et a 4ob in Tai/an thou#h no fault of thei o/n as
po!ised b( the accused, /ho li7e/ise failed to ei!buse to heein co!plainants the
afoe!entioned a!ount despite epeated de!andsA that considein# that thee ae siB
>)? o !oe co!plainants pe4udiced b( the unla/ful acts of the accused, the sa!e is
dee!ed co!!itted in la#e scale and consideed an offense involvin# econo!ic
sabota#e.C
"
<hen aai#ned on .1 9ebua( .,,,, appellant Do!in#a 9otuna, /ith the assistance of counsel,
pleaded not #uilt( to the ci!e cha#edA tial then ensued.
Ta7in# the /itness stand fo the posecution /ee pivate co!plainants 'ina =anot, Nenita
*ndasan and *n#el(n Ma#pa(o.
'ina N. =anot, *n#el(n N. Ma#pa(o, Nenita *. *ndasan, Rebecca P. De 'eon, *nnie M. Nu3ue
and Ed#ado '. Salvado !et Do!in#a 9otuna ( Coales in a se!ina on CTuppe/aeC poducts
bein# then po!oted fo sale in Cabanatuan Cit(. 9otuna too7 the occasion to convese /ith
pivate co!plainants, alon# /ith so!e of the attendees, offein# 4ob place!ents in Tai/an.
Convinced that 9otuna could actuall( povide the! /ith 4obs aboad, pivate co!plainants, on ,)
8ul( "11+, each #ave he the a!ount of P&,-,,.,, to ta7e cae of the pocessin# fee fo !edical
eBa!ination and othe eBpenses fo secuin# thei espective passpots. On "% 8ul( "11+, pivate
co!plainants too7 the !edical eBa!ination in Manila. <ee7s /ent b( but the po!ised depatue
had not !ateialiEed. Suspectin# that so!ethin# /as not i#ht, the( finall( de!anded that 9otuna
etun thei !one(. 9otuna, in the !ean/hile, /ent Cinto hidin#.C *fte havin# late leaned that
9otuna had neithe a license no an authoit( to undeta7e ecuitin# activities, *n#el(n Ma#pa(o
filed a co!plaint /hich, in due ti!e, ulti!atel( esulted in the indict!ent of 9otuna fo ille#al
ecuit!ent. Duin# the peli!ina( investi#ation, as /ell as late at the tial, 9otuna #ave
assuance to have the !one( she had eceived fo! pivate co!plainants etuned to the! but,
eBcept fo the a!ount of P",.&,.,, paid to *n#el(n Ma#pa(o, 9otuna /as unable to !a7e #ood
he po!ise.
Do!in#a 9otuna, in he testi!on(, ad!itted havin# attended the se!ina on 8une "11+ /hee she
then !et *nnie Nu3ue, Rebecca De 'eon, Nenita *ndasan, Ed#ado Salvado, *n#el(n Ma#pa(o
and 'ina =anot. Duin# the se!ina, she puchased CTuppe/aeC poducts fo! pivate
co!plainants afte she /as convinced to be thei sub6a#ent. Initiall(, she /as able to e!it
pa(!ents to pivate co!plainants on he sales but, /hen she failed to !a7e subse3uent
e!ittances, she /as theatened /ith ci!inal posecution. In ode to settle the !atte, she
eBecuted sepaate po!isso( notes. <hen she a#ain failed to pa(, pivate co!plainants filed the
case fo ille#al ecuit!ent a#ainst he. Oi#inall(, thee /ee siB pivate co!plainants but
eventuall( onl( thee of the! pusued the case because the othes /ee finall( able to leave fo
aboad.
In its decision, dated ,. 8anua( .,,", the Re#ional Tial Cout, $anch .2, Cabanatuan Cit(, held
Do!in#a Coales 9otuna #uilt( of Ille#al Recuit!ent in 'a#e Scale. The tial cout held0
C<5ERE9ORE, the Cout finds the accused Do!in#a 9otuna =DI'T; be(ond
easonable doubt of Ille#al Recuit!ent in 'a#e Scale and heeb( i!poses upon he the
penalt( of life i!pison!ent and a fine of 9ive 5unded Thousand >P&,,,,,,.,,? pesos,
as the sa!e involves econo!ic sabota#e.
CShe is li7e/ise odeed to ei!buse five thousand fou hunded >P&,-,,.,,? each to
'ina =anot, Nenita *ndasan epesentin# the a!ount the( #ave to the accused as
pocessin# fee and the a!ount of fou thousand one hunded fift( >P-,"&,.,,? pesos in
favo of *n#el(n Ma#pa(o, as thee /as a patial estitution duin# the tial of the oi#inal
five thousand fou hunded >P&,-,,.,,? pesos she deliveed to the accused.C
.
See7in# a evesal of he conviction, appellant 9otuna, in he assi#n!ent of eos, /ould no/
have the Cout conclude that 6
CI. The cout a quo eed in convictin# the accused6appellant on an info!ation /heein
the facts alle#ed theein do not constitute an offenseA
CII. The cout a quo eed in findin# that accused6appellant violated Section ), pa. >!? of
R.*. +,-. /hen it did not ei!buse the alle#ed a!ounts eceived fo! pivate
co!plainantsA
10
CIII. The cout a quo eed standin# its findin# that the accused6appellant /as #uilt( of
ille#al ecuit!ent.C
%
The appeal is beeft of !eit.
The ci!e of ille#al ecuit!ent is co!!itted /hen, a!on# othe thin#s, a peson /ho, /ithout
bein# dul( authoiEed accodin# to la/, epesents o #ives the distinct i!pession that he o she
has the po/e o the abilit( to povide /o7 aboad convincin# those to /ho! the epesentation is
!ade o to /ho! the i!pession is #iven to theeupon pat /ith thei !one( in ode to be assued
of that e!plo(!ent.
-
Veil(, the testi!on( pesented at the tial b( the co!plainin# /itnesses ade3uatel( established the
co!!ission of the offense.
Testi!on( of co!plainant 'ina =anot M
CN. Ms. <itness, /hee /ee (ou in the !onth of 8une, "11+O
C*. *t Macatbon#, Cabanatuan Cit(, si.
CN. <ee (ou #ainfull( e!plo(ed at that ti!eO
C*. No, si.
CN. On that paticula !onth, 8une, "11+, havin# been une!plo(ed at that ti!e,
/as thee eve an occasion that (ou tied to loo7 fo a 4obO
C*. ;es, si, I FtiedG to loo7 fo a 4ob.
CN. <as thee eve an occasion that (ou tied to be a selle of Tuppe/ae
poductsO
C*. ;es, si.
CN. Please tell us in connection /ith this intention of (ous to sell Tuppe/ae
poducts, did (ou eve attend a se!inaO
C*. ;es, si.
CN. <heeO
C*. *t $u#os *venue, Cabanatuan Cit(, si.
CN. 5ave (ou eve co!e acoss this paticula na!e Do!in#a Coales 9otunaO
C*. ;es, si.
CN. *nd /hee /ee (ou able to !eet this paticula pesonO
C*. *t the se!ina of the Tuppe/ae, si.
CN. <hat tanspied /ith espect to this paticula !eetin#O
C*. She ecuited us and told us that she /ill #ive us #ood 4obs, si.
CCODRT
CN. <hee is she no/O
C*. Thee, si >/itness pointin# to a peson /ho, /hen as7ed, ans/eed b( the
na!e of Do!in#a Coales 9otuna?.
C9ISC*'
CN. 5o/ /as this accused able to elate to (ou that 4ob place!ent /ill be available
fo (ou in Tai/anO
C*. She told !e Fto #iveG he P&,-,,.,, fo pocessin# fee and she /ent to ou
house and I #ave the said a!ount, si.
CN. Dpon heain# this paticula poposition, /hat /as (ou eactionO
C*. I believeFdG and I thou#ht that I FcouldG eall( /o7, si.
CN. *side fo! the pocessin# fee of P&,-,,.,,, /ee thee an( othe financial
!atte that /as #iven b( (ouO
C*. None, siA /hen /e /ent to Manila, /e shouldeed ou eBpenses.
CN. <hen did (ou #o to ManilaO
C*. 8ul( "%, "11+, si.
CN. <hat /as the pupose /h( (ou /ent theeO
11
C*. 9o !edical pupose, accodin# to he, si.
CN. *nd /ho /as /ith (ouO
C*. The accused, si.
CN. *side fo! (ou and the accused, /ee thee an( othe pesonsO
C*. <e /ee acco!panied b( !( co6co!plainants, si, aside fo! the accused.C
&
Testi!on( of *n#el(n Ma#pa(o 6
CCODRT0
CN. Do (ou 7no/ the accusedO
C*. ;es, ;ou 5ono.
CN. Point to he no/.
C*. SheKs the one, si. ><itness pointin# to a peson /ho! /hen as7ed of he na!e
ans/eed Do!in#a 9otuna ( Coales.?
CN. 5o/ did (ou co!e to 7no/ heO
C*. I ca!e to 7no/ he duin# the se!ina of Tuppe/ae, ;ou 5ono.
C9ISC*' M*C*R*I=0
CN. <h( did (ou have to attend this se!ina in the sellin# of Tuppe/aeO
C*. *s an additional business, si.
CN. Could (ou please tell us, /hee this se!ina F/asG bein# held at that ti!eO
C*. *t $u#os St., Cabanatuan Cit(, si.
CN. *nd /hen did (ou !eet the accused fo the fist ti!eO
C*. *t the se!ina in Tuppe/ae, si.
CN. Could (ou please tell us /hat tanspied duin# the fist !eetin# /ith the
accusedO
C*. She intoduced heself to us, si.
CN. *fte/ads, /hat happened neBtO
C*. She convesed /ith us and as7ed if /e /antFedG to /o7 outside the Philippines,
si.
CN. *nd /hat /as (ou esponse to the offe of the accusedO
C*. I said I F/asG /illin# because I alead( have a passpot, si.
CN. *side fo! that paticula 3uestion, /hat othe !attes that (ou and the accused
tal7ed FaboutGO
C*. She as7ed !e if I FhadG P&,-,,.,, fo the pocessin# of necessa( papes, si.
CN. *nd /hat /as (ou esponse to this 3uestionO
C*. I said I /ill aise FtheG !one(, si.
CN. F<eeG (ou able to aise FtheG !one(O
C*. ;es, si.
CN. <hen /as the appointed ti!e that (ou F/ouldG have to hand o #ive the !one(
to the accusedO
C*. 8ul( ), "11+, si.
CN. *nd /ee (ou able to actuall( #ive the !one(, the P&,-,,.,,O
C*. ;es, si.
CN. <as thee a eceipt of this paticula pa(!entO
C*. None, si.
CN. Could (ou please tell us /h( thee /as no eceipt fo this paticula pa(!entO
12
C*. $ecause I tusted he, si.
CN. *nd afte the pa(!ent of P&,-,,.,, /hat happened neBtO
C*. She bou#ht us to Manila fo !edical puposes, si.
CN. *nd /hat happened theeafteO
C*. I /as not able to #et the esult of the !edical eBa!ination, si.
CN. $( the /a(, /hat count( /as !entioned to (ou b( the accused /hee (ou /ee
#oin# to /o7O
C*. Tai/an, si.
CN. *nd /ee (ou able to #o to Tai/anO
C*. No, si.
CN. Could (ou please tell us /h( thee /as a failue in #oin# to Tai/anO
C*. *fte the !edical eBa!ination, she neve sho/ed heself, si.C
)
Testi!on( of Nenita *ndasan 6
CN. Do (ou 7no/ a cetain Do!in#a 9otuna ( CoalesO
C*. ;es, si.
CN. In /hat capacit( /ee (ou able to 7no/ this Do!in#a 9otunaO
C*. Duin# the se!ina of Tuppe/ae, si.
CN. *nd /hat is this se!ina all aboutO
C*. *bout sellin# Tuppe/ae poducts, si.
CN. *nd /hee /as this se!ina of Tuppe/ae heldO
C*. *t $u#os *venue, Cabanatuan Cit(, si.
CN. Do (ou 7no/ /ho F/asG the one conductin# this se!inaO
C*. No, si.
CN. <h( did (ou attend this paticula se!ina of Tuppe/ae poductsO
C*. $ecause I /as invited, si.
CN. 5o/ !an( pesons attended that se!inaO
C*. I cannot ecall ho/ !an( pesons thee /ee, si.
CN. <hen /as this se!ina heldO
C*. In the !onth of 8une, "11+, si.
CN. 8une of /hat (eaO
C*. "11+, si.
CN. ;ou !entioned a/hile a#o that it /as duin# the se!ina of Tuppe/ae
poducts that (ou /ee able to !eet Do!in#a 9otuna, /ill (ou please tell us /hat
tanspied duin# that paticula !eetin#O
C*. <e FhadG convesation and then she as7ed us if /e /anted to #o aboad, si.
CN. <ho /as the one F/hoG as7ed (ou thatO
C*. The accused Do!in#a 9otuna, si.
CN. *nd /hat /as (ou paticula esponseO
C*. I said to he P(es,K si, because I /antFedG to have a 4ob.
CN. <ee (ou the onl( one F/hoG /as pesent at the se!ina of Tuppe/ae that
/as offeed this 4obO
C*. *lso !( co6co!plainants, si.
CN. <hat happened afte/ads, afte (ou told he that (ou /ee inteested in
/o7in# aboadO
13
C*. <e set the date in ode to fiB ou papes, si.
CN. $( the /a(, /ee those the onl( !attes told to (ou b( the accused at that point
in ti!eO
C*. She also told us to pepae !one( needed fo that, si.
CN. *nd ho/ !uch /ould that !one( be to be pepaed b( (ouO
C*. P&,-,,.,,, si.
CN. *nd did she tell (ou /hat this P&,-,,.,, is all aboutO
C*. 9o pocessin# of papes needed, si.
CN. *nd /hen /as the ti!e that (ou had to actuall( pa( o tende this P&,-,,.,,O
C*. In 8ul(, "11+, si.
CN. <ee (ou able to co!pl( /ith this paticula e3uie!entO
C*. ;es, si.
CN. *nd /hen did (ou actuall( co!pl( /ith this e3uie!entO
C*. On 8ul( ), "11+, si.
CN. To /ho! did (ou pesonall( tende this P&,-,,.,,O
C*. In the house of Ms. =anot, si.
CN. *nd /hee is the house of this Ms. =anotO
C*. *t Macatbon#, Cabanatuan Cit(, si.
CN. $( the /a(, /ho is this Ms. =anotO
C*. She is the one headin# us, si,
CN. Do (ou have 7no/led#e /hethe this Ms. =anot F/asG also inteested in
/o7in# aboadO
C*. ;es, si.
CN. 5o/ !an( /ee (ou /ho /ee pesent /hen (ou actuall( tendeed the
P&,-,,.,,O
C*. <e /ee siB >)?, si.
CN. Do (ou 7no/ the na!es of the othesO
C*. ;es, si.
CN. <ill (ou please tell us the na!es of those othe pesons /ho /ee pesent
/hen (ou actuall( tende the P&,-,,.,, to the accusedO
C*. Rebecca de 'eon, *nnie Nu3ue, Nenita *ndasan, *n#el(n Ma#pa(o, 'ina
=anot and Ed#ado Salvado, si.
CN. *t that point in ti!e afte (ou had #iven the a!ount of P&,-,,.,, to the
accused, /as thee an official eceipt that /as issued o #iven to (ou b( the accusedO
C*. None, si.
CN. Do (ou 7no/ of an( eason /h( thee /as no eceiptO
C*. $ecause /e tusted he, si, because /e /ee baio!ates.
CN. *t that point in ti!e that (ou actuall( handed the P&,-,,.,,, /hee /as
Do!in#a 9otunaO
C*. She /as pesent, si.
CN. Did she tell (ou an(thin# befoe and afte the #ivin# of this P&,-,,.,,O
C*. She said that /e /ill be #oin# to Manila to pocess ou papes and passpot and
/e /ill have a !edical eBa!ination, si.C
2
The naation !ade b( the co!plainin# /itnesses does appea to be stai#htfo/ad, cedible and
convincin#, and thee scacel( is an( eason fo i#noin# the tial cout in its evaluation of thei
cedibilit(. Indeed, the tial cout has additionall( obseved0
14
CB B B. Thee is no sho/in# that an( of the co!plainants had ill6!otives a#ainst accused
Do!in#a 9otuna othe than to bin# he to the ba of 4ustice. 9uthe!oe, appellant /as
a stan#e to pivate co!plainants befoe the ecuit!ent. It is conta( to hu!an natue
and eBpeience fo pesons to conspie and accuse a stan#e of such a seious ci!e
li7e this that /ould ta7e the latteKs libet( and send hi! o he to pison. *#ainst the
posecutionKs ove/hel!in# evidence, accused could onl( offe a bae denial and an
obviousl( concocted sto(.C
Doctinall(, the assess!ent !ade on testi!onial evidence b( the tial 4ud#e is accoded the hi#hest
espect fo it is he /ho has the distinct oppotunit( to diectl( peceive the de!eano of /itnesses
and pesonall( ascetain thei eliabilit(. The ule has been said that a peson cha#ed /ith ille#al
ecuit!ent !a( be convicted on the sten#th of the testi!on( of the co!plainants, if found to be
cedible and convincin#, and that the absence of eceipts to evidence pa(!ent to the ecuite
/ould not /aant an ac3uittal, a eceipt not bein# fatal to the posecution@s cause.
+
The petinent povisions of Republic *ct No. +,-. state0
CSEC. ). Definition. M 9o puposes of this act, ille#al ecuit!ent shall !ean an( act of
canvassin#, enlistin#, contactin#, tanspotin#, utiliEin#, hiin#, o pocuin# /o7es and
includes efein#, contact of sevices, po!isin# o advetisin# fo e!plo(!ent aboad,
/hethe fo pofit o not, /hen undeta7en b( a non6license o non6holde of authoit(
conte!plated unde *ticle "%>f? of Pesidential Decee No. --., as a!ended, othe/ise
7no/n as the 'abo Code of the Philippines0 Povided, that an( such non6licensee o
non6holde /ho, in an( !anne, offes o po!ises fo a fee e!plo(!ent aboad to t/o
o !oe pesons shall be dee!ed so en#a#ed.
CB B B B B B B B B.
CIlle#al ecuit!ent is dee!ed co!!itted b( a s(ndicate if caied out b( a #oup of thee
>%? o !oe pesons conspiin# o confedeatin# /ith one anothe. It is dee!ed
co!!itted in la#e scale if co!!itted a#ainst thee >%? o !oe pesons individuall( o as
a #oup.
CSec. 2. Penalties. M
C>a? *n( peson found #uilt( of ille#al ecuit!ent shall suffe the penalt( of i!pison!ent
of not less than siB >)? (eas and one >"? da( but not !oe than t/elve >".? (eas and a
fine of not less than T/o hunded thousand pesos >P.,,,,,,.,,? no !oe than 9ive
hunded thousand pesos >P&,,,,,,.,,?.
C>b? The penalt( of life i!pison!ent and a fine of not less than 9ive hunded thousand
pesos >P&,,,,,,.,,? no !oe than One !illion pesos >P",,,,,,,,.,,? shall be i!posed
if ille#al ecuit!ent constitutes econo!ic sabota#e as defined heein.
CPovided, ho/eve, That the !aBi!u! penalt( shall be i!posed if the peson ille#all(
ecuited is less than ei#hteen >"+? (eas of a#e o co!!itted b( a non6licensee o non6
holde of authoit(.C
This Cout finds the info!ation /hich has cha#ed appellant /ith the offense of Ille#al Recuit!ent
in 'a#e Scale, defined and penaliEed in Republic *ct No. +,-., to be sufficient in fo! and
substance. <hile the info!ation cited Section ), paa#aph >!?, of Republic *ct No. +,-., its
factual ave!ents, ho/eve, ae sufficient to constitute the ci!e of Ille#al Recuit!ent in 'a#e
Scale unde the afoe3uoted povisions of the la/. It is not the specific desi#nation of the offense in
the info!ation that contols but it is the alle#ations theein contained diectl( appisin# the
accused of the natue and cause of the accusation a#ainst hi! that !atte.
1
The e3uisites
constitutin# the offense of Ille#al Recuit!ent in 'a#e Scale have sufficientl( been poven b( the
posecution.First, appellant, undeniabl(, has not been dul( licensed to en#a#e in ecuit!ent
activitiesA second, she has en#a#ed in ille#al ecuit!ent activities, offein# pivate co!plainants
e!plo(!ent aboad fo a feeA and third, she has co!!itted the 3uestioned ille#al ecuit!ent
activities a#ainst thee o !oe pesons. Ille#al ecuit!ent in la#e scale >/hen co!!itted a#ainst
thee o !oe pesons?, li7e ille#al ecuit!ent co!!itted b( a s(ndicate >/hen caied out b( a
#oup of thee o !oe pesons?, /ould be dee!ed constitutive of econo!ic sabota#e
",
ca(in# a
penalt(, unde section 2, paa#aph >b?, of Republic *ct +,-., of life i!pison!ent and a fine of not
less than five hunded thousand >P&,,,,,,.,,? pesos no !oe than one !illion >P",,,,,,,,.,,?
pesos. The sentence i!posed b( the tial cout thus accods /ith the penalt( pescibed b( la/.
* /od in passin#. No t/o cases ae eBactl( ali7eA al!ost invaiabl(, suoundin# cicu!stances
va( fo! case to case. It is this ealit( that !ust have co!pelled the adoption b( the Revised
Penal Code of the sche!e of #aduated penalties povidin#, coespondin#l(, fo the
cicu!stances that affect ci!inal liabilit(. The s(ste! allo/s the 4ud#e to have a #ood latitude in
the sentencin# pocess. Indeed, in othe 4uisdictions, a bifucated poceedin# is pescibed in
ode to help !a7e cetain that the penalt( is co!!ensuate to the /on# done. Dnde this
pocedue, the #uilt and the innocence of the accused is fist dete!ined and then, afte a vedict of
plea o #uilt, a pe6sentence heain# is conducted /hee the 4ud#e o a 4u( /ould hea a#u!ent
and eceive additional evidence on such !attes as the natue of the offense, !anne of its
co!!ission, the !ilieu of ti!e and place, as /ell as the education, eli#ion, ph(sical and !ental
state of the accused, alon# /ith still othe conditions o cicu!stances, that !a( find elevance in
eithe !iti#atin# o a##avatin# the punish!ent to be !eted,
""
all calculated to enhance a fai
4ud#!ent. Statuto( povisions fo a sin#le penalt(, li7e those pescibed in Republic *ct No. +,-.,
vituall( i#noe these safe#uads that help obviate the dan#e of i!posin# eithe too #eat o too
little a punish!ent fo the offense.
It is in the above li#ht and #iven the factual cicu!stances of the case at ba, that Con#ess !i#ht
see it fit to evisit Republic *ct No. +,-. to/ads adoptin# the povisions of the Revised Penal
Code on penalties, includin# its taditional no!enclatues, that could pave the /a( fo the pope
appeciation of the vaious cicu!stances lon# tested that affect ci!inal liabilit(. Mean/hile, the
Cout espectfull( eco!!ends to the Pesident of the Philippines a possible co!!utation of
sentence.
