Antonio Planteras vs People
allowing BBB, CCC, DDD and AAA, a minor,
Facts:
P/S int Audie Villacin directed the elements of the
Regional Investigation Detective Division (RIDM) to
conduct surveillance operations at xxx lodge,
located in Cebu City, after receiving reports that
alleged trafficking in persons and sexual exploitation
were being committed at the said place.
March 2009 - Police officers Dumaguit and Rusiana
conducted another surveillance. They proceeded to
the lodge and were welcomed by Buhisan, who
offered them girls for sex. Buhisan led them upstairs
and they saw Planteras, the owner of the lodge, who
appeared to be aware and listening to the on-going
negotiation. Rusiana asked about the room rates
and Plateras informed him that the room charge is
P40 per hour plus 50 every succeeding hour. After
that the police officers and the girls left the lodge for
drinks within the vicinity.
April 28, 2009 – an entrapment operation was
conducted by the Regional Special investigation
unit, the Carbon Station, Barangay Tanods, and
representatives from the Department of Social
Welfare and Development (DSWD).
At the lodge, Police officers Dumaguit and Llanes
was approached by Tawi who offered girls for sexual
favors. The police officers, along with 3 girls went
upstairs. Then, Dumaguit requested one more girl
from Tawi. Buhisan came and joined the negotiation.
Tawi left and returned with a young girl. Petitioner
was behind the reception who appeared to be
listening to the said transaction. Dumaguit and
Llanes handed over the marked money to Buhisan
and also gave them P200 tip for Tawi.
After that Dumaguit executed the prearranged
signal, a missed call on the rest of the team. When
the team arrived, Dumaguit announced that they are
police officers and immediately thereafter, Buhisan
Tawi, Plateras and his wife were arrested. The girls
who were exploited were turned over to the DSWD.
2 criminal informations were filed against Buhisan,
Tawi, Plateras and his wife
Criminal Case against Plateras and his wife
- That the accused, conniving and
confederating together and mutually helping
with one another, with deliberate intent, with
intent of gain, did then and there knowingly
allow its establishment xxx lodge to be
used for the PURPOSE OF PROMOTING
TRAFFICIKING IN PERSONS, that is, by
17 years old to engage in prostitution in the
said establishment.
Buhisan and Tawi
- Accused, conniving and confederating together
mutually helping with each other, with deliberate
intent, with intent to gain, did then and there
recruit, transport and then maintain for the
purpose of prostitution, pornography, or sexual
exploitation four females, one of which is a child
who is only 17 years old, with the aggravating
circumstances:
1) Trafficked persons are children
2) Crime is committed in large scale
Prosecution presented the testimonies of Police
Officers Dumaguit and Almohallas. It also presented
the testimony of AAA to corroborate with the
testimonies of the said police officers.
AAA testified that while looking for her sister at the
vicinity of xxx, cebu city, she met buhisan who
inquired whether she wanted money in exchange for
her sexual services to customers. Buhisan would
find customers for her and they would brought to xxx
lodge where the illicit activity will be consummated.
She also knew Tawi who was also a prostitute and
would sometimes act as a pimp for her. She also
narrated that the lodge was owned by Plateras and
his wife and that they would receive payments for
room charges and sold condoms at the hotel. That
on one occasion, plateras even offered her to
another customer.
After the prosecution rested its case, all the accused,
including petitioner, filed a Demurrer to Evidence
which was granted only in favor of the wife of
Plateras.
Consequently, the defense presented the
testimonies of Plateras, Buhisan, and Tawi.
Plateras denied hearing the conversation among the
police officers and Buhisan and Tawi. He also
insisted that he does not know Buhisan and Tawi.
Buhisan testified that she was merely a helper at the
lodge. That before the entrapment operations were
conducted she was only called to assist to the 4
guests who were accompanied by Tawi.
Tawi admitted that she was a sex worker and she the use of the girls for sexual intercourse happened
knows AAA and Buhisan because they were in the lodge, right in the presence of Planteras,
engaged in the same activity. thus, he knew it.