;HEREFORE, the appealed decision of the Re#ional Tial Cout, Cabanatuan Cit(, in Ci!inal
Case No. +&+1 fo Ille#al Recuit!ent in 'a#e Scale a#ainst appellant Do!in#a Coales
is !FFRME&.
15
'et copies of this decision be fo/aded to the Office of the Pesident and to the Con#ess of the
Philippines.
SO OR&ERE&.
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
16
SECOND DIVISION
G.R. No. 124433 February 5, 2004
PEOPLE OF THE PHLPPNES, appellee
vs.
FLOR GUTERRE= " TMO&, appellant.
D E C I S I O N
T1NG!, J.:
In its decision dated .. Mach "11), the Re#ional Tial Cout >RTC? of Pasa( Cit(, $anch
",+
"
found accused 9lo =utieeE y Ti!od #uilt( be(ond easonable doubt of Ille#al Recuit!ent
in 'a#e Scale and sentenced he to suffe the penalt( of life i!pison!ent and to pa( a fine of
P",,,,,,.,,.
The Information in Ci!inal Case No. 1&6)21) eads as follo/s0
That fo! the !onths of *pil to *u#ust "11- in Pasa( Cit(, Philippines, and /ithin the 4uisdiction
of this 5onoable Cout, accused 9'OR =DTIERREL ; TIMOD conspiin# and confedeatin# /ith
CECI'I* $*DTIST*, EST5ER =*MI'DE, 'IND* R*$*INO and M*RI';N =*RCI* >/hose
pesent /heeabouts ae un7no/n? and !utuall( helpin# one anothe, actin# in co!!on accod,
did then and thee, /illfull(, unla/full( and feloniousl(, en#a#e in ecuit!ent activities fo oveseas
4ob place!ent and actuall( contact, enlist and ecuit EVE';N V. R*MOS, ROSEM*RIE I.
TD=*DE, =ENEROS* =. *SDNCION and ROS*';N $. SDM*;O as do!estic helpes in Dubai,
Dnited *ab E!iates, fo a fee of vaious a!ounts an#in# fo! P",,,,,.,, to P"&,,,,.,, each,
/ithout fist obtainin# the e3uied license and:o authoit( fo! the Philippine Oveseas
E!plo(!ent *d!inistation >POE*?.
CONTR*R; TO '*<.
.
*ai#ned on *pil .-, "11&, the accused enteed a plea of not #uilt(. The vesion of the
posecution is as follo/s0
On *pil "+, "11-, Rose!aie Tu#ade /ent to the house of one Celia $autista, a Cecuite6a#entC
of the accused, at $#(. $ulala, Vi#an, Ilocos Su.
%
Celia told Rose!aie that she had to sub!it the
follo/in# e3uie!ents fo he application to /o7 in Dubai as a do!estic helpe0 P-,,,,.,, as
place!ent fee, P",.,,.,, fo passpot, P+&,.,, fo C!edical,C siB >)? .B. pictues and he oi#inal
bith cetificate.
-
The neBt da(, Rose!aie, to#ethe /ith Cecuite6a#entC Celia $autista and fello/ applicant Evel(n
Ra!os, taveled to Manila to the house of one Esthe =a!ilde, anothe of the accused@s Cecuite6
a#ents.C
&
Thee, Rose!aie and Evel(n filled out thei bio6data fo!s. The t/o then unde/ent a
!edical eBa!ination befoe havin# thei /hole6bod( pictue ta7en. Esthe told the! that the(
/ould 7no/ the esults of thei application fo! Celia.
)
T/o /ee7s late, Celia told Rose!aie that he application fo Dubai /as alead( appoved and
that she /ill be eceivin# Q"&,.,,6dollas pe !onth. 9o the fist thee >%? !onths, ho/eve, thee
/ill be sala( deductions.
2
On *u#ust .2, "11-, Rose!aie and Evel(n, alon# /ith Celia and Esthe, /ent to the accused@s
office at Saifudin Manpo/e and =eneal Sevices at EDS* EBtension, Pasa( Cit(.
+
The accused
told Rose!aie that she needed to pa( P.,,,,.,, !oe.
1
The accused said she had eceived all of
Rose!aie@s docu!ents and the !one( paid to Celia.
",
Tustin# in Celia, Rose!aie did not
de!and a eceipt fo! the accused.
On *u#ust %", "11-, the accused as7ed Rose!aie to #ive P&,,.,, as te!inal fee fo he
depatue in a /ee7@s ti!e.
""
Rose!aie paid the a!ount, as evidenced b( a eceipt.
".
The
scheduled depatue did not push thou#h, ho/eve. Instead, Rose!aie /as told that she /as to
leave on Septe!be "&, "11-, but, a#ain, this did not !ateialiEe.
"%
* seies of postpone!ents
follo/ed until finall( she /as told that she /ould be leavin# befoe Chist!as "11-. *l!ost
pedictabl(, he tip neve ca!e to pass.
"-
Pivate co!plainant Evel(n Ra!os /as /ith Rose!aie /hen she /ent to Celia $autista@s house
on *pil "1, "11-.
"&
Celia told Evel(n that fo P-,,,,.,, she could leave fo Dubai to /o7 as a
do!estic helpe.
")
'i7e Rose!aie, Evel(n #ave all he docu!ents and paid the fees to Celia, /ho
in tun handed the! to Esthe =a!ilde in Tondo.
"2
On 8une ",, "11-, Ra!os #ave $autista
P+,,,,.,,, /hich /as also tuned ove to =a!ilde.
"+
On *u#ust .., "11-, Celia told Evel(n that she onl( had to /ait one !oe /ee7 befoe she left fo
Dubai.
"1
On *u#ust .2, "11-, Esthe bou#ht Evel(n to the accused@s office,
.,
/hee the accused
as7ed fo an additional P.,,,,.,, as pocessin# fee fo the Philippine Oveseas E!plo(!ent
*#enc( >POE*?.
."
Evel(n paid the a!ount on *u#ust %", "11-,
..
includin# a te!inal fee of
P&,,.,,. 'i7e Rose!aie, Evel(n /as not able to leave the count( despite the accused@s
po!ises.
*nothe co!plainant, Rosal(n D. Su!a(o, also applied fo oveseas 4ob place!ent as a do!estic
helpe in Dubai. 5e eBpeience /as !oe a#oniEin#. In he case, it /as one Mail(n =acia /ho
assisted Rosal(n.
.%
She sub!itted a cop( of he bith cetificate, siB >)? copies of . B . pictues,
t/o >.? copies of he /hole6bod( pictue, passpot, and !edical cetificate.
.-
Mail(n also as7ed
Rosal(n to pa(0 a pocessin# fee of P2,&,,.,,, P.,).,.,, as full taB, P&,,.,, as te!inal fee, and
P%,,,,.,, as sevice cha#e.
.&
*ll the docu!ents and !one( #iven b( Rosal(n to Mail(n /ee subse3uentl( e!itted to the
accused at he office on 8une .+, "11-.
.)
The accused told Rosal(n that she /ould be leavin#
an(ti!e, but afte thee !onths, Rosal(n@s depatue did not push thou#h.
.2
Despite the setbac7, the accused 7ept assuin# Rosal(n that she /ould still be able to leave.
.+
One
ti!e, the accused bou#ht he to the aipot and instucted he to hide in the aipot
17
estoo!.
.1
*fte fifteen !inutes, the accused told he that the( had to leave the aipot
because mahigpit sa immigration.
%,
On anothe occasion, the accused diected Rosal(n to hide
inside the Ha(u!an##i Restauant fo fifteen >"&? !inutes.
%"
Nothin# happened afte, thou#h, and
the( /ent ho!e.
On Nove!be "-, "11-, Rosal(n /as a#ain at the aipot.
%.
The accused /aned he, thou#h, that
if the I!!i#ation Office insisted on seein# he papes, it /ould be bette fo he to leave.
%%
*s
diected, she left the aipot /hen she /as as7ed to poduce he docu!ents.
%-
EBaspeated, Rosal(n /ent to the accused@s house and de!anded the etun of he !one( and
he docu!ents. Instead of accedin# to Rosal(n@s de!ands, the accused shouted at he and
/aned he that she had to pa( a cancellation fee of Q%,,.,,.
%&
Rosal(n /as not able to #ive the
a!ount so she sta(ed /ith the accused, /ho assued he that she /ould still be able to leave the
count( and that she /ould eceive a !onthl( sala( of Q"&, to Q.,,.
%)
These po!ises /ee neve
fulfilled. Rosal(n thus /ent to the POE*, /hee POE* *d!inistato 9elicisi!o 8oson, 8. info!ed
he that the accused did not have a license to ecuit.
%2
=eneosa *suncion suffeed the sa!e fate as he co6applicants. In *u#ust "11-, she applied fo
oveseas 4ob place!ent /ith one 'inda Rabaino.
%+
=eneosa sub!itted he passpot, !edical
cetificate, cleaance fo! the National $ueau of Investi#ation >N$I?, bith cetificate, bio6data and
pictues.
%1
She also paid P"&,,,,.,, in t/o install!ents on Septe!be 1 and "., "11-,
-,
/hich
pa(!ents /ee not eceipted.
'inda told =eneosa she /ould be leavin# on Septe!be "%, "11-.
-"
5o/eve, she /as not able to
leave because, accodin# to 'inda, at .&, =eneosa /as unde6a#ed.
-.
'inda then efeed =eneosa to the accused in the latte@s office, /hee 'inda tuned ove
=eneosa@s docu!ents as /ell as the P"&,,,, ,, to the accused.
-%
The accused po!ised that
'inda /ould be able to leave, but he depatue neve too7 place.
--
<hen =eneosa de!anded the
etun of he !one( and he docu!ents, the accused told he that she had to pa( a cancellation
fee of Q),,.,,.
-&
Stunned, 'inda 4ust opted to a/ait the futhe outco!e of he application.
-)
5e
/aitin# /as all fo nau#ht.
<ith the po!ises of 4obs aboad unfulfilled, co!plainants decided to veif( if the accused /as a
licensed ecuite. Dpon leanin# fo! the POE* that she /as not so licensed,
-2
the( poceeded to
the Philippine *nti6Ci!e Co!!ission >P*CC? to eBecute thei espective affidavits.
-+
SPO- 8ohnn( Ma3ueta investi#ated the /o!en@s co!plaint. 5e confi!ed /ith the POE* that the
accused /as not licensed o authoiEed to ecuit oveseas contact /o7es.
-1
The fou
co!plainants also info!ed hi! that the accused /anted to !eet /ith the #oup on 8anua( .),
"11&.
&,
SPO- Ma3ueta thus had thei !one(, totalin# P.,,,,.,,,
&"
!a7ed at the National $ueau
of Investi#ation >N$I? 9oensic Section fo thei entap!ent opeation.
&.
On 8anua( .), "11&, the accused !et /ith the fou co!plainants at 8ollibee, Co!!on/ealth
*venue, NueEon Cit(. *s soon as she finished countin# the !a7ed !one( and /appin# it in
8ollibee nap7ins, the accused /as aested.
&%
In he defense, the accused clai!ed that as an Ce!plo(eeC of a dul( licensed a#enc( /ho /as
tas7ed to ecuit and offe 4ob place!ents aboad, she could not be held liable fo ille#al
ecuit!ent.
&-
She ad!itted that she had no authoit( to ecuit in he pesonal capacit(,
&&
but that
he authoit( e!anated fo! a Special Po/e of *ttone( >SP*? and a Cetification issued b( a
licensed a#enc(.
&)
*t the ti!e co!plainants applied fo oveseas e!plo(!ent, the accused /as Ce!plo(edC as a
Ma7etin# Diectess of Saifudin Manpo/e and =eneal Sevices,
&2
a dul( licensed a#enc( /ith
'icense No. OS61"6'$6)""1%6N' issued b( the Depat!ent of 'abo and E!plo(!ent.
&+
* Special
Po/e of *ttone( >SP*? fo! Saifudin, dated Ma( ", "11-,
&1
states that she /as authoiEed0
". To ne#otiate, ente into business tansactions fo !anpo/e suppl( paticulal( in the
Middle East countiesA
.. 9o and in behalf of S*RI9DDIN, M*NPO<ER *ND =ENER*' SERVICES usin# as
#uidelines and te!s and conditions b( both paties to secue0
>a? Veified 8ob OdesA
>b? Special Po/e of *ttone(A
>c? Cop( of Cetified Cetificate of $usiness Re#istationA
>d? VIS* *uthoiEation and:o NOC VIS*.
....
),
* Cetification
)"
dated 9ebua( %, "11&, issued b( the sa!e a#enc(, also states that0 CMRS. 9'OR
T. =DTIERREL /as >sic? e!plo(ed as OVERSE*S M*RHETIN= DIRECTRESS of S*RI9DDIN
M*NPO<ER *ND =ENER*' SERVICES, effective Ma( "11-, up to the pesentC
).
The defense also sub!itted seveal docu!ents to pove co!pliance /ith the e3uie!ents of the
a#enc( fo he to assu!e he duties unde the SP*. These include eceipts
)%
fo a cash bond in the
a!ount of P%,,,,,.,, that she paid in seveal install!ents. She also paid a o(alt( fee of
P-,,,,.,,
)-
and an office ental fee of P%,,,,.,,.
)&
The accused /as also e3uied b( the a#enc( to sub!it a !onthl( epot fo 8une "11-, as
evidenced b( a Me!oandu! si#ned b( the =eneal Mana#e, 'eah Salud.
))
She sub!itted said
!onthl( epot, indeed, seveal !onthl( epots.
)2
* docu!ent callin# on all Ma7etin#
Diectesses:Diectos to attend a !eetin# on 8ul( +, "11-, /as also pesented.
)+
The accused did not eceive an( sala( o allo/ances fo! Saifudin but eceived co!!issions
fo! the a#enc(@s pincipals, the e!plo(es fo! foei#n counties >ten in the Middle East and t/o
18
in Sin#apoe? at the ate of D.S. Q",,.,, pe peson.
)1
9o! he co!!issions, she paid ent and
o(alt( to Saifudin.
2,
Ed/in Cistobal, POE* 'abo E!plo(!ent Office, confi!ed that Saifudin /as dul( licensed to
en#a#e in ecuit!ent activities.
2"
5e pesented a Cetification issued b( Ma. Salo!e S. MendoEa,
Mana#e of the 'icensin# $anch
2.
and containin# the list of offices and staff of Saifudin. On said
list appea the na!es C9lona =utieeEC and C9lo =utieeE,C
2%
appaentl(, one and the sa!e
peson.
2-
In the sa!e Cetification, appeas the follo/in#0
It is futhe cetified that the said a#enc( evo7ed the appoint!ent of Ms. 9lo =utieeE as
Oveseas M7t#. Diecto:Mana#e in a lette dated Dec. "&, "11&, althou#h this Office has not
eceived no ac7no/led#ed the epesentation of Ms. =utieeE.
2&
Cistobal eBplained that the POE*, CNeve had a lette fo! Saifudin e#istein# o authoiEin# 9lo
=utieeE... athe, F/hatG /e eceived F/as aG evocation of he appoint!ent.C
2)
5e also evealed
that the na!e of the accused does not appea in the ecods of the POE* as bein# e!plo(ed b(
the a#enc( fo! the assu!ption of its license on 8une "", "11%, up to its te!ination on 8une "",
"11&.
22
The defense li7e/ise alle#ed that co!plainants Rose!aie Tu#ade and Evel(n Ra!os eBecuted
*ffidavits of Desistance dated Ma( "., "11&,
2+
statin# that the accused had etuned to the! the
a!ounts the( paid he and that the co!plaint /as a esult of a !isundestandin#.
On Mach .., "11), the tial cout endeed its !ecision findin# the accused #uilt( be(ond
easonable doubt of Ille#al Recuit!ent in 'a#e Scale0
<5ERE9ORE, afte evaluatin# all the foe#oin#, the accused 9'OR =DTIERREL is heeb( found
#uilt( be(ond easonable doubt of Ille#al Recuit!ent in 'a#e Scale, and 4ud#!ent is heeb(
endeed as follo/s0
>a? Convictin# the accused of Ille#al Recuit!ent in 'a#e Scale and sentencin# he to
suffe the penalt( of life i!pison!ent and pa(!ent of P",,,,,,.,, fineA
>b? No ei!buse!ent to co!plainants is needed since thei !one( have alead( been
etunedA
>c? *ccused to pa( !oal da!a#es in the a!ount of P&,,,,,.,, to each co!plainantA
>d? *ccused to pa( eBe!pla( da!a#es in the a!ount of P&,,,,,.,, to each
co!plainantA and
>e? To pa( the costs of the suit.
21
*ccused 9lo =utieeE filed the pesent appeal see7in# the evesal of he conviction.
Ille#al ecuit!ent is co!!itted /hen t/o ele!ents concu, na!el(0 >"? the offende has no valid
license o authoit( e3uied b( la/ to enable one to la/full( en#a#e in ecuit!ent and place!ent
of /o7esA and >.? he undeta7es eithe an( activit( /ithin the !eanin# of Cecuit!ent and
place!entC defined unde *t. "%>b?, o an( of the pohibited pactices enu!eated unde *t. %- of
the 'abo Code.
+,
*t. "%>b? of the 'abo Code defines Cecuit!ent and place!entC as Can( act of
canvassin#, enlistin#, contactin#, tanspotin#, utiliEin#, hiin#, o pocuin# /o7es, and includes
efeals, contact sevices, po!isin# o advetisin# fo e!plo(!ent, locall( o aboad, /hethe fo
pofit o not0 Povided, That an( peson o entit( /hich, in an( !anne, offes o po!ises fo a fee
e!plo(!ent to t/o o !oe pesons, shall be dee!ed en#a#ed in ecuit!ent and place!ent.C
+"
The ci!e beco!es Ille#al Recuit!ent in 'a#e Scale /hen the t/o ele!ents concu, /ith the
addition of a thid ele!ent0 the ecuite co!!itted the sa!e a#ainst thee o !oe pesons,
individuall( o as a #oup.
+.
*ppellant a#ues that as a epesentative of a dul( licensed ecuit!ent a#enc(, she cannot be
held #uilt( of Ille#al Recuit!ent in 'a#e Scale. <e disa#ee.
Section "", Rule II, $oo7 II of the Rules and Re#ulations =ovenin# Oveseas E!plo(!ent
e3uies the pio appoval of the POE* of the appoint!ent of epesentatives o a#ents0
Section "". !22o+$-.e$- o0 Re2re/e$-a-+>e/. Eve( appoint!ent of epesentatives o a#ents of
licensed a#enc( shall be sub4ect to pio appoval o authoit( of the *d!inistation.
The appoval !a( be issued upon sub!ission of o co!pliance /ith the follo/in# e3uie!ents0
a. Poposed appoint!ent o Special Po/e of *ttone(A
b. Cleaances of the poposed epesentative o a#ent fo! N$IA
c. * s/on o veified state!ent b( the desi#natin# o appointin# peson o co!pan(
assu!in# full esponsibilit( fo all the acts of the a#ent o epesentative done in
connection /ith the ecuit!ent and place!ent of /o7es.
*ppoval b( the *d!inistation of the appoint!ent o desi#nation does not authoiEe the a#ent o
epesentative to establish a banch o eBtension office of the licensed a#enc( epesented.
*n( evocation o a!end!ent in the appoint!ent should be co!!unicated to the ad!inistation.
Othe/ise, the desi#nation o appoint!ent shall be dee!ed as not evo7ed o a!ended.
Section ", Rule R of the sa!e $oo7, in tun, povides that Cecuit!ent and place!ent activities of
a#ents o epesentatives appointed b( a licensee, /hose appoint!ents /ee not authoiEed b( the
*d!inistation shall li7e/ise constitute ille#al ecuit!ent.C
19
The Cetification fo! the POE* that it Chas not eceived no ac7no/led#ed the epesentation of
Ms. =utieeEC establishes that the appoint!ent of appellant b( Seafudin as a epesentative o
a#ent /as not authoiEed b( the POE*. It !a( be tue that the POE* eceived fo! Seafudin a
evocation of appellant@s appoint!ent, but still is of no conse3uence since Seafudin in the fist
place did not sub!it he appoint!ent to the POE*, and so the POE* has nothin# to appove.
*s found b( the tial cout
+%
the evidence on ecod, notabl( appellant@s o/n vesion, indicates that
she /as unnin# he o/n labo ecuit!ent business.
*ppellant cannot escape liabilit( b( clai!in# that she /as not a/ae that befoe /o7in# fo he
e!plo(e in the ecuit!ent a#enc(, she should fist be e#isteed /ith the POE*.
+-
Ille#al
ecuit!ent in la#e scale is malum prohibitum" not malum in se.
+&
=ood faith is not a defense.
That appellant en#a#ed in ecuit!ent and place!ent is be(ond dispute. The co!plainin#
/itnesses cate#oicall( testified that the accused po!ised the! on seveal occasions that the(
/ould be leavin# fo /o7 aboad. *ppellant eceived co!plainants@ !one( and docu!ents, a fact
that the co!plainants the!selves /itnessed and /hich the accused ac7no/led#ed /hen she
etuned the sa!e to the! afte the filin# of the case a#ainst he. *ppellant even bou#ht
co!plainant Rosal(n Su!a(o to the aipot thee ti!es, aisin# he eBpectations, but leavin# he
han#in# in !id6ai. The accused even had the audacit( to de!and cancellation fees fo! the
co!plainants /hen the( as7ed fo a efund.
The *ffidavits of Desistance eBecuted b( t/o of the co!plainants deseve little /ei#ht. The Cout
attaches no pesuasive value to affidavits of desistance, especiall( /hen eBecuted as an
aftethou#ht. *s held in the case ofPeople v. #bina"
+)
Cit /ould be a dan#eous ule fo couts to
e4ect testi!onies sole!nl( ta7en befoe the couts of 4ustice si!pl( because the /itnesses /ho
had #iven the! late on chan#ed thei !ind fo one eason o anotheA fo such ule /ould !a7e
sole!n tials a !oc7e( and place the investi#ation of tuth at the !ec( of unscupulous
/itnesses.C
+2
*s appellant co!!itted ille#al ecuit!ent a#ainst thee o !oe pesons, she is liable fo Ille#al
Recuit!ent in 'a#e Scale.
<5ERE9ORE, the !ecision of the Re#ional Tial Cout, findin# appellant 9lo =utieeE y Ti!od
#uilt( be(ond easonable doubt of the ci!e of Ille#al Recuit!ent in 'a#e Scale and sentencin#
he to life i!pison!ent and to pa( a fine of P",,,,,,.,, is *99IRMED.
SO ORDERED.
20
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
SECOND DIVISION
G.R. No. 131713 May 25, 2004
THE E?ECUT#E SECRET!R", THE SECRET!R" OF (USTCE, THE SECRET!R" OF L!'OR
!N& EMPLO"MENT, !N& THE SECRET!R" OF FOREGN !FF!RS, O;;! PUNO,
!&MNSTR!TOR, a$% POE! !&MNSTR!TOR, petitiones,
vs.
THE HON. COURT OF !PPE!LS a$% !S!N RECRUTMENT COUNCL PHLPPNE
CH!PTER 6!RCO4PHL.8, NC., re2re/e$-+$7 +-/ .e.ber/) ;or1%,are Ser>+,e/
$-er$a-+o$a1e, $,., S-ea%0a/-
$-er$a-+o$a1 Re,ru+-.e$- Cor2ora-+o$, &ra7o$ $-er$a-+o$a1 Ma$2o@er Ser>+,e/
Cor2ora-+o$, #er%a$- Ma$2o@er Mob+1+Aa-+o$ Cor2ora-+o$, 're$- O>er/ea/ Per/o$$e1, $,.,
!RL Ma$2o@er Ser>+,e/, $,., &a*1A*e$ $-er$a-+o$a1 Ser>+,e/, $,., $-er@or1% P1a,e.e$-
Ce$-er, $,., LaBa/ Tao Co$-ra,- Ser>+,e/, L-%. Co., a$% SSC Mu1-+/er>+,e/, espondents.
D E C I S I O N
C!LLE(O, SR., J.:
In this petition fo evie/ on cetioai, the EBecutive Seceta( of the Pesident of the Philippines,
the Seceta( of 8ustice, the Seceta( of 9oei#n *ffais, the Seceta( of 'abo and E!plo(!ent,
the POE* *d!inistato and the O<<* *d!inistato, thou#h the Office of the Solicito =eneal,
assail the Decision
"
of the Cout of *ppeals in C*6=.R. SP No. %++"& affi!in# the Ode
.
of the
Re#ional Tial Cout of NueEon Cit( dated *u#ust .", "11& in Civil Case No. N61&6.--,", #antin#
the plea of the petitiones theein fo a /it of peli!ina( in4unction and of the /it of peli!ina(
in4unction issued b( the tial cout on *u#ust .-, "11&.
T*e !$-e,e%e$-/
Republic *ct No. +,-., othe/ise 7no/n as the Mi#ant <o7es and Oveseas 9ilipinos *ct of
"11&, too7 effect on 8ul( "&, "11&. The O!nibus Rules and Re#ulations I!ple!entin# the Mi#ant
<o7es and Oveseas 9ilipino *ct of "11& /as, theeafte, published in the *pil 2, "11) issue of
the Manila $ulletin. 5o/eve, even befoe the la/ too7 effect, the *sian Recuit!ent Council
Philippine Chapte, Inc. >*RCO6Phil.? filed, on 8ul( "2, "11&, a petition fo declaato( elief unde
Rule )% of the Rules of Cout /ith the Re#ional Tial Cout of NueEon Cit( to declae as
unconstitutional Section ., paa#aph >#?, Section ), paa#aphs >a? to >4?, >l? and >!?, Section 2,
paa#aphs >a? and >b?, and Sections 1 and ", of the la/, /ith a plea fo the issuance of a
te!poa( estainin# ode and:o /it of peli!ina( in4unction en4oinin# the espondents theein
fo! enfocin# the assailed povisions of the la/.
In a supple!ent to its petition, the *RCO6Phil. alle#ed that Rep. *ct No. +,-. /as self6eBecuto(
and that no i!ple!entin# ules /ee needed. It pa(ed that the cout issue a te!poa( estainin#
ode to en4oin the enfoce!ent of Section ), paa#aphs >a? to >!? on ille#al ecuit!ent, Section 2
on penalties fo ille#al ecuit!ent, and Section 1 on venue of ci!inal actions fo ille#al
ecuit!ents, viE0
Vie/ed in the li#ht of the foe#oin# discussions, thee appeas to be u#ent an
i!peative need fo this 5onoable Cout to !aintain the status 3uo b( en4oinin# the
i!ple!entation o effectivit( of the 3uestioned povisions of R* +,-., b( /a( of a
estainin# ode othe/ise, the !e!be ecuit!ent a#encies of the petitione /ill suffe
#ave o iepaable da!a#e o in4u(. <ith the effectivit( of R* +,-., a #eat !a4oit( of
the dul( licensed ecuit!ent a#encies have stopped o suspended thei opeations fo
fea of bein# posecuted unde the povisions of a la/ that ae un4ust and
unconstitutional. This 5onoable Cout !a( ta7e 4udicial notice of the fact that pocessin#
of deplo(!ent papes of oveseas /o7es fo the past /ee7s have co!e to a standstill
at the POE* and this has affected thousands of /o7es eve(da( 4ust because of the
enact!ent of R* +,-.. Indeed, this has fa eachin# effects not onl( to suvival of the
oveseas !anpo/e suppl( indust( and the active paticipatin# ecuit!ent a#encies,
the count(Ks econo!( /hich has suvived !ainl( due to the dolla e!ittances of the
oveseas /o7es but !oe i!potantl(, to the poo and the need( /ho ae in die need
of inco!e6#eneatin# 4obs /hich can onl( be obtained fo! aboad. The loss o in4u(
that the ecuit!ent a#encies /ill suffe /ill then be i!!easuable and iepaable. *s of
no/, even foei#n e!plo(es have alead( educed thei !anpo/e e3uie!ents fo!
the Philippines due to thei 7no/led#e that R* +,-. pe4udiced and advesel( affected
the local ecuit!ent a#encies.
%
On *u#ust ", "11&, the tial cout issued a te!poa( estainin# ode effective fo a peiod of onl(
t/ent( >.,? da(s theefo!.
*fte the petitiones filed thei co!!ent on the petition, the *RCO6Phil. filed an a!ended petition,
the a!end!ents consistin# in the inclusion in the caption theeof eleven >""? othe copoations
/hich it alle#ed /ee its !e!bes and /hich it epesented in the suit, and a plea fo a te!poa(
estainin# ode en4oinin# the espondents fo! enfocin# Section ) subsection >i?, Section )
subsection >7? and paa#aphs "& and ") theeof, Section +, Section ",, paa#aphs " and ., and
Sections "" and -, of Rep. *ct No. +,-..
The espondent *RCO6Phil. assailed Section .>#? and >i?, Section ) subsection >a? to >!?, Section
2>a? to >b?, and Section ", paa#aphs >"? and >.?, 3uoted as follo/s0
>#? T5E ST*TE RECO=NILES T5*T T5E D'TIM*TE PROTECTION TO *'' MI=R*NT
<ORHERS IS T5E POSSESSION O9 SHI''S. PDRSD*NT TO T5IS *ND *S SOON
*S PR*CTIC*$'E, T5E =OVERNMENT S5*'' DEP'O; *ND:OR *''O< T5E
DEP'O;MENT ON'; O9 SHI''ED 9I'IPINO <ORHERS.
-
Sec. . subsection >i, .nd pa.?
21
Nonetheless, the deplo(!ent of 9ilipino oveseas /o7es, /hethe land6based o sea6
based, b( local sevice contactos and !annin# a#ents e!plo(in# the! shall be
encoua#es >sic?. *ppopiate incentives !a( be eBtended to the!.
I
II. I''E=*' RECRDITMENT
SEC. ). Definition. M 9o puposes of this *ct, ille#al ecuit!ent shall !ean an( act of
canvassin#, enlistin#, contactin#, tanspotin#, utiliEin#, hiin#, o pocuin# /o7es and
includes efein#, contact sevices, po!isin# o advetisin# fo e!plo(!ent aboad,
/hethe fo pofit o not, /hen undeta7en b( a non6licensee o non6holde of authoit(
conte!plated unde *ticle "%>f? of Pesidential Decee No. --., as a!ended, othe/ise
7no/n as the 'abo Code of the Philippines0 Povided, That an( such non6licensee o
non6holde /ho, in an( !anne, offes o po!ises fo a fee e!plo(!ent aboad to t/o
o !oe pesons shall be dee!ed so en#a#ed. It shall, li7e/ise, include the follo/in#
acts, /hethe co!!itted b( an( peson, /hethe a non6licensee, non6holde, licensee o
holde of authoit(0
>a? To cha#e o accept diectl( o indiectl( an( a!ount #eate than that
specified in the schedule of allo/able fees pescibed b( the Seceta( of
'abo and E!plo(!ent, o to !a7e a /o7e pa( an( a!ount #eate than that
actuall( eceived b( hi! as a loan o advanceA
>b? To funish o publish an( false notice o info!ation o docu!ent in elation
to ecuit!ent o e!plo(!entA
>c? To #ive an( false notice, testi!on(, info!ation o docu!ent o co!!it an(
act of !isepesentation fo the pupose of secuin# a license o authoit(
unde the 'abo CodeA
>d? To induce o atte!pt to induce a /o7e alead( e!plo(ed to 3uit his
e!plo(!ent in ode to offe hi! anothe unless the tansfe is desi#ned to
libeate a /o7e fo! oppessive te!s and conditions of e!plo(!entA
>e? To influence o atte!pt to influence an( peson o entit( not to e!plo( an(
/o7e /ho has not applied fo e!plo(!ent thou#h his a#enc(A
>f? To en#a#e in the ecuit!ent o place!ent of /o7es in 4obs ha!ful to
public health o !oalit( o to the di#nit( of the Republic of the PhilippinesA
>#? To obstuct o atte!pt to obstuct inspection b( the Seceta( of 'abo and
E!plo(!ent o b( his dul( authoiEed epesentativeA
>h? To fail to sub!it epots on the status of e!plo(!ent, place!ent vacancies,
e!ittance of foei#n eBchan#e eanin#s, sepaation fo! 4obs, depatues and
such othe !attes o info!ation as !a( be e3uied b( the Seceta( of
'abo and E!plo(!entA
>i? To substitute o alte to the pe4udice of the /o7e, e!plo(!ent contacts
appoved and veified b( the Depat!ent of 'abo and E!plo(!ent fo! the
ti!e of actual si#nin# theeof b( the paties up to and includin# the peiod of
the eBpiation of the sa!e /ithout the appoval of the Depat!ent of 'abo
and E!plo(!entA
>4? 9o an office o a#ent of a ecuit!ent o place!ent a#enc( to beco!e an
office o !e!be of the $oad of an( copoation en#a#ed in tavel a#enc( o
to be en#a#ed diectl( o indiectl( in the !ana#e!ent of a tavel a#enc(A
>7? To /ithhold o den( tavel docu!ents fo! applicant /o7es befoe
depatue fo !oneta( o financial consideations othe than those authoiEed
unde the 'abo Code and its i!ple!entin# ules and e#ulationsA
>l? 9ailue to actuall( deplo( /ithout valid eason as dete!ined b( the
Depat!ent of 'abo and E!plo(!entA and
>!? 9ailue to ei!buse eBpenses incued b( the /o7e in connection /ith
his docu!entation and pocessin# fo puposes of deplo(!ent, in cases /hee
the deplo(!ent does not actuall( ta7e place /ithout the /o7eKs fault. Ille#al
ecuit!ent /hen co!!itted b( a s(ndicate o in la#e scale shall be
consideed an offense involvin# econo!ic sabota#e.
Ille#al ecuit!ent is dee!ed co!!itted b( a s(ndicate if caied out b( a #oup of thee
>%? o !oe pesons conspiin# o confedeatin# /ith one anothe. It is dee!ed
co!!itted in la#e scale if co!!itted a#ainst thee >%? o !oe pesons individuall( o as
a #oup.
The pesons ci!inall( liable fo the above offenses ae the pincipals, acco!plices and
accessoies. In case of 4uidical pesons, the offices havin# contol, !ana#e!ent o
diection of thei business shall be liable.
I
SEC. 2. Penalties. M
>a? *n( peson found #uilt( of ille#al ecuit!ent shall suffe the penalt( of i!pison!ent
of not less than siB >)? (eas and one >"? da( but not !oe than t/elve >".? (eas and a
fine of not less than t/o hunded thousand pesos >P.,,,,,,.,,? no !oe than five
hunded thousand pesos >P&,,,,,,.,,?.
22
>b? The penalt( of life i!pison!ent and a fine of not less than five hunded thousand
pesos >P&,,,,,,.,,? no !oe than one !illion pesos >P",,,,,,,,.,,? shall be i!posed
if ille#al ecuit!ent constitutes econo!ic sabota#e as defined heein.
Povided, ho/eve, That the !aBi!u! penalt( shall be i!posed if the peson ille#all(
ecuited is less than ei#hteen >"+? (eas of a#e o co!!itted b( a non6licensee o non6
holde of authoit(.
Sec. +.
Prohibition on $fficials and %mployees. M It shall be unla/ful fo an( official o e!plo(ee
of the Depat!ent of 'abo and E!plo(!ent, the Philippine Oveseas E!plo(!ent
*d!inistation >POE*?, o the Oveseas <o7es <elfae *d!inistation >O<<*?, o the
Depat!ent of 9oei#n *ffais, o othe #oven!ent a#encies involved in the
i!ple!entation of this *ct, o thei elatives /ithin the fouth civil de#ee of consan#uinit(
o affinit(, to en#a#e, diectl( o indiectl(, in the business of ecuitin# !i#ant
/o7es as defined in this *ct. The penalties povided in the i!!ediate pecedin#
paa#aph shall be i!posed upon the!. >undescoin# supplied?
I
Sec. ",, pas. " S ..
&oney Claims. M Not/ithstandin# an( povision of la/ to the conta(, the 'abo *bites
of the National 'abo Relations Co!!ission >N'RC? shall have the oi#inal and
eBclusive 4uisdiction to hea and decide,/ithin ninet( >1,? calenda da(s afte the filin#
of the co!plaint, the clai!s aisin# out of an e!plo(e6e!plo(ee elationship o b( vitue
of an( la/ o contact involvin# 9ilipino /o7es fo oveseas deplo(!ent includin#
clai!s fo actual, !oal, eBe!pla( and othe fo!s of da!a#es.
The liabilit( of the pincipal:e!plo(e and the ecuit!ent:place!ent a#enc( fo an( and
all clai!s unde this section shall be 4oint and seveal. This povision shall be
incopoated in the contact fo oveseas e!plo(!ent and shall be a condition pecedent
fo its appoval. The pefo!ance bond to be filed b( the ecuit!ent:place!ent a#enc(,
as povided b( la/, shall be ans/eable fo all !one( clai!s o da!a#es that !a( be
a/aded to the /o7es. If the ecuit!ent:place!ent a#enc( is a 4uidical bein#, the
copoate offices and diectos and patnes as the case !a( be, shall the!selves be
4ointl( and solidail( liable /ith the copoation o patneship fo the afoesaid clai!s and
da!a#es.
I
SEC. "". &andatory Periods for 'esolution of Illegal 'ecruitment Cases. M The
peli!ina( investi#ations of cases unde this *ct shall be te!inated /ithin a peiod of
thit( >%,? calenda da(s fo! the date of thei filin#. <hee the peli!ina( investi#ation
is conducted b( a posecution office and a pi!a facie case is established, the
coespondin# info!ation shall be filed in cout /ithin t/ent(6fou >.-? hous fo! the
te!ination of the investi#ation. If the peli!ina( investi#ation is conducted b( a 4ud#e
and a pi!a facie case is found to eBist, the coespondin# info!ation shall be filed b(
the pope posecution office /ithin fot(6ei#ht >-+? hous fo! the date of eceipt of the
ecods of the case.
The espondent aveed that the afoe3uoted povisions of Rep. *ct No. +,-. violate Section ",
*ticle III of the Constitution.
&
*ccodin# to the espondent, Section )>#? and >i? disci!inated
a#ainst uns7illed /o7es and thei fa!ilies and, as such, violated the e3ual potection clause, as
/ell as *ticle II, Section ".
)
and *ticle RV, Sections "
2
and %>%? of the Constitution.
+
*s the la/
encoua#ed the deplo(!ent of s7illed 9ilipino /o7es, onl( oveseas s7illed /o7es ae #anted
i#hts. The espondent stessed that uns7illed /o7es also have the i#ht to see7 e!plo(!ent
aboad. *ccodin# to the espondent, the i#ht of uns7illed /o7es to due pocess is violated
because the( ae pevented fo! findin# e!plo(!ent and eanin# a livin# aboad. It cannot be
a#ued that s7illed /o7es ae i!!une fo! abuses b( e!plo(es, /hile uns7illed /o7es ae
!eel( pone to such abuses. It /as pointed out that both s7illed and uns7illed /o7es ae
sub4ected to abuses b( foei#n e!plo(es. 9uthe!oe, the pohibition of the deplo(!ent of
uns7illed /o7es aboad /ould onl( encoua#e fl(6b(6ni#ht ille#al ecuites.
*ccodin# to the espondent, the #ant of incentives to sevice contactos and !annin# a#encies
to the eBclusion of all othe licensed and authoiEed ecuites is an invalid classification. 'icensed
and authoiEed ecuites ae thus depived of thei i#ht to popet( and due pocess and to the
Ce3ualit( of the peson.C It is undestandable fo the la/ to pohibit ille#al ecuites, but to
disci!inate a#ainst licensed and e#isteed ecuites is unconstitutional.
The espondent, li7e/ise, alle#ed that Section ), subsections >a? to >!? is unconstitutional because
licensed and authoiEed ecuit!ent a#encies ae placed on e3ual footin# /ith ille#al ecuites. It
contended that /hile the 'abo Code distin#uished bet/een ecuites /ho ae holdes of licenses
and non6holdes theeof in the i!position of penalties, Rep. *ct No. +,-. does not !a7e an(
distinction. The penalties in Section 2>a? and >b? bein# based on an invalid classification ae,
theefoe, epu#nant to the e3ual potection clause, besides bein# eBcessiveA hence, such
penalties ae violative of Section "1>"?, *ticle III of the Constitution.
1
It /as also pointed out that
the penalt( fo offices:officials:e!plo(ees of ecuit!ent a#encies /ho ae found #uilt( of
econo!ic sabota#e o la#e6scale ille#al ecuit!ent unde Rep. *ct No. +,-. is life i!pison!ent.
Since ecuit!ent a#encies usuall( opeate /ith a !anpo/e of !oe than thee pesons, such
a#encies ae foced to shut do/n, lest thei offices and:o e!plo(ees be cha#ed /ith la#e scale
ille#al ecuit!ent o econo!ic sabota#e and sentenced to life i!pison!ent. Thus, the penalt(
i!posed b( la/, bein# dispopotionate to the pohibited acts, discoua#es the business of licensed
and e#isteed ecuit!ent a#encies.
The espondent also posited that Section )>!? and paa#aphs >"&? and >")?, Sections +, 1 and ",,
paa#aph . of the la/ violate Section .., *ticle III of the Constitution
",
pohibitin# eB6post facto
la/s and bills of attainde. This is because the povisions pesu!e that a licensed and e#isteed
ecuit!ent a#enc( is #uilt( of ille#al ecuit!ent involvin# econo!ic sabota#e, upon a findin# that
it co!!itted an( of the pohibited acts unde the la/. 9uthe!oe, officials, e!plo(ees and thei
elatives ae pesu!ed #uilt( of ille#al ecuit!ent involvin# econo!ic sabota#e upon such findin#
that the( co!!itted an( of the said pohibited acts.
23
The espondent futhe a#ued that the 1,6da( peiod in Section ",, paa#aph >"? /ithin /hich a
labo abite should decide a !one( clai! is elativel( shot, and could depive licensed and
e#isteed ecuites of thei i#ht to due pocess. The peiod /ithin /hich the su!!ons and the
co!plaint /ould be seved on foei#n e!plo(ees and, theeafte, the filin# of the ans/e to the
co!plaint /ould ta7e !oe than 1, da(s. This /ould theeb( shift on local licensed and authoiEed
ecuites the buden of povin# the defense of foei#n e!plo(es. 9uthe!oe, the espondent
asseted, Section ",, paa#aph . of the la/, /hich povides fo the 4oint and seveal liabilit( of the
offices and e!plo(ees, is a bill of attainde and a violation of the i#ht of the said copoate offices
and e!plo(ees to due pocess. Considein# that such copoate offices and e!plo(ees act /ith
pio appoval of the boad of diectos of such copoation, the( should not be liable, 4ointl( and
seveall(, fo such copoate acts.
The espondent asseted that the follo/in# povisions of the la/ ae unconstitutional0
SEC. 1. (enue. M * ci!inal action aisin# fo! ille#al ecuit!ent as defined heein shall
be filed /ith the Re#ional Tial Cout of the povince o cit( /hee the offense /as
co!!itted o /hee the offended pat( actuall( esides at the ti!e of the co!!ission of
the offense0 Povided, That the cout /hee the ci!inal action is fist filed shall ac3uie
4uisdiction to the eBclusion of othe couts0 Povided, ho/eve, That the afoestated
povisions shall also appl( to those ci!inal actions that have alead( been filed in cout
at the ti!e of the effectivit( of this *ct.
I
SEC. ",. &oney Claims. M Not/ithstandin# an( povision of la/ to the conta(, the
'abo *bites of the National 'abo Relations Co!!ission >N'RC? shall have the
oi#inal and eBclusive 4uisdiction to hea and decide, /ithin ninet( >1,? calenda da(s
afte the filin# of the co!plaint, the clai!s aisin# out of an e!plo(e6e!plo(ee
elationship o b( vitue of an( la/ o contact involvin# 9ilipino /o7es fo oveseas
deplo(!ent includin# clai!s fo actual, !oal, eBe!pla( and othe fo!s of da!a#es.
Sec. -,.
The depat!ents and a#encies cha#ed /ith ca(in# out the povisions of this *ct shall,
/ithin ninet( >1,? da(s afte the effectivi( of this *ct, fo!ulate the necessa( ules and
e#ulations fo its effective i!ple!entation.
*ccodin# to the espondent, the said povisions violate Section &>&?, *ticle VIII of the
Constitution
""
because the( i!pai the po/e of the Supe!e Cout to po!ul#ate ules of
pocedue.
In thei ans/e to the petition, the petitiones alle#ed, inte alia, that >a? the espondent has no
cause of action fo a declaato( eliefA >b? the petition /as pe!atue as the ules i!ple!entin#
Rep. *ct No. +,-. not havin# been eleased as (etA >c? the assailed povisions do not violate an(
povisions of the ConstitutionA and, >d? the la/ /as appoved b( Con#ess in the eBecise of the
police po/e of the State. In opposition to the espondentKs plea fo in4unctive elief, the petitiones
aveed that0
*s ealie sho/n, the a!ended petition fo declaato( elief is devoid of !eit fo failue of
petitione to de!onstate convincin#l( that the assailed la/ is unconstitutional, apat fo! the
defect and i!popiet( of the petition. One /ho attac7s a statute, alle#in# unconstitutionalit( !ust
pove its invalidit( be(ond easonable doubt >Caleon v. )gus !evelopment Corporation, .,2 SCR*
2-+?. *ll easonable doubts should be esolved in favo of the constitutionalit( of a statute >People
v. (era, )& Phil. &)?. This pesu!ption of constitutionalit( is based on the doctine of sepaation of
po/es /hich en4oin upon each depat!ent a beco!in# espect fo the acts of the othe
depat!ents >*arcia vs. %+ecutive Secretary, .,- SCR* &") F"11"G?. Necessail(, the ancilla(
e!ed( of a te!poa( estainin# ode and:o a /it of peli!ina( in4unction pa(ed fo !ust fall.
$esides, an act of le#islatue appoved b( the eBecutive is pesu!ed to be /ithin constitutional
bounds >,ational Press Club v. Commission on %lections, .,2 SCR* "?.
".