If he did not approve of it or that it was done at the
at the lodge, he could have easily told them to go
RTC somewhere else. He did not do anything about it
Rendered a decision convicting petitioner, Buhisan which only means that he had consented to it.
and Tawi guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the The totality of the circumstance constitutes an
crime of QUALIFIED TRAFFICKING in persons in unbroken chain leading to the inescapable
violation of Sec. 4, in relation to Sec. 6 of conclusion that Planteras, through his acts and
Republic Act No. 9208 omissions, knew that the transaction happening
Antonio Planteras was also found guilty beyond within his hearing distance is for prostitution and
reasonable doubt of the crime of KNOWINGLY knowingly permitted the use of his
ALLOWING xxx Lodge to be used for the ESTABLISHEMENT therefor.
purpose of TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS of Sec. Court ruled that prosecution has, through
5, RA 9208 testimonial, documentary, and object evidence,
Planteras, Buhisan and Tawi filed their motion for overwhelmingly proved the elements of Promoting
reconsideration which was denied by the RTC. So Trafficking in Persons with MORAL CERTAINTY
they elevated the case to the CA. against accused-appellant Plateras.
As to the claim of petitioner that AAA freely engaged
in prostitution, thus, no trafficking in person was
CA committed, such is unmeritorious. KNOWLEDGE or
CONSENT of the minor is not a defense under
CA denied their appeals and affirmed their
Republic Act No. 9208. The victim's consent is
convictions.
rendered meaningless due to the coercive, abusive,
or deceptive means employed by perpetrators of
human trafficking. Even without the use of coercive,
SC abusive, or deceptive means, a minor's consent is
Petition under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court by not given out of his or her own free will.
Planteras
The petition lacks merit.
Only questions of law should be raised in petitions
filed under Rule 45. This court is not a trier of facts.
Nevertheless, granting that the court shall review the
factual incidents of this case, the petition must still
fail.
Sec. 5, RA 9208
Acts that promote trafficking in persons
a) To knowingly lease or sublease, use or allow to
be used any house, building or establishment for
the purpose of promoting trafficking in persons.
The RTC, as affirmed by the CA, still convicted
Planteras of the crime charged against him based on
circumstantial evidence and the credibility of the
testimonies of the witnesses presented by the
prosecution
In the present case, the negotiation between Tawi,
Buhisan and the girls and the poseur customers for
People vs Evangeline De Dios
Facts:
De Dios was accused of trafficking in persons
punishable under Section 4 (a), in relation to
Sections 3(a) and 6(a) of R.A. No. 9208.
The crime was attended by the Qualifying
Circumstance of minority, complainant AAA being
16 years of age, and committed in large scale.
Sometime in August 2013, AAA was peddled by De
Dios to Gay and two other male customers near the
Marikina River Park. De Dios approached Gay
whether he wanted to have sex with a girl for 500.
Negotiations ensued but De Dios refused to lower
the amount so Gay handed her 500. Gay was then
allowed to choose from among the girls and he
chose AAA.
It turned out that Gay was a poseur customer and
that De Dios was the subject of the entrapment
operation of the Anti-Human Trafficking Division of
the NBI. The NBI had been receiving several
information regarding the peddling of minors for
sexual trade under the bridge of Marikina River
Park.
The accusation against De Dios was confirmed by
AAA when she testified during the trial. She claimed
that sometime in May 2012, she had her first gimik
with De Dios’ male customer who brought her to a
hotel in Antipolo City and there he had sexual
intercourse with her and from then on she worked for
De Dios and had sex with several other male
customers. She received from De Dios P400 from
De Dios for every transaction.
Only De Dios testified for the defense. She claimed
that she had already moved to Rodriguez, Rizal from
her former residence near the bridge in Sto. Nino,
Marikina City. That she only went to Brgy Sto. Nino
when she was invited by her friend Jay and on her
way she met AAA and XXX and YYY who joined her
in the restaurant.
RTC
Found De Dios guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
the crime of QUALIFIED TRAFFICKING IN
PERSONS under Sec. 3 (a) in relation to Sec. 6 (a)
of RA 9208.
CA
Affirmed the decision of the RTC.
SC
Court dismisses the appeal. it affirms the conviction
of De Dios for the crime of Qualified Trafficking in
Persons under Sec. 3 (a) in relation to Sec. 6(a) of
RA 9208 as amended by RA 10364.
Sec. 3(a) definition of Trafficking in Persons
in People vs. Hirang, the court reiterated the
following elements of the offense, as derived from
Sec. 3 (a)
1) the act of recruitment, transportation,
transfer, or harbouring, or receipt of persons
with or without the victim’s consent or
knowledge, within or across national
boarders;
2) the means used which include threat or use
of force, or other forms of COERCION,
ABDUCTION, FRAUD, DECEPTION or
ABUSE of POWER or of positon, taking
advantage of the vulnerability of the person
or the giving or receiving of payments or
benefits to achieve the consent of a person
having control over another
3) the purpose of trafficking is exploitation
which includes exploitation or the prostitution
of others or other forms of sexual
exploitation, forced labor or services,
slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of
organs.
Sec. 6 Qualified Trafficking in Persons
(a) When the trafficked person is a Child
The prosecution witness who testified during trial,
included minor AAA and Agent Gay, whose
testimonies matched as to how De Dios committed
the crime.
AAA was still then a minor when she was offered,
along with other girls, in the illicit sexual trade upon
the promise of financial gain for their services.
De Dios denial was uncorroborated and weak.
It did not matter that there was NO THREAT,
FORCE, COERCION, ABDUCTION, FRAUD
DECEPTION or ABUSE OF POWER that was
employed by De Dios when she involved AAA in
her illicit sexual trade.
AAA was still a minor when she was exposed to
prostitution by the prodding, promises and acts
of De Dios.
Trafficking in persons may be committed also by
means of TAKING ADVANTAGE of the person’s
vulnerability as minors, a circumstance that
applied to AAA, was sufficiently alleged in the
information and proved during the trial.
This element was further achieved through the offer
of financial gain for the illicit services that were
provided by AAA to the customers of De Dios.
People vs Hirang prostitution, pornography, sexual
exploitation, forced labor, slavery,
Facts: involuntary servitude or debt bondage
June 27, 2007 – Hirang sold BBB, along with AAA, Section 6. Qualified Trafficking in Persons. - The
CCC and DDD, who were all minors at the time, to following are considered as qualified trafficking:
his Korean customers for sexual activities. Hirang
told them that they would receive P5,000 after the (a) When the trafficked person is a CHILD;
gimik with them. The girls proceeded to meet the (b)
Koreans at Chowking Restaurant in Taguig City. (c) When the crime is committed by a
Hirang instructed the girls that they should tell the SYNDICATE or in LARGE SCALE
Koreans that they are 16 years old as this was the
customer’s preference. SYNDICATE if carried out by a group of three
(3) or more persons conspiring or
When they arrived at the Chowking, Hirang talked to confederating with one another
a Korean and introduced the girls to him. The Korean
handed the money to Hirang and as he was It is deemed committed in LARGE SCALE if
counting, the NBI agents arrived and announced a committed against three (3) or more persons,
raid. NBI agents arrest Hirang, while the girls were individually or as a group
brought to the DSWD.
The information filed against Hirang
Prior to the raid, investigations have already been sufficiently alleged the recruitment and
conducted by IJM, a non-profit organization that transportation of the MINOR VICTIMS for
renders legal services and is based on Washington, sexual activities and exploitation, with the
DC. They discovered that Hirang was SELLING offender taking advantage of the
MINORS for prostitution. vulnerability of the young girls through
the guarantee of a good time and
financial gain.
RTC
Rendered its decision convicting Hirang of the crime
of Human Trafficking in violation of Section 6 of RA
9208.

CA
Appeal was denied and the RTC decision was
affirmed in toto.