*fte the espective counsels of the paties /ee head on oal a#u!ents, the tial cout issued on
*u#ust .", "11&, an ode #antin# the petitioneKs plea fo a /it of peli!ina( in4unction upon a
bond of P&,,,,,. The petitione posted the e3uisite bond and on *u#ust .-, "11&, the tial cout
issued a /it of peli!ina( in4unction en4oinin# the enfoce!ent of the follo/in# povisions of Rep.
*ct No. +,-. pendin# the te!ination of the poceedin#s0
I Section ., subsections >#? and >i, .nd pa.?A Section ), subsections >a? to >!?, and
pas. "& S ")A Section 2, subsections >a? S >b?A Section +A Section 1A Section ",A pas. "
S .A Section ""A and Section -, of Republic *ct No. +,-., othe/ise 7no/n as the
Mi#ant <o7es and Oveseas 9ilipinos *ct of "11&. I
"%
The petitiones filed a petition fo cetioai /ith the Cout of *ppeals assailin# the ode and the
/it of peli!ina( in4unction issued b( the tial cout on the follo/in# #ounds0
". Respondent *RCO6P5I'. had uttel( failed to sho/ its clea i#ht:s o that of its
!e!be6a#encies to be potected b( the in4unctive elief and:o violation of said i#hts b(
the enfoce!ent of the assailed sections of R.*. +,-.A
.. Respondent 8ud#e fiBed a P&,,,,, in4unction bond /hich is #ossl( inade3uate to
ans/e fo the da!a#e /hich petitione6officials !a( sustain, should espondent *RCO6
P5I'. be finall( ad4ud#ed as not bein# entitled theeto.
"-
The petitiones asseted that the espondent is not the eal pat(6in6inteest as petitione in the tial
cout. It is inconceivable ho/ the espondent, a non6stoc7 and non6pofit copoation, could sustain
diect in4u( as a esult of the enfoce!ent of the la/. The( a#ued that if, at all, an( da!a#e /ould
esult in the i!ple!entation of the la/, it is the licensed and e#isteed ecuit!ent a#encies and:o
the uns7illed 9ilipino !i#ant /o7es disci!inated a#ainst /ho /ould sustain the said in4u( o
da!a#e, not the espondent. The espondent, as petitione in the tial cout, /as budened to
adduce pepondeant evidence of such iepaable in4u(, but failed to do so. The petitiones futhe
insisted that the petition a 3uo /as pe!atue since the ules and e#ulations i!ple!entin# the la/
had (et to be po!ul#ated /hen such petition /as filed. 9inall(, the petitiones aveed that the
24
espondent failed to establish the e3uisites fo the issuance of a /it of peli!ina( in4unction
a#ainst the enfoce!ent of the la/ and the ules and e#ulations issued i!ple!entin# the sa!e.
On Dece!be &, "112, the appellate cout ca!e out /ith a fou6pa#e decision dis!issin# the
petition and affi!in# the assailed ode and /it of peli!ina( in4unction issued b( the tial cout.
The appellate cout, li7e/ise, denied the petitionesK !otion fo econsideation of the said
decision.
The petitiones no/ co!e to this Cout in a petition fo evie/ on cetioai on the follo/in#
#ounds0
". Pivate espondent *RCO6P5I'. had uttel( failed to sho/ its clea i#ht:s o that of its
!e!be6a#encies to be potected b( the in4unctive elief and:o violation of said i#hts b(
the enfoce!ent of the assailed sections of R.*. +,-.A
.. The P&,,,,, in4unction bond fiBed b( the cout a 3uo and sustained b( the Cout of
*ppeals is #ossl( inade3uate to ans/e fo the da!a#e /hich petitiones6officials !a(
sustain, should pivate espondent *RCO6P5I'. be finall( ad4ud#ed as not bein# entitled
theeto.
"&
On 9ebua( "), "11+, this Cout issued a te!poa( estainin# ode en4oinin# the espondents
fo! enfocin# the assailed ode and /it of peli!ina( in4unction.
T*e //ue/
The coe issue in this case is /hethe o not the tial cout co!!itted #ave abuse of its discetion
a!ountin# to eBcess o lac7 of 4uisdiction in issuin# the assailed ode and the /it of peli!ina(
in4unction on a bond of onl(P&,,,,, and /hethe o not the appellate cout eed in affi!in# the
tial coutKs ode and the /it of peli!ina( in4unction issued b( it.
The petitiones contend that the espondent has no locus standi. It is a non6stoc7, non6pofit
o#aniEationA hence, not the eal pat(6in6inteest as petitione in the action. *lthou#h the
espondent filed the petition in the Re#ional Tial Cout in behalf of licensed and e#isteed
ecuit!ent a#encies, it failed to adduce in evidence a cetified cop( of its *ticles of Incopoation
and the esolutions of the said !e!bes authoiEin# it to epesent the said a#encies in the
poceedin#s. Neithe is the suit of the espondent a class suit so as to vest in it a pesonalit( to
assail Rep. *ct No. +,-.A the espondent is sevice6oiented /hile the ecuit!ent a#encies it
pupots to epesent ae pofit6oiented. The petitiones asset that the la/ is pesu!ed
constitutional and, as such, the espondent /as budened to !a7e a case ston# enou#h to
oveco!e such pesu!ption and establish a clea i#ht to in4unctive elief.
The petitiones be/ail the P&,,,,, bond fiBed b( the tial cout fo the issuance of a /it of
peli!ina( in4unction and affi!ed b( the appellate cout. The( asset that the a!ount is #ossl(
inade3uate to ans/e fo an( da!a#es that the #eneal public !a( suffe b( eason of the non6
enfoce!ent of the assailed povisions of the la/. The tial cout co!!itted a #ave abuse of its
discetion in #antin# the espondentKs plea fo in4unctive elief, and the appellate cout eed in
affi!in# the ode and the /it of peli!ina( in4unction issued b( the tial cout.
The espondent, fo its pat, assets that it has dul( established its locus standi and its i#ht to
in4unctive elief as #leaned fo! its pleadin#s and the appenda#es theeto. Dnde Section &, Rule
&+ of the Rules of Cout, it /as incu!bent on the petitiones, as espondents in the RTC, to sho/
cause /h( no in4unction should issue. It aves that the in4unction bond posted b( the espondent
/as !oe than ade3uate to ans/e fo an( in4u( o da!a#e the petitiones !a( suffe, if an(, b(
eason of the /it of peli!ina( in4unction issued b( the RTC. In an( event, the assailed povisions
of Rep. *ct No. +,-. eBposed its !e!bes to the i!!ediate and iepaable da!a#e of bein#
depived of thei i#ht to a livelihood /ithout due pocess, a popet( i#ht potected unde the
Constitution.
The espondent contends that the co!!endable pupose of the la/ to eadicate ille#al ecuites
should not be done at the eBpense and to the pe4udice of licensed and authoiEed ecuit!ent
a#encies. The /it of peli!ina( in4unction /as necessitated b( the #eat nu!be of dul( licensed
ecuit!ent a#encies that had stopped o suspended thei business opeations fo fea that thei
offices and e!plo(ees /ould be indicted and posecuted unde the assailed oppessive penal
povisions of the la/, and !eted eBcessive penalties. The espondent, li7e/ise, u#es that the
Cout should ta7e 4udicial notice that the pocessin# of deplo(!ent papes of oveseas /o7es
have co!e to a vitual standstill at the POE*.
T*e Cour-C/ Ru1+$7
The petition is !eitoious.
-he 'espondent .as /ocus Standi
-o File the Petition in the '-C in 'epresentation of the %leven /icensed and 'egistered
'ecruitment )gencies Impleaded in the )mended Petition
The !oden vie/ is that an association has standin# to co!plain of in4uies to its !e!bes. This
vie/ fuses the le#al identit( of an association /ith that of its !e!bes.
")
*n association has
standin# to file suit fo its /o7es despite its lac7 of diect inteest if its !e!bes ae affected b(
the action. *n o#aniEation has standin# to asset the concens of its constituents.
"2
In -elecommunications and 0roadcast )ttorneys of the Philippines v. Commission on
%lections"
"+
/e held that standin# 4us tetii /ould be eco#niEed onl( if it can be sho/n that the
pat( suin# has so!e substantial elation to the thid pat(, o that the i#ht of the thid pat( /ould
be diluted unless the pat( in cout is allo/ed to espouse the thid pat(Ks constitutional clai!s.
In this case, the espondent filed the petition fo declaato( elief unde Rule )- of the Rules of
Cout fo and in behalf of its eleven >""? licensed and e#isteed ecuit!ent a#encies /hich ae its
!e!bes, and /hich appoved sepaate esolutions eBpessl( authoiEin# the espondent to file
the said suit fo and in thei behalf. <e note that, unde its *ticles of Incopoation, the espondent
/as o#aniEed fo the puposes inte alia of po!otin# and suppotin# the #o/th and develop!ent
25
of the !anpo/e ecuit!ent indust(, both in the local and intenational levelsA povidin#, ceatin#
and eBploin# e!plo(!ent oppotunities fo the eBclusive benefit of its #eneal !e!beshipA
enhancin# and po!otin# the #eneal /elfae and potection of 9ilipino /o7esA and, to act as the
epesentative of an( individual, co!pan(, entit( o association on !attes elated to the !anpo/e
ecuit!ent indust(, and to pefo! othe acts and activities necessa( to acco!plish the puposes
e!bodied theein. The espondent is, thus, the appopiate pat( to asset the i#hts of its
!e!bes, because it and its !e!bes ae in eve( pactical sense identical. The espondent
assets that the assailed povisions violate the constitutional i#hts of its !e!bes and the offices
and e!plo(ees theeof. The espondent is but the !ediu! thou#h /hich its individual !e!bes
see7 to !a7e !oe effective the eBpession of thei voices and the edess of thei #ievances.
"1
5o/eve, the espondent has no locus standi to file the petition fo and in behalf of uns7illed
/o7es. <e note that it even failed to i!plead an( uns7illed /o7es in its petition. 9uthe!oe, in
failin# to i!plead, as paties6petitiones, the eleven licensed and e#isteed ecuit!ent a#encies it
clai!ed to epesent, the espondent failed to co!pl( /ith Section . of Rule )%
.,
of the Rules of
Cout. Nevetheless, since the eleven licensed and e#isteed ecuit!ent a#encies fo /hich the
espondent filed the suit ae specificall( na!ed in the petition, the a!ended petition is dee!ed
a!ended to avoid !ultiplicit( of suits.
."
-he )ssailed $rder and 1rit of
Preliminary In2unction Is &ooted
0y Case /aw
The espondent 4ustified its plea fo in4unctive elief on the alle#ation in its a!ended petition that its
!e!bes ae eBposed to the i!!ediate and iepaable dan#e of bein# depived of thei i#ht to a
livelihood and othe constitutional i#hts /ithout due pocess, on its clai! that a #eat nu!be of
dul( licensed ecuit!ent a#encies have stopped o suspended thei opeations fo fea that >a?
thei offices and e!plo(ees /ould be posecuted unde the un4ust and unconstitutional penal
povisions of Rep. *ct No. +,-. and !eted e3uall( un4ust and eBcessive penalties, includin# life
i!pison!ent, fo ille#al ecuit!ent and la#e scale ille#al ecuit!ent /ithout e#ad to /hethe
the ecuit!ent a#encies involved ae licensed and:o authoiEedA and, >b? if the !e!bes of the
espondent, /hich ae licensed and authoiEed, decide to continue /ith thei businesses, the( face
the sti#!a and the cuse of bein# labeled Cille#al ecuites.C In #antin# the espondentKs plea fo a
/it of peli!ina( in4unction, the tial cout held, /ithout statin# the factual and le#al basis theefo,
that the enfoce!ent of Rep. *ct No. +,-., pendente lite, /ould cause #ave and iepaable in4u(
to the espondent until the case is decided on its !eits.
<e note, ho/eve, that since Rep. *ct No. +,-. too7 effect on 8ul( "&, "11&, the Cout had, in a
catena of cases, applied the penal povisions in Section ), includin# paa#aph >!? theeof, and the
last t/o paa#aphs theein definin# la#e scale ille#al ecuit!ent co!!itted b( offices and:o
e!plo(ees of ecuit!ent a#encies b( the!selves and in connivance /ith pivate individuals, and
i!posed the penalties povided in Section 2 theeof, includin# the penalt( of life
i!pison!ent.
..
The Info!ations theein /ee filed afte peli!ina( investi#ations as povided fo
in Section "" of Rep. *ct No. +,-. and in venues as povided fo in Section 1 of the said act.
InPeople v. Chowdury,
.%
/e held that ille#al ecuit!ent is a ci!e of econo!ic sabota#e and !ust
be enfoced.
In People v. !iaz,
.-
/e held that Rep. *ct No. +,-. is but an a!end!ent of the 'abo Code of the
Philippines and is not an eB6post facto la/ because it is not applied etoactivel(. In 3&&
Promotion and &anagement" Inc. v. Court of )ppeals,
.&
the issue of the eBtent of the police po/e
of the State to e#ulate a business, pofession o callin# vis6T6vis the e3ual potection clause and
the non6i!pai!ent clause of the Constitution /ee aised and /e held, thus0
* pofession, tade o callin# is a popet( i#ht /ithin the !eanin# of ou constitutional
#uaantees. One cannot be depived of the i#ht to /o7 and the i#ht to !a7e a livin#
because these i#hts ae popet( i#hts, the abita( and un/aanted depivation of
/hich no!all( constitutes an actionable /on#.
Nevetheless, no i#ht is absolute, and the pope e#ulation of a pofession, callin#,
business o tade has al/a(s been upheld as a le#iti!ate sub4ect of a valid eBecise of
the police po/e b( the state paticulal( /hen thei conduct affects eithe the eBecution
of le#iti!ate #oven!ental functions, the pesevation of the State, the public health and
/elfae and public !oals. *ccodin# to the !aBi!, sic utee tuo ut alienu! non laedas,
it !ust of couse be /ithin the le#iti!ate an#e of le#islative action to define the !ode
and !anne in /hich eve( one !a( so use his o/n popet( so as not to pose in4u( to
hi!self o othes.
In an( case, /hee the libet( cutailed affects at !ost the i#hts of popet(, the
pe!issible scope of e#ulato( !easues is cetainl( !uch /ide. To petend that
licensin# o acceditation e3uie!ents violates the due pocess clause is to i#noe the
settled pactice, unde the !antle of the police po/e, of e#ulatin# ent( to the pactice
of vaious tades o pofessions. Pofessionals leavin# fo aboad ae e3uied to pass
i#id /itten and pactical eBa!s befoe the( ae dee!ed fit to pactice thei tade.
Sea!en ae e3uied to ta7e tests dete!inin# thei sea!anship. 'ocall(, the
Pofessional Re#ulation Co!!ission has be#un to e3uie peviousl( licensed doctos
and othe pofessionals to funish docu!enta( poof that the( had eithe e6tained o
had undeta7en continuin# education couses as a e3uie!ent fo ene/al of thei
licenses. It is not clai!ed that these e3uie!ents pose an un/aanted depivation of a
popet( i#ht unde the due pocess clause. So lon# as pofessionals and othe /o7es
!eet easonable e#ulato( standads no such depivation eBists.
9inall(, it is a futile #estue on the pat of petitiones to invo7e the non6i!pai!ent clause
of the Constitution to suppot thei a#u!ent that the #oven!ent cannot enact the
assailed e#ulato( !easues because the( abid#e the feedo! to contact.
In Philippine )ssociation of Service %+porters" Inc. vs. !rilon, /e held that CFtGhe non6
i!pai!ent clause of the Constitution I !ust (ield to the loftie puposes ta#eted b( the
#oven!ent.C E3uall( i!potant, into eve( contact is ead povisions of eBistin# la/,
and al/a(s, a esevation of the police po/e fo so lon# as the a#ee!ent deals /ith a
sub4ect i!pessed /ith the public /elfae.
26
* last point. Petitiones su##est that the sin#lin# out of entetaines and pefo!in#
atists unde the assailed depat!ent odes constitutes class le#islation /hich violates
the e3ual potection clause of the Constitution. <e do not a#ee.
The e3ual potection clause is diected pincipall( a#ainst undue favo and individual o
class pivile#e. It is not intended to pohibit le#islation /hich is li!ited to the ob4ect to
/hich it is diected o b( the teito( in /hich it is to opeate. It does not e3uie absolute
e3ualit(, but !eel( that all pesons be teated ali7e unde li7e conditions both as to
pivile#es confeed and liabilities i!posed. <e have held, ti!e and a#ain, that the e3ual
potection clause of the Constitution does not fobid classification fo so lon# as such
classification is based on eal and substantial diffeences havin# a easonable elation to
the sub4ect of the paticula le#islation. If classification is #e!ane to the pupose of the
la/, concens all !e!bes of the class, and applies e3uall( to pesent and futue
conditions, the classification does not violate the e3ual potection #uaantee.
.)
The validit( of Section ) of R.*. No. +,-. /hich povides that e!plo(ees of ecuit!ent a#encies
!a( be ci!inall( liable fo ille#al ecuit!ent has been upheld in People v. Chowdury0
.2
*s stated in the fist sentence of Section ) of R* +,-., the pesons /ho !a( be held
liable fo ille#al ecuit!ent ae the pincipals, acco!plices and accessoies. *n
e!plo(ee of a co!pan( o copoation en#a#ed in ille#al ecuit!ent !a( be held liable
as pincipal, to#ethe /ith his e!plo(e, if it is sho/n that he activel( and consciousl(
paticipated in ille#al ecuit!ent. It has been held that the eBistence of the copoate
entit( does not shield fo! posecution the copoate a#ent /ho 7no/in#l( and
intentionall( causes the copoation to co!!it a ci!e. The copoation obviousl( acts,
and can act, onl( b( and thou#h its hu!an a#ents, and it is thei conduct /hich the la/
!ust dete. The e!plo(ee o a#ent of a copoation en#a#ed in unla/ful business
natuall( aids and abets in the ca(in# on of such business and /ill be posecuted as
pincipal if, /ith 7no/led#e of the business, its pupose and effect, he consciousl(
contibutes his effots to its conduct and po!otion, ho/eve sli#ht his contibution !a(
be. I
.+
$( its ulin#s, the Cout theeb( affi!ed the validit( of the assailed penal and pocedual
povisions of Rep. *ct No. +,-., includin# the i!posable penalties theefo. Dntil the Cout, b( final
4ud#!ent, declaes that the said povisions ae unconstitutional, the enfoce!ent of the said
povisions cannot be en4oined.
-he '-C Committed *rave )buse of Its !iscretion )mounting to %+cess or /ac4 of 3urisdiction in
Issuing the )ssailed $rder and the 1rit of Preliminary In2unction
The !atte of /hethe to issue a /it of peli!ina( in4unction o not is addessed to the sound
discetion of the tial cout. 5o/eve, if the cout co!!its #ave abuse of its discetion in issuin#
the said /it a!ountin# to eBcess o lac7 of 4uisdiction, the sa!e !a( be nullified via a /it of
cetioai and pohibition.
In Social Secuit( Co!!ission v. 8ud#e $a(ona,
.1
/e uled that a la/ is pesu!ed constitutional
until othe/ise declaed b( 4udicial intepetation. The suspension of the opeation of the la/ is a
!atte of eBte!e delicac( because it is an intefeence /ith the official acts not onl( of the dul(
elected epesentatives of the people but also of the hi#hest !a#istate of the land.
In ;oun#e v. 5ais, 8.,
%,
the Supe!e Cout of the Dnited States e!phasiEed, thus0
9edeal in4unctions a#ainst state ci!inal statutes, eithe in thei entiet( o /ith espect
to thei sepaate and distinct pohibitions, ae not to be #anted as a !atte of couse,
even if such statutes ae unconstitutional. No citiEen o !e!be of the co!!unit( is
i!!une fo! posecution, in #ood faith, fo his alle#ed ci!inal acts. The i!!inence of
such a posecution even thou#h alle#ed to be unauthoiEed and, hence, unla/ful is not
alone #ound fo elief in e3uit( /hich eBets its eBtaodina( po/es onl( to pevent
iepaable in4u( to the plaintiff /ho see7s its aid. 2&. 0eal v. &issouri Pacific 'ailroad
Corp., %". D.S. -&, -1, )" S.Ct. -"+, -.,, +& '.Ed. &22.
*nd si!ilal(, in Dou#las, supa, /e !ade clea, afte eaffi!in# this ule, that0
CIt does not appea fo! the ecod that petitiones have been theatened /ith an( in4u(
othe than that incidental to eve( ci!inal poceedin# bou#ht la/full( and in #ood faith
IC %"1 D.S., at ")-, )% S.Ct., at ++".
%"
The possible unconstitutionalit( of a statute, on its face, does not of itself 4ustif( an in4unction
a#ainst #ood faith atte!pts to enfoce it, unless thee is a sho/in# of bad faith, haass!ent, o an(
othe unusual cicu!stance that /ould call fo e3uitable elief.
%.
The Con its faceC invalidation of
statutes has been descibed as C!anifestl( ston# !edicine,C to be e!plo(ed Cspain#l( and onl(
as a last esot,C and is #eneall( disfavoed.
%%
To be entitled to a peli!ina( in4unction to en4oin the enfoce!ent of a la/ assailed to be
unconstitutional, the pat( !ust establish that it /ill suffe iepaable ha! in the absence of
in4unctive elief and !ust de!onstate that it is li7el( to succeed on the !eits, o that thee ae
sufficientl( seious 3uestions #oin# to the !eits and the balance of hadships tips decidedl( in its
favo.
%-
The hi#he standad eflects 4udicial defeence to/ad Cle#islation o e#ulations developed
thou#h pesu!ptivel( easoned de!ocatic pocesses.C Moeove, an in4unction /ill alte, athe
than !aintain, the status 3uo, o /ill povide the !ovant /ith substantiall( all the elief sou#ht and
that elief cannot be undone even if the defendant pevails at a tial on the !eits.
%&
Considein#
that in4unction is an eBecise of e3uitable elief and authoit(, in assessin# /hethe to issue a
peli!ina( in4unction, the couts !ust sensitivel( assess all the e3uities of the situation, includin#
the public inteest.
%)
In liti#ations bet/een #oven!ental and pivate paties, couts #o !uch futhe
both to #ive and /ithhold elief in futheance of public inteest than the( ae accusto!ed to #o
/hen onl( pivate inteests ae involved.
%2
$efoe the plaintiff !a( be entitled to in4unction a#ainst
futue enfoce!ent, he is budened to sho/ so!e substantial hadship.
%+
The fea o chillin#6effect of the assailed penal povisions of the la/ on the !e!bes of the
espondent does not b( itself 4ustif( pohibitin# the State fo! enfocin# the! a#ainst those /ho!
the State believes in #ood faith to be punishable unde the la/s0
27
I 8ust as the incidental Cchillin# effectC of such statutes does not auto!aticall( ende
the! unconstitutional, so the chillin# effect that ad!ittedl( can esult fo! the ve(
eBistence of cetain la/s on the statute boo7s does not in itself 4ustif( pohibitin# the
State fo! ca(in# out the i!potant and necessa( tas7 of enfocin# these la/s a#ainst
sociall( ha!ful conduct that the State believes in #ood faith to be punishable unde its
la/s and the Constitution.
%1
It !ust be bone in !ind that sub4ect to constitutional li!itations, Con#ess is e!po/eed to define
/hat acts o o!issions shall constitute a ci!e and to pescibe punish!ents theefo.