SC
Court affirms Hirang’s conviction.
Hirang was charged and convicted for qualified
trafficking in persons under Section 4(a), in relation
to Section 6(a) and (c), and Section 3(a), (b) and (c)
of R.A. No. 9208,
Sec. 4 Acts of Trafficking in Persons - It shall be
unlawful for any person, natural or juridical, to
commit any of the following acts:
(a) To recruit, transport, transfer; harbor,
provide, or receive a person by any means,
including those done under the pretext of
domestic or overseas employment or training
or apprenticeship, for the purpose of
People vs Nangcas
Facts:
Victims: A 14 YO, 13 YO, 17 YO and 19 YO (Judith),
all residing at xxxx, Cagayan de Oro City
Nangcas proposed an employment as a house
helper at Camella Homes in Cagayan de Oro City
with Salary of P1,500 per month and with rest day
as Sunday to these 4 women. She even went to their
respective parents to ask their permission informing
the latter that their children would be employed at
Camella Homes in Cagayan De Oro City with 1500
salary per month. She even left her cellphone
number to the father of Judith. Their parents were
adamant at first, but since Nangcas assured them
that they would be working at Camella Homes which
would be within their reach, they eventually agreed.
Nangcas brought them to CAmella Homes but the
alleged employer was not there so they had to go to
Cogon. When they reached Cogon, she instructed
them to board a van as they would proceed to Illigan
City where the employer was. Though hesitant and
doubtful, they followed her instructions. Judith
noticed that they were already travelling far and tried
to talk to Nangcas but she was asleep for the
duration of the trip. When they reached their
destination, that was the only time when Nangcas
told them that they will be working as house helpers
in Marawi.
The girls complained and wanted to go home but
had no money to go back to Cagayan De Oro. They
had no choice but to stay in Marawi.
Nangcas brought Judith and BBB to the house of
Baby’s sister (Cairon) while AAA and CCC worked
for Baby. Nangcas went back to Cagayan de Oro.
They worked in Marawi for more than a month. They
were not paid their salaries because according to
their employers Nangcas had already collected
P1,600 for each of them. They were even made eat
left over rice with pulaka (mixed ginge, chili and
onion) as viand. They were threatened not to go out
or attempt to escape or else, the soldiers would kill
them since they were Christians.
When Judith failed to go home on her scheduled rest
day, Enerio called up Nangcas about his daughter
and told him that she was with her the other day and
that she could go home only after 2 months.
On April 2009, Judith asked permission to go home
as it was her birthday but she was denied and with
the help of the Kasambahay of the neighboring
house who lent them her cellphone, Judith was able
to call her father informing him of her whereabouts.
Enerio then went to the Police Station to report the
incident and seek assistance to rescue her daughter
and 3 other minors.
Police Inspector Vidal assisted Enerio in looking for
Nangcas, they went to her house but only her
children were there. They also left a message
inviting Nangcas to their station but she did not
respond.
The police officers then proceeded to Marawi with
the help of the owner of the cellphone who told them
the directions going to the house of their respective
employers. The 4 girls were rescued.
RTC
RTC found Nangcas guilty beyond reasonable doubt
of the crime of Qualified Trafficking in Persons.
Nangcas deception was apparent in the manner with
which she dealt with Enerio, Judith and the other 3
minors. They were made to believe that they would
be working at Camella Homes in Cagayan de Oro
City but Nangcas never bothered to inform the girls
parents of their children’s whereabouts. N
Nangcas futher deceived Enerio when she told him
that the girls were at Camella Homes when she fully
knew that they were in Marawi.
She employed deception when she brought the
girls to Marawi and since they were penniless they
had no chance to go back to Cagayan De Oro, thus
leaving them NO CHOICE but to WORK AGAINST
THEIR WILL.
She should have presented Joni Mohamad and his
mother to corroborate her testimonies. She admitted
previously providing helpers to others, and that the
incident was not the only occasion.