-,
The po/e
is inheent in Con#ess and is pat of the soveei#n po/e of the State to !aintain peace and
ode. <hateve vie/s !a( be entetained e#adin# the seveit( of punish!ent, /hethe one
believes in its efficienc( o its futilit(, these ae peculial( 3uestions of le#islative polic(.
-"
The
co!paative #avit( of ci!es and /hethe thei conse3uences ae !oe o less in4uious ae
!attes fo the State and Con#ess itself to dete!ine.
-.
Specification of penalties involves
3uestions of le#islative polic(.
-%
Due pocess pohibits ci!inal stabilit( fo! shiftin# the buden of poof to the accused, punishin#
/holl( passive conduct, definin# ci!es in va#ue o oveboad lan#ua#e and failin# to #ant fai
/anin# of ille#al conduct.
--
Class le#islation is such le#islation /hich denies i#hts to one /hich
ae accoded to othes, o inflicts upon one individual a !oe sevee penalt( than is i!posed upon
anothe in li7e case offendin#.
-&
$ills of attainde ae le#islative acts /hich inflict punish!ent on
individuals o !e!bes of a paticula #oup /ithout a 4udicial tial. Essential to a bill of attainde
ae a specification of cetain individuals o a #oup of individuals, the i!position of a punish!ent,
penal o othe/ise, and the lac7 of 4udicial tial.
-)
PenaliEin# unlicensed and licensed ecuit!ent a#encies and thei offices and e!plo(ees and
thei elatives e!plo(ed in #oven!ent a#encies cha#ed /ith the enfoce!ent of the la/ fo ille#al
ecuit!ent and i!posin# life i!pison!ent fo those /ho co!!it la#e scale ille#al ecuit!ent is
not offensive to the Constitution. The accused !a( be convicted of ille#al ecuit!ent and la#e
scale ille#al ecuit!ent onl( if, afte tial, the posecution is able to pove all the ele!ents of the
ci!e cha#ed.
-2
The possibilit( that the offices and e!plo(ees of the ecuit!ent a#encies, /hich ae !e!bes of
the espondent, and thei elatives /ho ae e!plo(ed in the #oven!ent a#encies cha#ed in the
enfoce!ent of the la/, /ould be indicted fo ille#al ecuit!ent and, if convicted sentenced to life
i!pison!ent fo la#e scale ille#al ecuit!ent, absent poof of iepaable in4u(, is not sufficient
on /hich to base the issuance of a /it of peli!ina( in4unction to suspend the enfoce!ent of the
penal povisions of Rep. *ct No. +,-. and avet an( indict!ents unde the la/.
-+
The no!al
couse of ci!inal posecutions cannot be bloc7ed on the basis of alle#ations /hich a!ount to
speculations about the futue.
-1
Thee is no alle#ation in the a!ended petition o evidence adduced b( the espondent that the
offices and:o e!plo(ees of its !e!bes had been theatened /ith an( indict!ents fo violations
of the penal povisions of Rep. *ct No. +,-.. Neithe is thee an( alle#ation theein that an( of its
!e!bes and:o thei offices and e!plo(ees co!!itted an( of the acts enu!eated in Section
)>a? to >!? of the la/ fo /hich the( could be indicted. Neithe did the espondent adduce an(
evidence in the RTC that an( o all of its !e!bes o a #eat nu!be of othe dul( licensed and
e#isteed ecuit!ent a#encies had to stop thei business opeations because of fea of
indict!ents unde Sections ) and 2 of Rep. *ct No. +,-.. The espondent !eel( speculated and
su!ised that licensed and e#isteed ecuit!ent a#encies /ould close shop and stop business
opeations because of the assailed penal povisions of the la/. * /it of peli!ina( in4unction to
en4oin the enfoce!ent of penal la/s cannot be based on such con4ectues o speculations. The
Cout cannot ta7e 4udicial notice that the pocessin# of deplo(!ent papes of oveseas /o7es
have co!e to a vitual standstill at the POE* because of the assailed povisions of Rep. *ct No.
+,-.. The espondent !ust adduce evidence to pove its alle#ation, and the petitiones accoded a
chance to adduce contovetin# evidence.
The espondent even failed to adduce an( evidence to pove iepaable in4u( because of the
enfoce!ent of Section ",>"?>.? of Rep. *ct No. +,-.. Its fea o appehension that, because of
ti!e constaints, its !e!bes /ould have to defend foei#n e!plo(ees in cases befoe the 'abo
*bite is based on speculations. Even if tue, such inconvenience o difficult( is hadl( iepaable
in4u(.
The tial cout even i#noed the public inteest involved in suspendin# the enfoce!ent of Rep. *ct
No. +,-. vis6T6vis the eleven licensed and e#isteed ecuit!ent a#encies epesented b( the
espondent. In People v. =a!boa,
&,
/e e!phasiEed the pi!a( ai! of Rep. *ct No. +,-.0
Peli!inail(, the polifeation of ille#al 4ob ecuites and s(ndicates pe(in# on innocent
people anBious to obtain e!plo(!ent aboad is one of the pi!a( consideations that
led to the enact!ent of -he &igrant 1or4ers and $verseas Filipinos )ct of 1556. *i!ed
at affodin# #eate potection to oveseas 9ilipino /o7es, it is a si#nificant
i!pove!ent on eBistin# la/s in the ecuit!ent and place!ent of /o7es fo oveseas
e!plo(!ent. Othe/ise 7no/n as the Ma#na Cata of O9<s, it boadened the concept
of ille#al ecuit!ent unde the 'abo Code and povided stiffe penalties theeto,
especiall( those that constitute econo!ic sabota#e, i.e." Illegal 'ecruitment in /arge
Scale and Illegal 'ecruitment Committed by a Syndicate.
&"
$( issuin# the /it of peli!ina( in4unction a#ainst the petitiones sans an( evidence, the tial cout
fustated, albeit te!poail(, the posecution of ille#al ecuites and allo/ed the! to continue
victi!iEin# hapless and innocent people desiin# to obtain e!plo(!ent aboad as oveseas
/o7es, and bloc7ed the attain!ent of the saluta( policies
&.
e!bedded in Rep. *ct No. +,-.. It
beas stessin# that oveseas /o7es, land6based and sea6based, had been e!ittin# to the
Philippines billions of dollas /hich ove the (eas had popped the econo!(.In issuin# the /it of
peli!ina( in4unction, the tial cout consideed paa!ount the inteests of the eleven licensed and
e#isteed ecuit!ent a#encies epesented b( the espondent, and capiciousl( ovetuned the
pesu!ption of the constitutionalit( of the assailed povisions on the baefaced clai! of the
espondent that the assailed povisions of Rep. *ct No. +,-. ae unconstitutional. The tial cout
co!!itted a #ave abuse of its discetion a!ountin# to eBcess o lac7 of 4uisdiction in issuin# the
assailed ode and /it of peli!ina( in4unction. It is fo this eason that the Cout issued a
te!poa( estainin# ode en4oinin# the enfoce!ent of the /it of peli!ina( in4unction issued b(
the tial cout.
N LGHT OF !LL THE FOREGONG, the petition is GR!NTE&. The assailed decision of the
appellate cout isRE#ERSE& !N& SET !S&E. The Ode of the Re#ional Tial Cout dated
*u#ust .", "11& in Civil Case No. N61&6.--," and the <it of Peli!ina( In4unction issued b( it in
the said case on *u#ust .-, "11& ae NULLFE&. No costs. SO OR&ERE&.
28
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
T5IRD DIVISION
G.R. No. 151<43 (u$e 23, 2005
G D M 6PHL.8, NC., Petitioner"
vs.
;LLE '!TOM!L!EUE, 'espondent.
D E C I S I O N
C!RPO MOR!LES, J.)
Culled fo! the ecods of the case ae the follo/in# facts !ateial to the appeal of petitione.
So!eti!e in 9ebua( "11., *bdul *EiE *bdullah *l Muhai!id Na4ad Ca Maintenance *ssociation
>*bdul *EiE?, a Saudi *abian entit( based in Ri(adh, hied espondent, <illie $ato!ala3ue, as a
ca painte at a !onthl( sala( of DSQ%2,.,,
"
fo a t/o6(ea peiod
.
thou#h its a#ent, petitione
=SM >Phil.?, Inc.
In accodance /ith the e!plo(!ent contact, espondent stated /o7in# fo *bdul *EiE on Mach
",, "11.
%
at a !onthl( sala( of DSQ%2,.,,
-
/hich accodin# to hi! /as e3uivalent to ",.,, Saudi
i(als.
&
On 8une 2, "11-
)
espondent /as epatiated and on 8anua( %, "11& he filed a co!plaint
2
a#ainst
petitione, *bdul *EiE, and Count( E!pie Insuance Co!pan( /ith the Philippine Oveseas
E!plo(!ent *d!inistation
+
fo non6pa(!ent and undepa(!ent of salaies and
da!a#es.1avvphi1.zw7
In his Co!plaint6*ffidavit espondent clai!ed that fo the fist fou !onths of e!plo(!ent, he
eceived a !onthl( sala( of 1,, Saudi i(als,
1
and fo the fifth !onth >8ul( "11.? up to the end of
the ".th !onth >9ebua( "11%?, he eceived a !onthl( sala( of 2,, Saudi i(alsA
",
that afte a
one6(ea stint /ith *bdul *EiE, the /o7shop /hee he /as /o7in# /as sold but the ne/ o/ne
did not hie hi!A
""
that fo eleven !onths he /as 4oblessA
".
that *bdul *EiE hied hi! a#ain and
stated /o7in# fo it in 9ebua( "11- fo /hich he /as paid ",.,, Saudi i(alsA
"%
and that he
esi#ned in Ma( "11- since he /as not paid his sala( fo the !onths of Mach and *pil
"11-,
"-
/hich .6!onth sala(, /as, ho/eve, used to puchase his ailine tic7et on his epatiation
to the Philippines.
Respondent thus pa(ed in his Co!plaint6*ffidavit fo the a/ad to hi! of da!a#es aisin# fo!
the follo/in#0
a. Non6pa(!ent of /a#es fo "" !onths fo! *pil "11% to 8anua( "11-A
b. Non6pa(!ent of salaies fo the !onths of Mach and *pil "11-A
c. Non6pa(!ent of sala( diffeentials int > sic ? the a!ount of SR&,, pe !onth fo /e>e$
.o$-*/ deducted fo! his sala( statin# the &th !onth of his /o7 o 8ul( "11. up to
9ebua( "11% o the totla >sic? a!ount of SR%,&,,A
d. !oal and eBe!pla( da!a#es of P&,,,,,.,,A
e. othe 4ust and e3uitable e!edies ae pa(ed fo.
"&
>E!phasis and undescoin#
supplied?
*!on# othe clai!s, petitione denied espondentKs clai! that he /as undepaid, it !aintainin#
that he /as paid his salaies in full.
")
$( Decision
"2
of 8ul( .., "11), 'abo *bite 9ati!a 8a!bao69anco cedited espondentKs
co!plaint fo undepa(!ent of salaies duin# the fist (ea of his contact but denied his othe
clai!s in this /ise0
*fte due consideation, this Office finds the co!plaint fo undepa(!ent of salaies and /a#es
!eitoious.
<ell6settled is the ule that in cases of non6pa(!ent and undepa(!ent of salaies and /a#es, the
e!plo(e has the buden of poof to sho/ that the /o7e:e!plo(ee has been paid all his salaies
and /a#es since it has in its possession the poof of pa(!ent such as pa(olls and:o vouches
>Sa!balona( vs. 8ose Cuevas, N'RC No. R$ IV M "+)--2, 9ebua( "%, "1+,? and in the absence
of poof to the conta(, it is dee!ed that no pa(!ent has been !ade.
In the case at ba, eBcept fo thei bae alle#ation that co!plainantKs salaies /as not undepaid, no
evidence /as adduced to sho/ that co!plainantKs salaies and /a#es /ee full( paid constainin#
the undesi#ned to #ant the clai! of the co!plainant as sho/n in the co!putation belo/, to /it0
*#eed Sala( M SR",.,,
Sala( Received M SR1,, fo & !onths
M SR2,, fo + !onths
Sala( diffeential
29
SR",.,, M SR1,, U SR%,, B & !os. U SR",&,,
SR",.,, M SR2,, U SR&,, B + !os. U SR-,,,,
SR&,&,,
The clai! fo the non6pa(!ent of salaies fo eleven >""? !onths >*pil "11% to 8anua( "11-? is,
ho/eve, untenable. The ecods sho/ that co!plainant /as epatiated on 8une 2, "11-, !oe
than t/o >.? (eas fo! his deplo(!ent on Mach 1, "11.. <hile he clai!s fo undepa(!ent of
salaies and /a#es fo thiteen >"%? !onths,he did not clai! fo ille#al dis!issal, althou#h he
clai!s fo the pa(!ent of salaies fo! *pil "11% to 8anua( "11-.
"+
This Office is in a 3uanda(
/h( co!plainant sta(ed at the 4obsite fo eleven >""? !onths, /ithout /o7, (et thee /as no
co!plaint lod#ed in the 'abo:Consulate Office in Saudi *abia. The undesi#ned opines that if
co!plainant eall( felt a##ieved, then he could have easil( filed a co!plaint at the 4obsite.
5o/eve, co!plainant did nothin# to vindicate his i#ht, in fact, he sta(ed on until 8une "11-.
Dnde these cicu!stances, this Office #ives !oe cedence to the espondentsK assetion that
co!plainant co!pleted his . (eas >sic? contact and even eBtended fo anothe . !onths befoe
his epatiation. It is /oth( to note that co!plainant neve clai!ed that he /as constuctivel(
dis!issed endein# his clai! fo pa(!ent of the uneBpied potion of the contact untenable.
The clai! fo efund of tanspotation eBpenses is li7e/ise, not allo/able in the absence of poof
that the epatiation cost /as actuall( shouldeed b( hi!. >Dndescoin# supplied?
The labo abite thus disposed as follo/s0
<5ERE9ORE, in vie/ of the foe#oin#, espondents = S M >Phils.?, Inc., *bdul *EiE *bdullah *l
Muhai!id Na4ad Ca Maintenance *ssociation and Count( E!pie Insuance Co!pan( ae
heeb( odeed to pa( 4ointl( and seveall( co!plainant <illie $ato!ala3ue the a!ount of 9IVE
T5ODS*ND 9IVE 5DNDRED S*DDI RI;*'S > SR5,500 ? o in Philippine cuenc( at the pevailin#
ate of eBchan#e as cetified to b( the Cental $an7 at the ti!e of pa(!ent, epesentin# his
undepa(!ent of salaies and /a#es.
*ll othe clai!s ae dis!issed fo lac7 of !eit.
SO ORDERED.
"1
>E!phasis and undescoin# supplied?
Petitione appealed
.,
the labo abiteKs decision to the National 'abo Relation Co!!ission
>N'RC? /hich, b( Resolution
."
of 9ebua( "", "111, affi!ed the sa!e.
*##ieved, petitione, via a petition fo cetioai
..
unde Rule )&, bou#ht the case to the Cout of
*ppeals /hich doc7eted it as C*6=.R. No. &.1.,. $( the assailed decision
.%
of *pil .2, .,,", the
Cout of *ppeals dis!issed petitioneKs petition, it holdin# that the N'RC co!!itted no eo !uch
less an( #ave abuse of discetion.
PetitioneKs !otion fo econsideation
.-
havin# been denied b( the Cout of *ppeals, b(
Resolution
.&
of 8anua( +, .,,., it lod#ed the pesent petition.
.)
Petitione !aintains that espondent had been paid his salaies in full and it /as incu!bent upon
hi! to pove othe/ise.
PetitioneKs clai! fails.
It is settled that as a #eneal ule, a pat( /ho alle#es pa(!ent as a defense has the buden of
povin# it.
.2
Specificall( /ith espect to labo cases, the buden of povin# pa(!ent of !oneta( clai!s ests on
the e!plo(e, the ationale bein#
that the petinent pesonnel files, pa(olls, ecods, e!ittances and othe si!ila docu!ents J
/hich /ill sho/ that oveti!e, diffeentials, sevice incentive leave and othe clai!s of /o7es
have been paid J ae not in the possession of the /o7e but in the custod( and absolute contol
of the e!plo(e.
.+
*side, ho/eve, fo! its bae alle#ation that its pincipal *bdul *EiE had full( paid espondentKs
salaies, petitione did not pesent an( evidence, e.#., pa(oll o pa(slips, to suppot its defense of
pa(!ent. Petitione thus failed to discha#e the onus probandi.
Petitione, as the ecuite and a#ent of *bdul *EiE, is thus solidail( liable /ith the latte fo the
unpaid /a#es of espondent. This Cout, thou#h 8ustice Iene Cotes, in 'oyal Crown
Internationale v. ,/'C
.1
eBplains the basis theeof0
IPetitione convenientl( oveloo7s the fact that it had voluntail( assu!ed solida( liabilit( unde
the vaious contactual undeta7in#s it sub!itted to the $ueau of E!plo(!ent Sevices. In
appl(in# fo its license to opeate a pivate e!plo(!ent a#enc( fo oveseas ecuit!ent and
place!ent, petitione /as e3uied to sub!it, a!on# othes, a docu!ent o veified undeta7in#
/heeb( it assu!ed all esponsibilities fo the pope use of its license and the implementation of
the contracts of employment with the wor4ers it ecuited and deplo(ed fo oveseas
e!plo(!ent FSection .>e?, Rule V, $oo7 I, Rules to I!ple!ent the 'abo Code >"12)?G. It /as also
e3uied to file /ith the $ueau a fo!al appoint!ent o a#enc( contact eBecuted b( the foei#n6
based e!plo(e in its favo to ecuit and hie pesonnel fo the fo!e, /hich contained a povision
e!po/ein# it to sue and be sued 2ointly and solidarily with the foreign principal for any of the
violations of the recruitment agreement and the contracts of employment FSection ", >a? >.?, Rule
V, $oo7 I of the Rules to I!ple!ent the 'abo Code >"12)?G. Petitione /as e3uied as /ell to post
such cash and suet( bonds as dete!ined b( the Seceta( of 'abo to #uaantee co!pliance
/ith pescibed ecuit!ent pocedues, ules and e#ulations, and te!s and conditions of
e!plo(!ent as appopiate FSection " of Pes. Dec. "-". >"12+? a!endin# *ticle %" of the 'abo
CodeG.
These ,o$-ra,-ua1 u$%er-aB+$7/ ,o$/-+-u-e -*e 1e7a1 ba/+/ 0or *o1%+$7 2e-+-+o$er, a$% o-*er
2r+>a-e e.21oy.e$- or re,ru+-.e$- a7e$,+e/, 1+ab1e Fo+$-1y a$% /e>era11y @+-* +-/ 2r+$,+2a1,
30
the foei#n6based e!plo(e, fo all clai!s filed b( ecuited /o7es /hich !a( aise in connection
/ith the i!ple!entation of the sevice a#ee!ents o e!plo(!ent contacts FSee *!ba3ue
Intenational Place!ent and Sevices v. N'RC, =.R. No. 2212,, 8anua( .+, "1++, "&2 SCR* -%"A
Catan v. N'RC, =.R. No. 22.21, *pil "&, "1++, "), SCR* )1"A *l#a Mohe Intenational
Place!ent Sevices v. *tienEa, =.R. No. 2-)",, Septe!be %,, "1++G
%,
>E!phasis and
undescoin# suppliedA italics in the oi#inal?
Petitione a#ues, ho/eve, that the foe#oin# ule has no application in the case at ba because it
applies onl( to one /hich aises the issue of non6pa(!ent but not one /hich aises issues of
undepa(!ent,
%"
hence, the buden /as on espondent to sho/ that he /as indeed undepaid.
%.
Petitione does not pesuade.
On epeated occasions, this Cout uled that the debto has the buden of sho/in# /ith le#al
cetaint( that the obli#ation has been discha#ed b( pa(!ent.
%%
To discha#e !eans to eBtin#uish
an obli#ation,
%-
and in contact la/ discha#e occus eithe /hen the paties have pefo!ed thei
obli#ations in the contact, o /hen an event the conduct of the paties, o the opeation of la/
eleases the paties fo! pefo!in#.
%&
Thus, a pat( /ho alle#es that an obli#ation has been
eBtin#uished !ust pove facts o acts #ivin# ise to the eBtinction.
The fact of undepa(!ent does not shift the buden of evidence to the plaintiff6heein espondent
because patial pa(!ent does not eBtin#uish the obli#ation.
%)
Onl( /hen the debto intoduces
evidence that the obli#ation has been eBtin#uished does the buden of evidence shift to the cedito
/ho is then unde a dut( of poducin# evidence to sho/ /h( pa(!ent does not eBtin#uish the
obli#ation.
The lac7 of !eit of petitioneKs petition not/ithstandin#, this Cout finds that the appellate coutKs
affi!ance of the a/ad to espondent of salaies fo a "%6!onth peiod, as eflected in the
co!putation of sala( diffeential in the decision of the labo abite, calls fo !odification.
Respondent hi!self alle#ed in his Co!plaint6*ffidavit havin# been undepaid fo ".
!onths
%2
albeit, oddl( enou#h, in the above63uoted pa(e of his said Co!plaint6*ffidavit, he
pa(ed fo sala( diffeential in the a!ount of CSR&,, pe !onth fo seven F2G !onthsI statin# the
&th !onth of his /o7 o 8ul( "11. up to 9ebua( "11% o Fa totalG a!ount of SR%,&,,.C
Respondent bein# entitled to a !onthl( sala( of DSQ%2,.,,,
%+
its e3uivalent of ",.,, Saudi i(als
of /hich has not been disputed, and his alle#ation that he eceived a !onthl( sala( of 1,, Saudi
i(als fo the fist - !onths and 2,, Saudi i(als fo the &th !onth until the end of the ".th !onth
not havin# been successfull( efuted, he is entitled to SR5,200,
%1
not SR&,&,,, epesentin# the
total deficient pa(!ent of his salaies fo a ".6!onth peiod.
;HEREFORE, the Decision of the Cout of *ppeals in C.*. =.R. SP. No. &.1., is !FFRME&
@+-* -*e MO&FC!TON that espondent, <illie $ato!ala3ue, is onl( entitled to &,.,, Saudi
i(als, instead of &,&,, Saudi i(als. Costs a#ainst petitione.
SO OR&ERE&.
31
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
SECOND DIVISION

G.R. No. 100641 (u$e 14, 1333
F!RLE P. !LMO&EL, petitione,
vs.
N!TON!L L!'OR REL!TONS COMMSSON 6FRST &#SON8, R!"THEON PHLS.,
NC., espondents.
)polinario /omabao" 3r. for petitioner.
(icente ). Cruz" 3r." for private respondent.

NOCON, J.:
Sub4ect of this petition fo certiorari is the decision dated Mach .", "11" of the National 'abo
Relations Co!!ission in N'RC Case No.
,,6,,)-&6+1 /hich evesed and set aside the 'abo *bite@s decision dated Septe!be .2, "1+1
and odeed instead the pa(!ent of sepaation pa( and financial assistance of P",,,,,,.,,.
Petitione i!putes #ave abuse of discetion on the pat of the Co!!ission and pa(s fo the
einstate!ent of the 'abo *bite@s decision /hich declaed his te!ination on the #ound of
edundanc( ille#al.
Petitione 9ale P. *l!odiel is a cetified public accountant /ho /as hied in Octobe, "1+2 as Cost
*ccountin# Mana#e of espondent Ra(theon Philippines, Inc. thou#h a eputable place!ent fi!,
8ohn Cle!ents Consultants, Inc. /ith a statin# !onthl( sala( of P"+,,,,.,,. $efoe said
e!plo(!ent, he /as the accounts eBecutive of Inte#ated Micoelectonics, Inc. fo seveal (eas.
5e left his lucative 4ob theein in vie/ of the po!isin# caee offeed b( Ra(theon. 5e stated as a
pobationa( o te!poa( e!plo(ee. *s Cost *ccountin# Mana#e, his !a4o duties /ee0 >"? plan,
coodinate and ca( out (ea and ph(sical invento(A >.? fo!ulate and issue out had copies of
Standad Poduct costin# and othe cost:picin# anal(sis if needed and e3uied and >%? set up the
/itten Cost *ccountin# S(ste! fo the /hole co!pan(. *fte a fe/ !onths, he /as #iven a
e#ulaiEation incease of P",),,.,, a !onth. Not lon# theeafte, his sala( /as inceased to
P.",),,.,, a !onth.
On *u#ust "2, "1++, he eco!!ended and sub!itted a Cost *ccountin#:9inance Reo#aniEation,
affectin# the /hole finance #oup but the sa!e /as disappoved b( the Contolle. 5o/eve, he
/as assued b( the Contolle that should his position o depat!ent /hich /as appaentl( a one6
!an depat!ent /ith no staff beco!es untenable o unable to delive the needed sevice due to
!anpo/e constaint, he /ould be #iven a thee >%? (ea advance notice.
In the !eanti!e, the standad cost accountin# s(ste! /as installed and used at the Ra(theon
plants and subsidiaies /old/ide. It /as li7e/ise adopted and installed in the Philippine
opeations. *s a conse3uence, the sevices of a Cost *ccountin# Mana#e alle#edl( entailed onl(
the sub!ission of peiodic epots that /ould use co!puteiEed fo!s pescibed and desi#ned b(
the intenational head office of the Ra(theon Co!pan( in Califonia, DS*.
On 8anua( .2, "1+1, petitione /as su!!oned b( his i!!ediate boss and in the pesence of IRD
Mana#e, M. Rolando Estada, he /as told of the abolition of his position on the #ound of
edundanc(. 5e pleaded /ith !ana#e!ent to defe its action o tansfe hi! to anothe
depat!ent, but he /as told that the decision of !ana#e!ent /as final and that the sa!e has
been conve(ed to the Depat!ent of 'abo and E!plo(!ent. Thus, he /as constained to file the
co!plaint fo ille#al dis!issal befoe the *bitation $anch of the National Capital Re#ion, N'RC,
Depat!ent of 'abo and E!plo(!ent.
On Septe!be .2, "1+1, 'abo *bite Dais( Cauton6$acelona endeed a decision, the
dispositive potion of /hich eads as follo/s0
<5ERE9ORE, 4ud#!ent is heeb( endeed declain# that co!plainant@s
te!ination on the #ound of edundanc( is hi#hl( ie#ula and /ithout le#al
and factual basis, thus odein# the espondents to einstate co!plainant to
his fo!e position /ith full bac7/a#es /ithout lost of senioit( i#hts and othe
benefits. Respondents ae futhe odeed to pa( co!plainant P.,,,,,,.,, as
!oal da!a#es and P.,,,,,.,, as eBe!pla( da!a#es, plus ten pecent
>",V? of the total a/ad as attone(@s fees.
1
Ra(theon appealed theefo! on the #ounds that the 'abo *bite co!!itted #ave abuse of
discetion in den(in# its i#hts to dis!iss petitione on the #ound of edundanc(, in el(in# on
baseless su!ises and self6sevin# assetions of the petitione that its act /as tainted /ith !alice
and bad faith and in a/adin# !oal and eBe!pla( da!a#es and attone(@s fees.
On Mach .", "11", the N'RC evesed the decision and diected Ra(theon to pa( petitione the
total su! of P",,,,,,.,, as sepaation pa(:financial assistance. The dispositive potion of /hich is
heeb( 3uoted as follo/s0
<5ERE9ORE, the appealed decision is heeb( set aside. In its stead, Ode
is heeb( issued diectin# espondent to pa( co!plainant the total sepaation
pa(:financial assistance of One 5unded Thousand Pesos >P",,,,,,.,,?.
SO ORDERED.
2
32
9o! this decision, petitione filed the instant petition avein# that0
The public espondent co!!itted #ave abuse of discetion a!ountin# to >lac7
of? o in eBcess of 4uisdiction in declain# as valid and 4ustified the te!ination
of petitione on the #ound of edundanc( in the face of cleal( established
findin# that petitione@s te!ination /as tainted /ith !alice, bad faith and
ie#ulait(.
3
Te!ination of an e!plo(ee@s sevices because of edundanc( is #ovened b( *ticle .+% of the
'abo Code /hich povides as follo/s0
*t. .+%. Closure of establishment and reduction of personnel. J The
e!plo(e !a( also te!inate the e!plo(!ent of an( e!plo(ee due to
installation of labo6savin# devices, edundanc(, etench!ent to pevent
losses o the closin# o cessation of opeation of the establish!ent o
undeta7in# unless the closin# is fo the pupose of cicu!ventin# the
povisions of this Title, b( sevin# a /itten notice on the /o7e and the
Depat!ent of 'abo and E!plo(!ent at least one >"? !onth befoe the
intended date theeof. In case of te!ination due to installation of labo6savin#
devices o edundanc(, the /o7e affected theeb( shall be entitled to a
sepaation pa( e3uivalent to at least one >"? !onth pa( fo eve( (ea of
sevice, /hicheve is hi#he. In case of etench!ent to pevent losses and in
cases of closue o cessation of opeations of establish!ent o undeta7in# not
due to seious business losses o financial eveses, the sepaation pa( shall
be e3uivalent to at least one >"? !onth pa( o at least one6half >":.? !onth pa(
fo eve( (ea of sevice, /hicheve is hi#he. * faction of at least siB >)?
!onths shall be consideed as one >"? /hole (ea.
Thee is no dispute that petitione /as dul( advised, one >"? !onth befoe, of the te!ination of his
e!plo(!ent on the #ound of edundanc( in a /itten notice b( his i!!ediate supeio, Ms.
Ma#dalena $.D. 'opeE so!eti!e in the aftenoon of 8anua( .2, "1+1. 5e /as issued a chec7 fo
P&-,+)%.,, epesentin# sepaation pa( but in vie/ of his efusal to ac7no/led#e the notice and
the chec7, the( /ee sent to hi! thu e#isteed !ail on 8anua( %,, "1+1. The Depat!ent of
'abo and E!plo(!ent /as seved a cop( of the notice of te!ination of petitione in accodance
/ith the petinent povisions of the 'abo Code and the i!ple!entin# ules.
The cuB of the contoves( lies on /hethe bad faith, !alice and ie#ulait( cept in the abolition
of petitione@s position of Cost *ccountin# Mana#e on the #ound of edundanc(. Petitione clai!s
that the functions of his position /ee absobed b( the Pa(oll:Mis:9inance Depat!ent unde the
!ana#e!ent of Dann( *n# Tan Chai, a esident alien /ithout an( /o7in# pe!it fo! the
Depat!ent of 'abo and E!plo(!ent as e3uied b( la/. Petitione elies on the testi!on( of
Ra(theon@s /itness to the effect that coolla( functions appetainin# to cost accountin# /ee
dispesed to othe units in the 9inance Depat!ent. *nd #antin# that his depat!ent has to be
declaed edundant, he clai!s that he should have been the Mana#e of the Pa(oll:Mis:9inance
Depat!ent /hich handled #eneal accountin#, pa(oll and encodin#. *s a $. S. *ccountin#
#aduate, a CP* /ith M.$.*. units, ." (eas of /o7 eBpeience, and a natual bon 9ilipino, he
clai!s that he is bette 3ualified than *n# Tan Chai, a $.S. Industial En#inee, hied !eel( as a
S(ste!s *nal(st Po#a!!e o its e3uivalent in eal( "1+2, po!oted as MIS Mana#e onl(
duin# the !iddle pat of "1++ and a esident alien.
On the othe hand, Ra(theon insists that petitione@s functions as Cost *ccountin# Mana#e had
not been absobed b( *n# Tan Chai, a pe!anent esident bon in this count(. It clai!s to have
established belo/ that *n# Tan Chai did not displace petitione o absob his functions and duties
as the( /ee occup(in# entiel( diffeent and distinct positions e3uiin# diffeent sets of eBpetise
o 3ualifications and discha#in# functions alto#ethe diffeent and foei#n fo! that of petitione@s
abolished position. Ra(theon debun7s petitione@s eliance on the testi!on( of M. Estada sa(in#
that the sa!e /itness testified unde oath that the functions of the Cost *ccountin# Mana#e had
been co!pletel( dispensed /ith and the position itself had been totall( abolished.
<hethe petitione@s functions as Cost *ccountin# Mana#e have been dispensed /ith o !eel(
absobed b( anothe is ho/eve i!!ateial. Thus, not/ithstandin# the death of evidence on the
said 3uestion, a esolution of this case can be aived at /ithout delvin# into this !atte. 9o even
concedin# that the functions of petitione@s position /ee !eel( tansfeed, no !alice o bad faith
can be i!puted fo! said act. * suve( of eBistin# case la/ /ill disclose that in 1iltshire File Co."
Inc. v. ,/'C,
4
the position of Sales Mana#e /as abolished on the #ound of edundanc( as the
duties peviousl( discha#ed b( the Sales Mana#e si!pl( added to the duties of the =eneal
Mana#e to /ho! the Sales Mana#e used to epot. In ad4ud#in# said te!ination as le#al, this
Cout said that edundanc(, fo puposes of ou 'abo Code, eBists /hee the sevices of an
e!plo(ee ae in eBcess of /hat is easonabl( de!anded b( the actual e3uie!ents of the
entepise. The chaacteiEation of an e!plo(ee@s sevices as no lon#e necessa( o sustainable,
and theefoe, popel( te!inable, /as an eBecise of business 4ud#!ent on the pat of the
e!plo(e. The /isdo! o soundness of such chaacteiEation o decision /as not sub4ect to
discetiona( evie/ on the pat of the 'abo *bite no of the N'RC so lon#, of couse, as
violation of la/ o !eel( abita( and !alicious action is not sho/n.
In the case of International &acleod" Inc. v. Intermediate )ppellate Court,
5
this Cout also
consideed the position of =oven!ent Relations Office to have beco!e edundant in vie/ of the
appoint!ent of the Intenational 5eav( E3uip!ent Copoation as the co!pan(@s deale /ith the
#oven!ent. It held theein that the dete!ination of the need fo the phasin# out of a depat!ent
as a labo and cost savin# device because it /as no lon#e econo!ical to etain said sevices is a
!ana#e!ent peo#ative and the couts /ill not intefee /ith the eBecise theeof as lon# as no
abuse of discetion o !eel( abita( o !alicious action on the pat of !ana#e!ent is sho/n.
In the sa!e vein, this Cout uled in 0ondoc v. People8s 0an4 and -rust Co."
6
that the ban7@s boad
of diectos possessed the po/e to e!ove a depat!ent !ana#e /hose position depended on
the etention of the tust and confidence of !ana#e!ent and /hethe thee /as need fo his
sevices. *lthou#h so!e vindictive !otivation !i#ht have i!pelled the abolition of his position, this
Cout eBpounded that it is undeniable that the ban7@s boad of diectos possessed the po/e to
e!ove hi! and to dete!ine /hethe the inteest of the ban7 4ustified the eBistence of his
depat!ent.
Indeed, an e!plo(e has no le#al obli#ation to 7eep !oe e!plo(ees than ae necessa( fo the
opeation of its business. Petitione does not dispute the fact that a cost accountin# s(ste! /as
installed and used at Ra(theon subsidiaies and plants /old/ideA and that the functions of his
position involve the sub!ission of peiodic epots utiliEin# co!puteiEed fo!s desi#ned and
33
pescibed b( the head office /ith the installation of said accountin# s(ste!. Petitione atte!pts to
contovet these ealities b( alle#in# that so!e of the functions of his position /ee still
indispensable and /ee actuall( dispesed to anothe depat!ent. <hat these indispensable
functions that /ee dispesed, he failed ho/eve, to specif( and point out. $esides, the fact that the
functions of a position /ee si!pl( added to the duties of anothe does not affect the le#iti!ac( of
the e!plo(e@s i#ht to abolish a position /hen done in the no!al eBecise of its peo#ative to
adopt sound business pactices in the !ana#e!ent of its affais.
Considein# futhe that petitione heein held a position /hich /as definitel( !ana#eial in
chaacte, Ra(theon had a boad latitude of discetion in abolishin# his position. *n e!plo(e has a
!uch /ide discetion in te!inatin# e!plo(!ent elationship of !ana#eial pesonnel co!paed
to an7 and file e!plo(ees.
7
The eason obviousl( is that offices in such 7e( positions pefo! not
onl( functions /hich b( natue e3uie the e!plo(e@s full tust and confidence but also functions
that spell the success o failue of an entepise.
'i7e/ise destitute of !eit is petitione@s i!putation of unla/ful disci!ination /hen Ra(theon
caused coolla( functions appetainin# to cost accountin# to be absobed b( Dann( *n# Tan Chai,
a esident alien /ithout a /o7in# pe!it. *ticle -, of the 'abo Code /hich e3uies e!plo(!ent
pe!it efes to non6esident aliens. The e!plo(!ent pe!it is e3uied fo ent( into the count(
fo e!plo(!ent puposes and is issued afte dete!ination of the non6availabilit( of a peson in the
Philippines /ho is co!petent, able and /illin# at the ti!e of application to pefo! the sevices fo
/hich the alien is desied. Since *n# Tan Chai is a esident alien, he does not fall /ithin the a!bit
of the povision.
Petitione also assails Ra(theon@s choice of *n# Tan Chai to head the Pa(oll:Mis:9inance
Depat!ent, clai!in# that he is bette 3ualified fo the position. It should be noted, ho/eve, that
*n# Tan Chai /as po!oted to the position duin# the !iddle pat of "1++ o befoe the abolition of
petitione@s position in eal( "1+1. $esides the fact that *n# Tan Chai@s po!otion theeto is a
settled !atte, it has been consistentl( held that an ob4ection founded on the #ound that one has
bette cedentials ove the appointee is fo/ned upon so lon# as the latte possesses the !ini!u!
3ualifications fo the position. In the case at ba, since petitione does not alle#e that *n# Tan Chai
does not 3ualif( fo the position, the Cout cannot substitute its discetion and 4ud#!ent fo that
/hich is cleal( and eBclusivel( !ana#e!ent peo#ative. To do so /ould ta7e a/a( fo! the
e!plo(e /hat i#htl( belon#s to hi! as aptl( eBplained in ,ational Federation of /abor #nions v.
,/'C0
<
It is a /ell6settled ule that labo la/s do not authoiEe intefeence /ith the
e!plo(e@s 4ud#!ent in the conduct of his business. The dete!ination of the
3ualification and fitness of /o7es fo hiin# and fiin#, po!otion o
eassi#n!ent ae eBclusive peo#atives of !ana#e!ent. The 'abo Code and
its i!ple!entin# Rules do not vest in the 'abo *bites no in the diffeent
Divisions of the N'RC >no in the couts? !ana#eial authoit(. The e!plo(e is
fee to dete!ine, usin# his o/n discetion and business 4ud#!ent, all
ele!ents of e!plo(!ent, Cfo! hiin# to fiin#C eBcept in cases of unla/ful
disci!ination o those /hich !a( be povided b( la/. Thee is none in the
instant case.
9indin# no #ave abuse of discetion on the pat of the National 'abo Relations Co!!ission in
evesin# and annullin# the decision of the 'abo *bite and that on the conta(, the te!ination of
petitione@s e!plo(!ent /as anchoed on a valid and authoiEed cause unde *ticle .+% of the
'abo Code, the instant petition fo certiorari!ust fail.
SO ORDERED.
34
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
9IRST DIVISION

G.R. No. 114337 Se2-e.ber 23, 1335
NTTO ENTERPRSES, petitione,
vs.
N!TON!L L!'OR REL!TONS COMMSSON a$% RO'ERTO C!PL, espondents.

G!PUN!N, J.:
This petition fo certiorari unde Rule )& of the Rules of Cout see7in# to annul the
decision
1
endeed b( public espondent National 'abo Relations Co!!ission, /hich evesed
the decision of the 'abo *bite.
$iefl(, the facts of the case ae as follo/s0
Petitione Nitto Entepises, a co!pan( en#a#ed in the sale of #lass and alu!inu! poducts, hied
Robeto Capili so!eti!e in Ma( "11, as an appentice !achinist, !olde and coe !a7e as
evidenced b( an appenticeship a#ee!ent
2
fo a peiod of siB >)? !onths fo! Ma( .+, "11, to
Nove!be .+, "11, /ith a dail( /a#e ate of P)).2& /hich /as 2&V of the applicable !ini!u!
/a#e.
*t aound "0,, p.!. of *u#ust ., "11,, Robeto Capili /ho /as handlin# a piece of #lass /hich he
/as /o7in# on, accidentall( hit and in4ued the le# of an office seceta( /ho /as teated at a
neab( hospital.
'ate that sa!e da(, afte office hous, pivate espondent enteed a /o7shop /ithin the office
pe!ises /hich /as not his /o7 station. Thee, he opeated one of the po/e pess !achines
/ithout authoit( and in the pocess in4ued his left thu!b. Petitione spent the a!ount of
P",,.%.,- to cove the !edication of pivate espondent.
The follo/in# da(, Robeto Capili /as as7ed to esi#n in a lette
3
/hich eads0
*u#ust ., "11,
<ala si(an# tan##ap n# utos !ula sa supebiso at /ala si(an# eBpeiensa
7un# papaano #a!itin and CTOO'C sa pa#buhat n# sala!in, saili ni(an#
desis(on an# pa##a!it n# tool at !a( dis#as(a at nada!a( pa an# isan#
se7eta(a n# 7o!pan(a.
Sa aa/ din# ito li!an# >&? !inute an# na7a7alipas !ula alas6sin#7o n#
hapon si(a a( pu!aso7 sa shop na hindi na!an sa7op n# 7an(an# tabaho.
Pina7iala!an at 7inali7ot an# !a7ina at nadis#as(a ni(a an# 7an(an# sailin#
7a!a(.
Na7a#astos an# 7o!pan(a n# !#a su!usunod0
E!e#enc( and docto fee P2"&.,,
Medecines >sic? and othes %"2.,-
$ibi#(an si(a n# 7o!pan(a n# Si(a! na aa/ na liben# sahod han##an#
!atan##al an# tahi n# 7an(an# 7a!a(.
Tatan##apin ni(a an# sahod ni(an# ani! na aa/, !ula i7a6%, n# 5ul(o at
i7a6- n# *#osto, "11,.
*n# 7o!pan(a an# !a#baba(ad n# lahat n# #astos pa#tan##al n# tahi n#
7an(an# 7a!a(, pa#7atapos n# si(a! na aa/ !ula i7a6. n# *#osto.
Sa lahat n# na7asulat sa itaas, hinihin#i n# 7o!pan(a an# 7an(an#
esi#nas(on, 7asa!a n# 7an(an# co!fi!as(on at pa#6a(on na an# lahat sa
itaas a( totoo.

Naiintindihan 7o an# lahat n# na7asulat sa itaas, at an# lahat n# ito a( a7in#
pa#7a7asala sa hindi pa#sunod sa alintuntunin n# 7o!pan(a.
>S#d.?
Robeto
Capili
35
Robeto
On *u#ust %, "11, pivate espondent eBecuted a Nuitclai! and Release in favo of petitione fo
and in consideation of the su! of P",1"..21.
4
Thee da(s afte, o on *u#ust ), "11,, pivate espondent fo!all( filed befoe the N'RC
*bitation $anch, National Capital Re#ion a co!plaint fo ille#al dis!issal and pa(!ent of othe
!oneta( benefits.
On Octobe 1, "11", the 'abo *bite endeed his decision findin# the te!ination of pivate
espondent as valid and dis!issin# the !one( clai! fo lac7 of !eit. The dispositive potion of the
ulin# eads0
<5ERE9ORE, pe!ises consideed, the te!ination is valid and fo cause,
and the !one( clai!s dis!issed fo lac7 of !eit.
The espondent ho/eve is odeed to pa( the co!plainant the a!ount of
P&,,.,, as financial assistance.
SO ORDERED.
5
'abo *bite Paticio P. 'ibo6on #ave t/o easons fo ulin# that the dis!issal of Robeto Capilian
/as valid. 9ist, pivate espondent /ho /as hied as an appentice violated the te!s of thei
a#ee!ent /hen he acted /ith #oss ne#li#ence esultin# in the in4u( not onl( to hi!self but also
to his fello/ /o7e. Second, pivate espondent had sho/n that Che does not have the pope
attitude in e!plo(!ent paticulal( the handlin# of !achines /ithout authoit( and pope tainin#.
6
On 8ul( .), "11%, the National 'abo Relations Co!!ission issued an ode evesin# the decision
of the 'abo *bite, the dispositive potion of /hich eads0
<5ERE9ORE, the appealed decision is heeb( set aside. The espondent is
heeb( diected to einstate co!plainant to his /o7 last pefo!ed /ith
bac7/a#es co!puted fo! the ti!e his /a#es /ee /ithheld up to the ti!e he
is actuall( einstated. The *bite of oi#in is heeb( diected to futhe hea
co!plainant@s !one( clai!s and to dispose the! on the basis of la/ and
evidence obtainin#.
SO ORDERED.
7
The N'RC declaed that pivate espondent /as a e#ula e!plo(ee of
petitione b( ulin# thus0
*s coectl( pointed out b( the co!plainant, /e cannot undestand ho/ an
appenticeship a#ee!ent filed /ith the Depat!ent of 'abo onl( on 8une 2,
"11, could be validl( used b( the 'abo *bite as basis to conclude that the
co!plainant /as hied b( espondent as a plain CappenticeC on Ma( .+, "11,.
Cleal(, theefoe, the co!plainant /as espondent@s e#ula e!plo(ee unde
*ticle .+, of the 'abo Code, as eal( as Ma( .+,"11,, /ho thus en4o(ed the
secuit( of tenue #uaanteed in Section %, *ticle RIII of ou "1+2 Constitution.
The co!plainant bein# fo ille#al dis!issal >a!on# othes? it then behooves
upon espondent, pusuant to *t. ..2>b? and as uled in Ed/in =esul#on vs.
N'RC, et al. >=.R. No. 1,%-1, Mach &, "11%, %d Div., 9eliciano, 3.? to pove
that the dis!issal of co!plainant /as fo a valid cause. *bsent such poof, /e
cannot but ule that the co!plainant /as ille#all( dis!issed.
<
On 8anua( .+, "11-, 'abo *bite 'ibo6on called fo a confeence at /hich onl( pivate
espondent@s epesentative /as pesent.