CA
The CA found no merits in the arguments raised by
Nangcas:
1) There is no doubt that Nangcas recruited,
transported the girls to their supposed
employer in Marawi. These are well within
the acts that may constitute trafficking, to
wit: recruitment, transportation, transfer or
harboring. This meets the 1st elements of the
offense.
2) Nangcas employed FRAUD and DECEIT
and TOOK ADVANTAGE of the Victim’s
 vulnerability to successfully recruit them
– satisfying the 2nd element.
3) The foregoing acts and means resulted in the
victims’ FORCED LABOR and SLAVERY
The appeal is dismissed and the decision of the RTC
is affirmed.
SC
Sol Gen acted as counsel for the girls.
The court affirmed Nangcas’ Conviction. Her guilt
was established beyond reasonable doubt.
Nangcas was charged and convicted for qualified
trafficking in persons under Section 4(a), in relation
to Section 6(a) and (c), and Section 3(a), (b), and
(d) of R.A. No. 9208
Sec. 4 Acts of Trafficking in Persons – it shall be
unlawful for any person, natural or juridical, to
commit any of the following acts:
a) To recruit, transport, transfer, harbor, provide
or receive any person by any means,
including those done under the pretext of
Domestic and Overseas employment or
training or apprenticeship, for the purpose
of PROSTITUTION, PORNOGRAPHY,
SEXUAL EXPLOITATION, FORCED
LABOR, SLAVERY, INVOLUNTARY
SERVITUDE or Debt Bondage.
Section 6. Qualified Trafficking in Persons. - The
following are considered as qualified trafficking:
(a) When the trafficked person is a child;
(c) When the crime is committed by a syndicate, or
in large scale. Trafficking is deemed committed by a
syndicate if carried out by a group of three (3) or
more persons conspiring or confederating with one
another. It is deemed committed in large scale if
committed against three (3) or more persons,
individually or as a group;
2) The means used include by means of threat,
use of force, or other forms of coercion,
abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power
or of taking advantage of the vulnerability of
the person, or the giving or receiving of
payments or benefits to achieve the consent
of a person having control over another
person.
3) The purpose of trafficking includes the
exploitation or the prostitution of others
or other forms of sexual exploitation,
forced labor or services, servitude or the
removal or sale of organs.
The presence of the elements were established by
the prosecution witnesses who testified during the
trial. Their testimonies established that Nangcas
employed DECEPTION and FRAUD in obtaining
the victim and their parents’ trust and
confidence in order to bring the victims to
Marawi City.
She promised the victims and their parents that they
will be working at Camella Homes in Cagayan De
Oro with an enticing salary of P1,500 per month.
Nangcas decision to bring the victims to Marawi City
was PLANNED. Her failure to notify the parents
bolsters the allegation that it was really her intention
to conceal the fact that the work was actually in
Marawi City and not in Cagayan De Oro.

Under Republic Act No. 10364,47 the

elements of trafficking m persons have
been expanded to include the following
acts:
1) The act of recruitment, obtaining, hiring,
providing, offering, transportation, transfer,
maintaining, harboring, or receipt of persons
with or without the victim’s consent or
knowledge, within or across national
borders.
People vs Ramirez
Facts:
Ramirez was charged with QUALIFIED
TRAFFICKING OF PERSONS in relation to Section
4(e) of Republic Act No. 9208.
Police Officer Nemenzo and Llanes proceeded to
the KTV Bar and disguised themselves as
customers negotiating for the prices of the minor’s
services. They ordered beer and waited for the
pimps. AAA and BBB approached them and upon
hearing that they need two more girls, Ramirez
approached them and told them that she could
provide the girls.
After Ramirez provided the 4 girls, the group left and
hailed a taxi heading for the Motel. Ramirez
instructed the girls to accept the money that they
would be given. In the taxi, Llanes handed over the
marked money to one of the girls, as soon as she
received it, he announced that they were police
officers. The police officers then went to the KTV Bar
and arrested Ramirez when BBB pointed to her as
the pimp.
The prosecution presented the testimony of BBB, a
minor, who testified that she knew Ramirez and she
was pimped out by Ramirez several times already.