On *pil .., "11-, a <it of EBecution /as issued, /hich eads0
NO<, T5ERE9ORE, findin# !eit in Fpivate espondent@sG Motion fo
Issuance of the <it, (ou ae heeb( co!!anded to poceed to the pe!ises
of FpetitioneG Nitto Entepises and 8ov( 9oste located at No. l 2- *aneta
*venue, Poteo, Malabon, Meto Manila o at an( othe places /hee thei
popeties ae located and effect the einstate!ent of heein Fpivate
espondentG to his /o7 last pefo!ed o at the option of the espondent b(
pa(oll einstate!ent.
;ou ae also to collect the a!ount of P"..,)1,.+& epesentin# his bac7/a#es
as called fo in the dispositive potion, and tun ove such a!ount to this Office
fo pope disposition.
Petitione filed a !otion fo econsideation but the sa!e /as denied.
5ence, the instant petition J fo certiorari.
The issues aised befoe us ae the follo/in#0
I
<5ET5ER OR NOT PD$'IC RESPONDENT N'RC COMMITTED =R*VE
*$DSE O9 DISCRETION IN 5O'DIN= T5*T PRIV*TE RESPONDENT <*S
NOT *N *PPRENTICE.
II
36
<5ET5ER OR NOT PD$'IC RESPONDENT N'RC COMMITTED =R*VE
*$DSE O9 DISCRETION IN 5O'DIN= T5*T PETITIONER 5*D NOT
*DEND*TE'; PROVEN T5E ERISTENCE O9 * V*'ID C*DSE IN
TERMIN*TIN= T5E SERVICE O9 PRIV*TE RESPONDENT.
<e find no !eit in the petition.
Petitione assails the N'RC@s findin# that pivate espondent Robeto Capili cannot plainl( be
consideed an appentice since no appenticeship po#a! had (et been filed and appoved at the
ti!e the a#ee!ent /as eBecuted.
Petitione futhe insists that the !ee si#nin# of the appenticeship a#ee!ent alead( established
an e!plo(e6appentice elationship.
Petitione@s a#u!ent is eoneous.
The la/ is clea on this !atte. *ticle )" of the 'abo Code povides0
Contents of appenticeship a#ee!ent. J *ppenticeship a#ee!ents,
includin# the !ain ates of appentices, shall confo! to the ules issued b(
the Ministe of 'abo and E!plo(!ent. The peiod of appenticeship shall not
eBceed siB !onths. *ppenticeship a#ee!ents povidin# fo /a#e ates belo/
the le#al !ini!u! /a#e, /hich in no case shall stat belo/ 2&V pe cent of
the applicable !ini!u! /a#e, !a( be enteed into onl( in accodance /ith
appenticeship po#a! dul( appoved b( the Ministe of 'abo and
E!plo(!ent. The Minist( shall develop standad !odel po#a!s of
appenticeship. >e!phasis supplied?
In the case at bench, the appenticeship a#ee!ent bet/een petitione and pivate espondent /as
eBecuted on Ma( .+, "11, alle#edl( e!plo(in# the latte as an appentice in the tade of Ccae
!a7e:!olde.C On the sa!e date, an appenticeship po#a! /as pepaed b( petitione and
sub!itted to the Depat!ent of 'abo and E!plo(!ent. 5o/eve, the appenticeship *#ee!ent
/as filed onl( on 8une 2, "11,. Not/ithstandin# the absence of appoval b( the Depat!ent of
'abo and E!plo(!ent, the appenticeship a#ee!ent /as enfoced the da( it /as si#ned.
$ased on the evidence befoe us, petitione did not co!pl( /ith the e3uie!ents of the la/. It is
!andated that appenticeship a#ee!ents enteed into b( the e!plo(e and appentice shall be
enteed onl( in accodance /ith the appenticeship po#a! dul( appoved b( the Ministe of 'abo
and E!plo(!ent.
Pio appoval b( the Depat!ent of 'abo and E!plo(!ent of the poposed appenticeship
po#a! is, theefoe, a condition sine quo non befoe an appenticeship a#ee!ent can be validl(
enteed into.
The act of filin# the poposed appenticeship po#a! /ith the Depat!ent of 'abo and
E!plo(!ent is a peli!ina( step to/ads its final appoval and does not instantaneousl( #ive ise
to an e!plo(e6appentice elationship.
*ticle &2 of the 'abo Code povides that the State ai!s to Cestablish a national appenticeship
po#a! thou#h the paticipation of e!plo(es, /o7es and #oven!ent and non6#oven!ent
a#enciesC and Cto establish appenticeship standads fo the potection of appentices.C To tanslate
such ob4ectives into eBistence, pio appoval of the DO'E to an( appenticeship po#a! has to be
secued as a condition sine qua non befoe an( such appenticeship a#ee!ent can be full(
enfoced. The ole of the DO'E in appenticeship po#a!s and a#ee!ents cannot be debased.
5ence, since the appenticeship a#ee!ent bet/een petitione and pivate espondent has no
foce and effect in the absence of a valid appenticeship po#a! dul( appoved b( the DO'E,
pivate espondent@s assetion that he /as hied not as an appentice but as a delive( bo(
>C7a#adoC o CpahinanteC? deseves cedence. 5e should i#htl( be consideed as a e#ula
e!plo(ee of petitione as defined b( *ticle .+, of the 'abo Code0
*t. .+,. Re#ula and Casual E!plo(!ent. J -he provisions of written
agreement to the contrary notwithstanding and regardless of the oral
agreement of the parties" an employment shall be deemed to be regular where
the employee has been engaged to perform activities which are usually
necessary or desirable in the usual business or trade of the employer" eBcept
/hee the e!plo(!ent has been fiBed fo a specific po4ect o undeta7in# the
co!pletion o te!ination of /hich has been dete!ined at the ti!e of the
en#a#e!ent of the e!plo(ee o /hee the /o7 o sevices to be pefo!ed is
seasonal in natue and the e!plo(!ent is fo the duation of the season.
*n e!plo(!ent shall be dee!ed to be casual if it is not coveed b( the
pecedin# paa#aph0Provided, That, an( e!plo(ee /ho has endeed at least
one (ea of sevice, /hethe such sevice is continuous o bo7en, shall be
consideed a e#ula e!plo(ee /ith espect to the activit( in /hich he is
e!plo(ed and his e!plo(!ent shall continue /hile such activit( eBists.
>E!phasis supplied?
and pusuant to the constitutional !andate to Cpotect the i#hts of /o7es and po!ote
thei /elfae.C
3
Petitione futhe a#ues that, thee is a valid cause fo the dis!issal of pivate espondent.
Thee is an abundance of cases /heein the Cout uled that the t/in e3uie!ents of due pocess,
substantive and pocedual, !ust be co!plied /ith, befoe valid dis!issal eBists.
10
<ithout /hich,
the dis!issal beco!es void.
The t/in e3uie!ents of notice and heain# constitute the essential ele!ents of due pocess. This
si!pl( !eans that the e!plo(e shall affod the /o7e a!ple oppotunit( to be head and to
defend hi!self /ith the assistance of his epesentative, if he so desies.
37
*!ple oppotunit( connotes eve( 7ind of assistance that !ana#e!ent !ust accod the e!plo(ee
to enable hi! to pepae ade3uatel( fo his defense includin# le#al epesentation.
11
*s held in the case of Pepsi9Cola 0ottling Co." Inc. v. ,/'C0
12
The la/ e3uies that the e!plo(e !ust funish the /o7e sou#ht to be
dis!issed /ith t/o >.? /itten notices befoe te!ination of e!plo(ee can be
le#all( effected0 >"? notice /hich appises the e!plo(ee of the paticula acts
o o!issions fo /hich his dis!issal is sou#htA and >.? the subse3uent notice
/hich info!s the e!plo(ee of the e!plo(e@s decision to dis!iss hi! >Sec.
"%, $P "%,A Sec. .6) Rule RIV, $oo7 V, Rules and Re#ulations I!ple!entin#
the 'abo Code as a!ended?. 9ailue to co!pl( /ith the e3uie!ents taints
the dis!issal /ith ille#alit(. This pocedue is !andato(, in the absence of
/hich, an( 4ud#!ent eached b( !ana#e!ent is void and in eBistent >Tin#son,
8. vs. N'RC, "+& SCR* -1+ F"11,GA National Sevice Cop. vs. N'RC, ")+
SCR* "..A Ruff( vs. N'RC. "+. SCR* %)& F"11,G?.
The fact is pivate espondent filed a case of ille#al dis!issal /ith the 'abo *bite onl( thee da(s
afte he /as !ade to si#n a Nuitclai!, a clea indication that such esi#nation /as not volunta(
and delibeate.
Pivate espondent aveed that he /as actuall( e!plo(ed b( petitione as a delive( bo(
>C7a#adoC o CpahinanteC?.
5e futhe asseted that petitione Cston#6a!edC hi! into si#nin# the afoe!entioned esi#nation
lette and 3uitclai! /ithout eBplainin# to hi! the contents theeof. Petitione !ade it clea to hi!
that an(/a(, he did not have a choice.
13
Petitione cannot dis#uise the su!!a( dis!issal of pivate espondent b( ochestatin# the latte@s
alle#ed esi#nation and subse3uent eBecution of a Nuitclai! and Release. * 4udicious eBa!ination
of both events belies an( spontaneit( on pivate espondent@s pat.
<5ERE9ORE, findin# no abuse of discetion co!!itted b( public espondent National 'abo
Relations Co!!ission, the appealed decision is heeb( *99IRMED.
SO ORDERED.
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
T5IRD DIVISION

G.R. No. 122317 (u1y 12, 1333
M!RTES 'ERN!R&O, EL#R! GO &!M!NTE, RE'ECC! E. &!#&, &!#& P. P!SCU!L,
R!EUEL ESTLLER, !L'ERT H!LL!RE, E&MUN& M. CORTE=, (OSELTO O. !G&ON
GEORGE P. LGUT!N (R., CELSO M. "!=!R, !LE? G. CORPU=, RON!L& M. &ELFN,
RO;EN! M. T!'!EUERO, COR!=ON C. &ELOS RE"ES, RO'ERT G. NOOR!, ML!GROS
O. LEEUG!N, !&R!N! F. T!TLONGH!R, GE C!'!N&UCOS, COCO" NO'ELLO,
&OREN&! C!NTM'UH!N, RO'ERT M!RCELO, LL'ETH E. M!RMOLE(O, (OSE E.
S!LES, S!'EL M!M!U!G, #OLET! G. MONTES, !L'NO TECSON, MELO&" #. GRUEL!,
'ERN!&ETH &. !GERO, C"NTH! &E #ER!, L!N R. CORTE=, M!. S!'EL '.
CONCEPCON, &N&O #!LERO, =EN!&! M!T!, !REL &EL PL!R, M!RG!RET CECL!
C!NO=!, THELM! SE'!ST!N, M!. (E!NETTE CER#!NTES, (E!NNE R!ML, RO=!&!
P!SCU!L, PNG" '!LOLO!, EL=!'ETH #ENTUR!, GR!CE S. P!R&O a$%
TMOS!,petitiones,
vs.
N!TON!L L!'OR REL!TONS COMMSSON a$% F!R E!ST '!NG !N& TRUST
COMP!N", espondents.

P!NG!N'!N, J.:
38
The &agna Carta fo Disabled Pesons !andates that 3ualified disabled pesons be #anted the
sa!e te!s and conditions of e!plo(!ent as 3ualified able6bodied e!plo(ees. Once the( have
attained the status of e#ula /o7es, the( should be accoded all the benefits #anted b( la/,
not/ithstandin# /itten o vebal contacts to the conta(. This teat!ents is ooted not !eel( on
chait( o acco!odation, but on 4ustice fo all.
-he Case
Challen#ed in the Petition fo Certiorari
1
befoe us is the 8une .,, "11& Decision
2
of the National
'abo Relations Co!!ission >N'RC?,
3
/hich affi!ed the *u#ust, .. "11- ulin# of 'abo *bite
Conelio '. 'insan#an. The labo abite@s Decision disposed as follo/s0
4
<5ERE9ORE, 4ud#!ent is heeb( endeed dis!issin# the above6!entioned
co!plaint fo lac7 of !eit.
*lso assailed is the *u#ust -, "11& Resolution
5
of the N'RC, /hich denied the Motion fo
Reconsideation.
-he Facts
The facts /ee su!!aiEed b( the N'RC in this /ise0
6
Co!plainants nu!bein# -% >p. "2), Recods? ae deaf6!utes /ho /ee hied
on vaious peiods fo! "1++ to "11% b( espondent 9a East $an7 and Tust
Co. as Mone( Sotes and Countes thou#h a unifo!l( /oded a#ee!ent
called CE!plo(!ent Contact fo 5andicapped <o7esC. >pp. )+ S )1,
Recods? The full teBt of said a#ee!ent is 3uoted belo/0
EMP'O;MENT CONTR*CT 9OR
5*NDIC*PPED <ORHERS
This Contact, enteed into b( and bet/een0
9*R E*ST $*NH *ND TRDST COMP*N;, a univesal
ban7in# copoation dul( o#aniEed and eBistin# unde
and b( vitue of the la/s of the Philippines, /ith business
addess at 9E$TC $uildin#, Mualla, Inta!uos, Manila,
epesented heein b( its *ssistant Vice Pesident, MR.
9'ORENDO =. M*R*N*N, >heeinafte efeed to as the
C$*NHC?A
6and6
JJJJJ, JJJJJ (eas old, of le#al a#e, JJJJ,
and esidin# at >heeinafte efeed to as the
>CEMP'O;EEC?.
<ITNESSET5 0 That
<5ERE*S, the $*NH, co#niEant of its social
esponsibilit(, ealiEes that thee is a need to povide
disabled and handicapped pesons #ainful e!plo(!ent
and oppotunities to ealiEe thei potentials, uplift thei
socio6econo!ic /ell bein# and /elfae and !a7e the!
poductive, self6eliant and useful citiEens to enable the!
to full( inte#ate in the !ainstea! of societ(A
<5ERE*S, thee ae cetain positions in the $*NH /hich
!a( be filled6up b( disabled and handicapped pesons,
paticulal( deaf6!utes, and the $*NH haFsG been
appoached b( so!e civic6!inded citiEens and authoiEed
#oven!ent a#encies Fe#adin#G the possibilit( of hiin#
handicapped /o7es fo these positionsA
<5ERE*S, the EMP'O;EE is one of those handicapped
/o7es /ho F/eeG eco!!ended fo possible
e!plo(!ent /ith the $*NHA
NO<, T5ERE9ORE, fo and in consideation of the
foe#oin# pe!ises and in co!pliance /ith *ticle +, of
the 'abo Code of the Philippines as a!ended, the $*NH
and the EMP'O;EE have enteed into this E!plo(!ent
Contact as follo/s0
". The $*NH a#ees to e!plo( and tain the EMP'O;EE,
and the EMP'O;EE a#ees to dili#entl( and faithfull(
/o7 /ith the $*NH, as &oney Sorter and Counter.
.. The EMP'O;EE shall pefo! a!on# othes, the
follo/in# duties and esponsibilities0
i. Sot out bills
accodin# to
coloA
ii. Count each
deno!ination pe
hunded, eithe
!anuall( o /ith
39
the aid of a
countin#
!achineA
iii. <ap and
label bills pe
hundedA
iv. Put the
/apped bills into
bundlesA and
v. Sub!it
bundled bills to
the ban7 telle fo
veification.
%. The EMP'O;EE shall unde#o a tainin# peiod of one
>"? !onth, afte /hich the $*NH shall dete!ine /hethe
o not he:she should be allo/ed to finish the e!ainin#
te! of this Contact.
-. The EMP'O;EE shall be entitled to an initial
co!pensation of P""+.,, pe da(, sub4ect to ad4ust!ent in
the sole 4ud#!ent of the $*NH, pa(able eve( "&th and
end of the !onth.1:wphi1.n;t
&. The e#ula /o7 schedule of the EMP'O;EE shall be
five >&? da(s pe /ee7, fo! Monda(s thu 9ida(s, at
ei#ht >+? hous a da(. The EMP'O;EE !a( be e3uied to
pefo! oveti!e /o7 as cicu!stance !a( /aant, fo
/hich oveti!e /o7 he:she FshallG be paid an additional
co!pensation of ".&V of his dail( ate if pefo!ed duin#
odina( da(s and "%,V if pefo!ed duin# Satuda( o
FaG est da(.
). The EMP'O;EE shall li7e/ise be entitled to the
follo/in# benefits0
i. Popotionate
"%th !onth pa(
based on his
basic dail( /a#e.
ii. 9ive >&? da(s
incentive leave.
iii. SSS pe!iu!
pa(!ent.
2. The EMP'O;EE binds hi!self:heself to abide Fb(G and
co!pl( /ith all the $*NH Rules and Re#ulations and
Policies, and to conduct hi!self:heself in a !anne
eBpected of all e!plo(ees of the $*NH.
+. The EMP'O;EE ac7no/led#es the fact that he:she
had been e!plo(ed unde a special e!plo(!ent po#a!
of the $*NH, fo /hich eason the standad hiin#
e3uie!ents of the $*NH /ee not applied in his:he
case. Conse3uentl(, the EMP'O;EE ac7no/led#es and
accepts the fact that the te!s and conditions of the
e!plo(!ent #eneall( obseved b( the $*NH /ith espect
to the $*NH@s e#ula e!plo(ee ae not applicable to the
EMP'O;EE, and that theefoe, the te!s and conditions
of the EMP'O;EE@s e!plo(!ent /ith the $*NH shall be
#ovened solel( and eBclusivel( b( this Contact and b(
the applicable ules and e#ulations that the Depat!ent
of 'abo and E!plo(!ent !a( issue in connection /ith
the e!plo(!ent ofdisabled and handicapped /o7es.
Moe specificall(, the EMP'O;EE heeb( ac7no/led#es
that the povisions of $oo7 SiB of the 'abo Code of the
Philippines as a!ended, paticulal( on e#ulation of
e!plo(!ent and sepaation pa( ae not applicable to
hi!:he.
1. The E!plo(!ent Contact shall be fo a peiod of siB
>)? !onths o fo! JJ to JJ unless ealie te!inated
b( the $*NH fo an( 4ust o easonable cause. *n(
continuation o eBtension of this Contact shall be in
/itin# and theefoe this Contact /ill auto!aticall( eBpie
at the end of its te!s unless ene/ed in /itin# b( the
$*NH.
IN <ITNESS <5EREO9, the paties, have heeunto
affiBed thei si#natueFsG this JJ da( of JJJ, JJJ at
Inta!uos, Manila, Philippines.
In "1++, t/o >.? deaf6!utes /ee hied unde this *#ee!entA in "1+1 anothe
t/o >.?A in "11,, nineteen >"1?A in "11" siB >)?A in "11., siB >)? and in "11%,
t/ent(6one >."?. Thei e!plo(!entFsG /ee ene/ed eve( siB !onths such
that b( the ti!e this case aose, thee /ee fift(6siB >&)? deaf6!utes /ho /ee
e!plo(ed b( espondent unde the said e!plo(!ent a#ee!ent. The last one
/as Thel!a Malindo( /ho /as e!plo(ed in "11. and /hose contact eBpied
on 8ul( "11%.
40
BBB BBB BBB
Disclai!in# that co!plainants /ee e#ula e!plo(ees, espondent 9a East
$an7 and Tust Co!pan( !aintained that co!plainants /ho ae a special
class of /o7es J the heain# i!paied e!plo(ees /ee hied te!poail(
unde FaG special e!plo(!ent aan#e!ent /hich /as a esult of ovetues
!ade b( so!e civic and political pesonalities to the espondent $an7A that
co!plainantFsG /ee hied due to Cpa7iusapC /hich !ust be consideed in the
li#ht of the conteBt caee and /o7in# envion!ent /hich is to !aintain and
sten#then a cops of pofessionals tained and 3ualified offices and e#ula
e!plo(ees /ho ae baccalaueate de#ee holdes fo! eBcellent schools
/hich is an unbendin# polic( in the hiin# of e#ula e!plo(eesA that in addition
to this, tainin# continues so that the e#ula e!plo(ee #o/s in the copoate
laddeA that the idea of hiin# handicapped /o7es /as acceptable to the!
onl( on a special aan#e!ent basisA that it /as adopted the special po#a!
to help tide ove a #oup of /o7es such as deaf6!utes li7e the co!plainants
/ho could do !anual /o7 fo the espondent $an7A that the tas7 of countin#
and sotin# of bills /hich /as bein# pefo!ed b( telles could be assi#ned to
deaf6!utes that the countin# and sotin# of !one( ae tellein# /o7s /hich
/ee al/a(s lo#icall( and natuall( pat and pacel of the telles@ no!al
functionsA that fo! the be#innin# thee have been no sepaate ite!s in the
espondent $an7 plantilla fo sotes o countesA that the telles the!selves
alead( did the sotin# and countin# choe as a e#ula featue and inte#al
pat of thei duties >p. 12, Recods?A that thou#h the Cpa7iusapC of *tuo
$o4al, the telles /ee elieved of this tas7 of countin# and sotin# bills in favo
of deaf6!utes /ithout ceatin# ne/ positions as thee is no position eithe in
the espondent o in an( othe ban7 in the Philippines /hich deals /ith puel(
countin# and sotin# of bills in ban7in# opeations.
Petitiones specified /hen each of the! /as hied and di!issed, viz0
7
N*ME O9 PETITIONER <ORHP'*CE Date 5ied Date Dis!issed
". M*RITES $ERN*RDO Inta!uos ".6Nov61, "26Nov61%
.. E'VIR* =O DI*M*NTE Inta!uos .-68an61, ""68an61-
%. RE$ECC* E. D*VID Inta!uos ")6*p61, .%6Oct61%
-. D*VID P. P*SCD*' $el6*i "&6Oct6++ ."6Nov61-
&. R*NDE' ESTI''ER Inta!uos .68ul61. -68an61-
). *'$ERT 5*''*RE <est -68an61" 168an61-
2. EDMDND M. CORTEL $el6*i "&68an61" %6Dec61%
+. 8OSE'ITO O. *=DON Inta!uos &6Nov61, "26Nov61%
1. =EOR=E P. 'I=DT*N 8R. Inta!uos )6Sep6+1 "168an61-
",. CE'SO M. ;*L*R Inta!uos +69eb61% +6*u#61%
"". *'ER =. CORPDL Inta!uos "&69eb61% "&6*u#61%
".. RON*'D M. DE'9IN Inta!uos ..69eb61% ..6*u#61%
"%. RO<EN* M. T*$*NDERO Inta!uos ..69eb61% ..6*u#61%
"-. COR*LON C. DE'OS RE;ES Inta!uos +69eb61% +6*u#61%
"&. RO$ERT =. NOOR* Inta!uos "&69eb61% "&6*u#61%
"). MI'*=ROS O. 'ENDI=*N Inta!uos "69eb61% "6*u#61%
"2. *DRI*N* 9. T*T'ON=5*RI Inta!uos ..68an61% ..68ul61%
"+. IHE C*$DNDDCOS Inta!uos .-69eb61% .-6*u#61%
"1. COCO; NO$E''O Inta!uos ..69eb61% ..6*u#61%
.,. DOREND* C*TIM$D5*N Inta!uos "&69eb61% "&6*u#61%
.". RO$ERT M*RCE'O <est %" 8D' 1% + "6*u#61%
... 'I'I$ET5 N. M*RMO'E8O <est "&68un61, ."6Nov61%
.%. 8OSE E. S*'ES <est )6*u#61. ".6Oct61%
.-. IS*$E' M*M*D*= <est +6Ma(61. ",6Nov61%
.&. VIO'ET* =. MONTES Inta!uos .69eb61, "&68an61-
.). *'$INO TECSON Inta!uos 26Nov61" ",6Nov61%
.2. ME'OD; $. =RDE'* <est .+6Oct61" %6Nov61%
.+. $ERN*DET5 D. *=ERO <est "16Dec61, .26Dec61%
.1. C;NT5I* DE VER* $el6*i .)68un61, %6Dec61%
%,. '*NI R. CORTEL $el6*i "&6Oct6++ ",6Dec61%
%". M*RI* IS*$E' $.CONCEPCION <est )6Sep61, )69eb61-
%.. DINDO V*'ERIO Inta!uos %,6Ma(61% %,6Nov61%
%%. LEN*ID* M*T* Inta!uos ",69eb61% ",6*u#61%
%-. *RIE' DE' PI'*R Inta!uos .-69eb61% .-6*u#61%
%&. M*R=*RET CECI'I* C*NOL* Inta!uos .268ul61, -69eb61-
%). T5E'M* SE$*STI*N Inta!uos ".6Nov61, "26Nov61%
%2. M*. 8E*NETTE CERV*NTES <est )68un61. 26Dec61%
%+. 8E*NNIE R*MI' Inta!uos .%6*p61, ".6Oct61%
%1. ROL*ID* P*SCD*' $el6*i .,6*p6+1 .16Oct61%
-,. PINH; $*'O'O* <est %68un61" .6Dec61%
-". E'IL*$ET5 VENTDR* <est ".6Ma61, 9E$ 1- FsicG
-.. =R*CE S. P*RDO <est -6*p61, "%6Ma61-
-%. RICO TIMOS* Inta!uos .+6*p61% .+6Oct61%
*s ealie noted, the labo abite and, on appeal, the N'RC uled a#ainst heein petitiones.
5ence, this ecouse to this Cout.
3
-he 'uling of the ,/'C
41
In affi!in# the ulin# of the labo abite that heein petitiones could not be dee!ed e#ula
e!plo(ees unde *ticle .+, of the 'abo Code, as a!ended, Respondent Co!!ission
atiocinated as follo/s0
<e a#ee that *t. .+, is not contollin# heein. <e #ive due cedence to the
conclusion that co!plainants /ee hied as an acco!!odation to FtheG
eco!!endation of civic oiented pesonalities /hose e!plo(!entFsG /ee
coveed b( . . . E!plo(!ent ContactFsG /ith special povisions on duation of
contact as specified unde *t. +,. 5ence, as coectl( held b( the 'abo
*bite a quo, the te!s of the contact shall be the la/ bet/een the paties.
10
The N'RC also declaed that the Ma#na Cata fo Disabled Pesons /as not applicable,
Cconsidein# the pevailin# cicu!stances:!ilieu of the case.C
Issues
In thei Me!oandu!, petitiones cite the follo/in# #ounds in suppot of thei cause0
I. The 5onoable Co!!ission co!!itted #ave abuse of discetion in holdin#
that the petitiones J !one( sotes and countes /o7in# in a ban7 J /ee
not e#ula e!plo(ees.
II. The 5onoable Co!!ission co!!itted #ave abuse of discetion in holdin#
that the e!plo(!ent contacts si#ned and ene/ed b( the petitiones J /hich
povide fo a peiod of siB >)? !onths J /ee valid.
III. The 5onoable Co!!ission co!!itted #ave abuse of discetion in not
appl(in# the povisions of the Ma#na Cata fo the Disabled >Republic *ct No.
2.22?, on posciption a#ainst disci!ination a#ainst disabled pesons.
11
In the !ain, the Cout /ill esolve /hethe petitiones have beco!e e#ula e!plo(ees.
-his Court8s 'uling
The petition is !eitoious. 5o/eve, onl( the e!plo(ees, /ho /o7ed fo !oe than siB !onths
and /hose contacts /ee ene/ed ae dee!ed e#ula. 5ence, thei dis!issal fo! e!plo(e!ent
/as ille#al.
Preliminary &atter0
Propriety of Certiorari
Respondent 9a East $an7 and Tust Co!pan( a#ues that a evie/ of the findin#s of facts of the
N'RC is not allo/ed in a petition fo certiorari. Specificall(, it !aintains that the Cout cannot pass
upon the findin#s of public espondent that petitiones /ee not e#ula e!plo(ees.
Tue, the Cout, as a rule, does not evie/ the factual findin#s of public espondents in
a certiorari poceedin#. In esolvin# /hethe the petitiones have beco!e e#ula e!plo(ees, /e
shall not chan#e the facts found b( the public espondent. Ou tas7 is !eel( to dete!ine /hethe
the N'RC co!!itted #ave abuse of discetion in appl(in# the la/ to the established facts, as
above63uoted fo! the assailed Decision.
&ain Issue
)re Petitioners 'egular %mployeeO
Petitiones !aintain that the( should be consideed e#ula e!plo(ees, because thei tas7 as
!one( sotes and countes /as necessa( and desiable to the business of espondent ban7.
The( futhe alle#e that thei contacts seved !eel( to peclude the application of *ticle .+, and
to ba the! fo! beco!in# e#ula e!plo(ees.
Pivate espondent, on the othe hand, sub!its that petitiones /ee hied onl( as Cspecial /o7es
and should not in an( /a( be consideed as pat of the e#ula co!ple!ent of the $an7.C
12
Rathe,
the( /ee CspecialC /o7es unde *ticle +, of the 'abo Code. Pivate espondent contends that it
neve solicited the sevices of petitiones, /hose e!plo(!ent /as !eel( an Cacco!!odationC in
esponse to the e3uests of #oven!ent officials and civic6!inded citiEens. The( /ee told fo! the
stat, C/ith the assistance of #oven!ent epesentatives,C that the( could not beco!e e#ula
e!plo(ees because thee /ee no plantilla positions fo C!one( sotes,C /hose tas7 used to be
pefo!ed b( telles. Thei contacts /ee ene/ed seveal ti!es, not because of need Cbut !eel(
fo hu!anitaian easons.C Respondent sub!its that Cas of the pesent, the Cspecial positionC that
/as ceated fo the petitiones no lon#e eBistFsG in pivate espondent Fban7G, afte the latte had
decided not to ene/ an(!oe thei special e!plo(!ent contacts.C
*t the outset, let it be 7no/n that this Cout appeciates the nobilit( of pivate espondent@s effot to
povide e!plo(!ent to ph(sicall( i!paied individuals and to !a7e the! !oe poductive
!e!bes of societ(. 5o/eve, /e cannot allo/ it to elude the le#al conse3uences of that effot,
si!pl( because it no/ dee!s thei e!plo(!ent ielevant. The facts, vie/ed in li#ht of the 'abo
Code and the Ma#na Cata fo Disabled Pesons, indubitabl( sho/ that the petitiones, eBcept
siBteen of the!, should be dee!ed e#ula e!plo(ees. *s such, the( have ac3uied le#al i#hts
that this Cout is dut(6bound to potect and uphold, not as a !atte of co!passion but as a
conse3uence of la/ and 4ustice.
The unifo! e!plo(!ent contacts of the petitiones stipulated that the( shall be tained fo a
peiod of one !onth, afte /hich the e!plo(e shall dete!ine /hethe o not the( should be
allo/ed to finish the )6!onth te! of the contact. 9uthe!oe, the e!plo(e !a( te!inate the
contact at an( ti!e fo a 4ust and easonable cause. Dnless ene/ed in /itin# b( the e!plo(e,
the contact shall auto!aticall( eBpie at the end of the te!.1:wphi1.n;t
42
*ccodin# to pivate espondent, the e!plo(!ent contacts /ee pepaed in accodance /ith
*ticle +, of the 'abo code, /hich povidesA
*t. +,. %mployment agreement. J *n( e!plo(e /ho e!plo(s handicapped
/o7es shall ente into an e!plo(!ent a#ee!ent /ith the!, /hich
a#ee!ent shall include0
>a? The na!es and addesses of the handicapped
/o7es to be e!plo(edA
>b? The ate to be paid the handicapped /o7es /hich
shall be not less than sevent( five >2&V? pe cent of the
applicable le#al !ini!u! /a#eA
>c? The duation of e!plo(!ent peiodA and
>d? The /o7 to be pefo!ed b( handicapped /o7es.
The e!plo(!ent a#ee!ent shall be sub4ect to inspection b( the Seceta( of
'abo o his dul( authoiEed epesentatives.
The stipulations in the e!plo(!ent contacts indubitabl( confo! /ith the afoecited povision.
Succeedin# events and the enact!ent of R* No. 2.22 >the Ma#na Cata fo Disabled
Pesons?,
13
ho/eve, 4ustif( the application of *ticle .+, of the 'abo Code.
Respondent ban7 enteed into the afoesaid contact /ith a total of &) handicapped /o7es and
ene/ed the contacts of %2 of the!. In fact, t/o of the! /o7ed fo! "1++ to "11%. Veil(, the
ene/al of the contacts of the handicapped /o7es and the hiin# of othes lead to the conclusion
that thei tas7s /ee beneficial and necessa( to the ban7. Moe i!potant, these facts sho/ that
the( /ee 3ualified to pefo! the esponsibilities of thei positions. In othe /ods, thei disabilit(
did not ende the! un3ualified o unfit fo the tas7s assi#ned to the!.
In this li#ht, the Ma#na Cata fo Disabled Pesons !andates that a qualified disabled e!plo(ee
should be #iven the sa!e te!s and conditions of e!plo(!ent as a qualified able6bodied peson.
Section & of the Ma#na Cata povides0
Sec. &. %qual $pportunity for %mployment. J No disabled peson shall be
denied access to oppotunities fo suitable e!plo(!ent. * 3ualified disabled
e!plo(ee shall be sub4ect to the sa!e te!s and conditions of e!plo(!ent
and the sa!e co!pensation, pivile#es, benefits, fin#e benefits, incentives o
allo/ances as a 3ualified able bodied peson.
The fact that the e!plo(ees /ee 3ualified disabled pesons necessail( e!oves the e!plo(!ent
contacts fo! the a!bit of *ticle +,. Since the Ma#na Cata accods the! the i#hts of 3ualified
able6bodied pesons, the( ae thus coveed b( *ticle .+, of the 'abo Code, /hich povides0
*t. .+,. 'egular and Casual %mployment. J The povisions of /itten
a#ee!ent to the conta( not/ithstandin# and e#adless of the oal
a#ee!ent of the paties, an e!plo(!ent shall be dee!ed to be e#ula /hee
the e!plo(ee has been en#a#ed to pefo! activities /hich ae usuall(
necessa( o desiable in the usual business o tade of the e!plo(e, eBcept
/hee the e!plo(!ent has been fiBed fo a specific po4ect o undeta7in# the
co!pletion o te!ination of /hich has been dete!ined at the ti!e of the
en#a#e!ent of the e!plo(ee o /hee the /o7 o sevices to be pefo!ed is
seasonal in natue and the e!plo(!ent is fo the duation of the season.
*n e!plo(!ent shall be dee!ed to be casual if it is not coveed b( the
pecedin# paa#aph0 Povided, That, an( e!plo(ee /ho has endeed at least
one (ea of sevice, /hethe such sevice is continuous o bo7en, shall be
consideed as e#ula e!plo(ee /ith espect to the activit( in /hich he is
e!plo(ed and his e!plo(!ent shall continue /hile such activit( eBists.
The test of /hethe an e!plo(ee is e#ula /as laid do/n in !e /eon v. ,/'C,
14
in /hich this
Cout held0
The pi!a( standad, theefoe, of dete!inin# e#ula e!plo(!ent is the
easonable connection bet/een the paticula activit( pefo!ed b( the
e!plo(ee in elation to the usual tade o business of the e!plo(e. The test is
/hethe the fo!e is usuall( necessa( o desiable in the usual business o
tade of the e!plo(e. The connection can be dete!ined b( considein# the
natue of the /o7 pefo!ed and its elation to the sche!e of the paticula
business o tade in its entiet(. *lso if the e!plo(ee has been pefo!in# the
4ob fo at least one (ea, even if the pefo!ance is not continuous and !eel(
inte!ittent, the la/ dee!s epeated and continuin# need fo its pefo!ance
as sufficient evidence of the necessit( if not indispensibilit( of that activit( to
the business. 5ence, the e!plo(!ent is consideed e#ula, but onl( /ith
espect to such activit(, and /hile such activit( eBist.
<ithout a doubt, the tas7 of countin# and sotin# bills is necessa( and desiable to the business of
espondent ban7. <ith the eBception of siBteen of the!, petitiones pefo!ed these tas7s fo !oe
than siB !onths. Thus, the follo/in# t/ent(6seven petitiones should be dee!ed e#ula
e!plo(ees0 Maites $enado, Elvia =o Dia!ante, Rebecca E. David, David P. Pascual, Ra3uel
Estille, *lbet 5allae, Ed!und M. CoteE, 8oselito O. *#don, =eo#e P. 'i#utan 8., 'ilibeth N.
Ma!ole4o, 8ose E. Sales, Isabel Ma!aua#, Violeta =. Montes, *lbino Tecson, Melod( V. =uela,
$enadeth D. *#eo, C(nthia de Vea, 'ani R. CoteE, Ma. Isabel $. Concepcion, Ma#aet Cecilia
CanoEa, Thel!a Sebastian, Ma. 8eanette Cevantes, 8eannie Ra!il, RoEaida Pascual, Pin7(
$aloloa, EliEabeth Ventua and =ace S. Pado.
*s held b( the Cout, C*ticles .+, and .+" of the 'abo Code put an end to the penicious pactice
of !a7in# pe!anent casuals of ou lo/l( e!plo(ees b( the si!ple eBpedient of eBtendin# to the!
pobationa( appoint!ents, ad infinitum.C
15
The contact si#ned b( petitiones is a7in to a
pobationa( e!plo(!ent, duin# /hich the ban7 dete!ined the e!plo(ees@ fitness fo the 4ob.
<hen the ban7 ene/ed the contact afte the lapse of the siB6!onth pobationa( peiod, the
43
e!plo(ees theeb( beca!e e#ula e!plo(ees.
16
No e!plo(e is allo/ed to dete!ine indefinitel(
the fitness of its e!plo(ees.
*s e#ula e!plo(ees, the t/ent(6seven petitiones ae entitled to secuit( of tenueA that is, thei
sevices !a( be te!inated onl( fo a 4ust o authoiEed cause. $ecause espondent failed to sho/
such cause,
17
these t/ent(6seven petitiones ae dee!ed ille#all( dis!issed and theefoe entitled
to bac7 /a#es and einstate!ent /ithout loss of senioit( i#hts and othe pivile#es.
1<
Considein#
the alle#ation of espondent that the 4ob of !one( sotin# is no lon#e available because it has
been assi#ned bac7 to the telles to /ho! it oi#inall( belon#ed,
1<
petitiones ae heeb( a/aded
sepaation pa( in lieu of einstate!ent.
20
$ecause the othe siBteen /o7ed onl( fo siB !onths, the( ae not dee!ed e#ula e!plo(ees and
hence not entitled to the sa!e benefits.
)pplicability of the
0rent 'uling
Respondent ban7, citin# 0rent School v. <amora
21
in /hich the Cout upheld the validit( of an
e!plo(!ent contact /ith a fiBed te!, a#ues that the paties enteed into the contact on e3ual
footin#. It adds that the petitiones had in fact an advanta#e, because the( /ee bac7ed b( then
DS<D Seceta( Mita Pado de Tavea and Repesentative *tuo $o4al.
<e ae not pesuaded. The te! li!it in the contact /as pe!ised on the fact that the petitiones
/ee disabled, and that the ban7 had to dete!ine thei fitness fo the position. Indeed, its validit(
is based on *ticle +, of the 'abo Code. $ut as noted ealie, petitiones poved the!selves to
be qualified disabled pesons /ho, unde the Ma#na Cata fo Disabled Pesons, ae entitled to
te!s and conditions of e!plo(!ent en4o(ed b( qualified able6bodied individualsA hence, *ticle +,
does not appl( because petitiones ae qualified fo thei positions. The validation of the li!it
i!posed on thei contacts, i!posed b( eason of thei disabilit(, /as a #lain# instance of the ve(
!ischief sou#ht to be addessed b( the ne/ la/.
Moeove, it !ust be e!phasiEed that a contact of e!plo(!ent is i!pessed /ith public
inteest.
22
Povisions of applicable statutes ae dee!ed /itten into the contact, and the Cpaties
ae not at libet( to insulate the!selves and thei elationships fo! the i!pact of labo la/s and
e#ulations b( si!pl( contactin# /ith each othe.C
23
Cleal(, the a#ee!ent of the paties
e#adin# the peiod of e!plo(!ent cannot pevail ove the povisions of the Ma#na Cata fo
Disabled Pesons, /hich !andate that petitiones !ust be teated as 3ualified able6bodied
e!plo(ees.
Respondent@s eason fo te!inatin# the e!plo(!ent of petitiones is instuctive. $ecause the
$an#7o Sental n# Pilipinas >$SP? e3uied that cash in the ban7 be tuned ove to the $SP duin#
business hous fo! +0,, a.!. to &0,, p.!., espondent esoted to ni#htti!e sotin# and countin#
of !one(. Thus, it easons that this tas7 Ccould not be done b( deaf !utes because of thei
ph(sical li!itations as it is ve( is7( fo the! to tavel at ni#ht.C
24
<e find no basis fo this
a#u!ent. Tavellin# at ni#ht involves is7s to handicapped and able6bodied pesons ali7e. This
eBcuse cannot 4ustif( the te!ination of thei e!plo(!ent.
$ther *rounds Cited by 'espondent
Respondent a#ues that petitiones /ee !eel( Cacco!!odatedC e!plo(ees. This fact does not
chan#e the natue of thei e!plo(!ent. *s ealie noted, an e!plo(ee is e#ula because of the
natue of /o7 and the len#th of sevice, not because of the !ode o even the eason fo hiin#
the!.
E3uall( unavailin# ae pivate espondent@s a#u!ents that it did not #o out of its /a( to ecuit
petitiones, and that its plantilla did not contain thei positions. In /. -. !atu v. ,/'C,
25
the Cout
held that Cthe dete!ination of /hethe e!plo(!ent is casual o e#ula does not depend on the
/ill o /od of the e!plo(e, and the pocedue of hiin# . . . but on the natue of the activities
pefo!ed b( the e!plo(ee, and to so!e eBtent, the len#th of pefo!ance and its continued
eBistence.C
Pivate espondent a#ues that the petitiones /ee info!ed fo! the stat that the( could not
beco!e e#ula e!plo(ees. In fact, the ban7 adds, the( a#eed /ith the stipulation in the contact
e#adin# this point. Still, /e ae not pesuaded. The /ell6settled ule is that the chaacte of
e!plo(!ent is dete!ined not b( stipulations in the contact, but b( the natue of the /o7
pefo!ed.
26
Othe/ise, no e!plo(ee can beco!e e#ula b( the si!ple eBpedient of
incopoatin# this condition in the contact of e!plo(!ent.
In this li#ht, /e iteate ou ulin# in 'omares v. ,/'C0
27
*t. .+, /as e!placed in ou statute boo7s to pevent the cicu!vention of the
e!plo(ee@s i#ht to be secue in his tenue b( indisci!inatel( and co!pletel(
ulin# out all /itten and oal a#ee!ents inconsistent /ith the concept of
e#ula e!plo(!ent defined theein. <hee an e!plo(ee has been en#a#ed
to pefo! activities /hich ae usuall( necessa( o desiable in the usual
business of the e!plo(e, such e!plo(ee is dee!ed a e#ula e!plo(ee and
is entitled to secuit( of tenue not/ithstandin# the conta( povisions of his
contact of e!plo(!ent.
BBB BBB BBB
*t this 4unctue, the leadin# case of 0rent School" Inc. v. <amora poves
instuctive. *s eaffi!ed in subse3uent cases, this Cout has upheld the
le#alit( of fiBed6te! e!plo(!ent. It uled that the decisive dete!inant in
Cte! e!plo(!entC should not be the activities that the e!plo(ee is called
upon to pefo! but the da( cetain a#eed upon the paties fo the
co!!ence!ent and te!ination of thei e!plo(!ent elationship. $ut this
Cout /ent on to sa( that /hee fo! the cicu!stances it is appaent that the
peiods have been i!posed to peclude ac3uisition of tenuial secuit( b( the
44
e!plo(ee, the( should be stuc7 do/n o dise#aded as conta( to public
polic( and !oals.
In endein# this Decision, the Cout e!phasiEes not onl( the constitutional bias in favo of the
/o7in# class, but also the concen of the State fo the pli#ht of the disabled. The noble ob4ectives
of Ma#na Cata fo Disabled Pesons ae not based !eel( on chait( o acco!!odation, but on
4ustice and the e3ual teat!ent of qualifiedpesons, disabled o not. In the pesent case, the
handicap of petitiones >deaf6!utes? is not a hindance to thei /o7. The elo3uent poof of this
state!ent is the epeated ene/al of thei e!plo(!ent contacts. <h( then should the( be
dis!issed, si!pl( because the( ae ph(sicall( i!paiedO The Cout believes, that, afte sho/in#
thei fitness fo the /o7 assi#ned to the!, the( should be teated and #anted the sa!e i#hts li7e
an( othe e#ula e!plo(ees.
In this li#ht, /e note the Office of the Solicito =eneal@s pa(e 4oinin# the petitiones@ cause.
2<
<5ERE9ORE, pe!ises consideed, the Petition is heeb( =R*NTED. The 8une .,, "11&
Decision and the *u#ust -, "11& Resolution of the N'RC ae REVERSED and SET *SIDE.
Respondent 9a East $an7 and Tust Co!pan( is heeb( ORDERED to pa( bac7 /a#es and
sepaation pa( to each of the follo/in# t/ent(6seven >.2? petitiones, na!el(, Maites $enado,
Elvia =o Dia!ante, Rebecca E. David, David P. Pascual, Ra3uel Estille, *lbet 5allae, Ed!und
M. CoteE, 8oselito O. *#don, =eo#e P. 'i#utan 8., 'ilibeh N. Ma!ole4o, 8ose E. Sales, Isabel
Ma!aua#, Violeta =. Montes, *lbino Tecson, Melod( V. =uela, $enadeth D. *#eo, C(nthia de
Vea, 'ani R. CoteE, Ma. Isabel $. Concepcion, Ma#aet Cecilia CanoEa, Thel!a Sebastian, Ma.
8eanette Cevantes, 8eannie Ra!il, RoEaida Pascual, Pin7( $aloloa, EliEabeth Ventua and =ace
S. Pado. The N'RC is heeb( diected to co!pute the eBact a!ount due each of said e!plo(ees,
pusuant to eBistin# la/s and e#ulations, /ithin fifteen da(s fo! the finalit( of this Decision. No
costs.1:wphi1.n;t
SO ORDERED.
45