The prosecution also presented the testimony of
AAA, a minor, who testified that she had already
been pimped by Ramirez twice.
Ramirez testified that she and her sister were at the
XXXX Grill watching a live band when two men
rushed to them and arrested her.
RTC
trial court's finding of overwhelming evidence
against Ramirez, as two (2) of the minor victims
positively identified her as their pimp.
Found Ramirez guilty of the crime of Qualified
Trafficking of Person in Relation to Sec. 4 (e) of
R.A. 9208 beyond reasonable doubt and sentences
her to suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and a
fine of Two million pesos.
CA
held that Ramirez not being employed at the
xxxxxxxxxxx KTV Bar was irrelevant. if BBB initiated
the negotiation with the poseur customers, the deal
was only closed when Ramirez brought another pair
of girls.
it was not uncommon for the payment to be received
by the hired girls instead of the pimps.
In any case, BBB testified that P400.00 had already
been earmarked from the P2,400.00 payment as
Ramirez' commission. This was enough to conclude
that she was the girls' pimp.
SC
Republic Act No. 9208 has since been amended by
Republic Act No. 10364[38] on February 6, 2013. In
recognition of the amendments to the law, Casio
clarifies that crimes prosecuted under Republic Act
No. 10364 must have the following elements:
Under Republic Act No. 10364, the elements of
trafficking in persons have been expanded to include
the following acts:
(1) The act of "recruitment, obtaining, hiring,
providing, offering, transportation, transfer,
maintaining, harboring, or receipt of persons with or
without the victim's consent or knowledge, within or
across national borders
(2) The means used include "by means
of threat, or use of force, or other forms of coercion,
abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or of
position, taking advantage of the vulnerability of the
person, or, the giving or receiving of payments or
benefits to achieve the consent of a person having
control over another person"
(3) The purpose of trafficking includes
"the exploitation or the prostitution of others or other
forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services,
slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of
organs[.]"[39] (Emphasis in the original)
in her handwritten letter to this Court,[49] seemingly
abandoned her earlier statement that she was just in
the area to watch a live band when the police rushed
to and arrested her. This time, she alleged that it was
BBB who approached and dragged her to the police
officers, and who also started negotiating prices.[50]
This contradicts her earlier statement that she
had NO KNOWLEDGE of the transaction.
Worse, this appears to corroborate the prosecution
witnesses' testimonies that she was indeed at the
transaction.
This Court, therefore, affirms the trial court and the
Court of Appeals' conviction of accused-appellant in
violation of Republic Act No. 9208, Section 4(e), as
qualified by Section 6(a) and punished under
Section 10(c).

People vs Monsanto
Facts:
AAA, 14 YO, was an orphan with no relatives,
working as house helper for a certain Kristine and
Reynante when she met Monsanto, who happened
to be a friend of Reynante. They became text mates
which led to a romantic and sexual relationship. He
promised her that he would send her to school. This
enticed AAA to live with him at his rented room in
Pandacan, Manila.
As testified by AAA, she was brought by Monsanto
to Robinsons Mall in Ermita, Manila and was
instructed by him to look for a foreigner and have sex
with him and get paid, thereafter. These happened
several times and she would sometimes have sex
with 2 foreigners in one day.
In February 2014, after about a year of living
together, she complained that she couldn’t sleep
because of their bed was wet. Monsanto opened her
mouth and urinated in it, which caused AAA to run
away and seek refuge at a customer’s place where
she stayed for a number of days.
To persuade AAA to return, Monsanto sent her a
message that he would give back her laptop
computer. But when AAA returned, he told her that
she could only get back her laptop if she would not
leave him. AAA pleaded with accused-appellant and
insisted on getting her laptop back, but the latter
shoved and choked her. AAA kicked accused-
appellant and ran. Witnesses helped AAA and
sought the assistance of barangay officials.
With the help of barangay tanods, Kagawad
Rebenito brought accused-appellant and a shaking
and visibly frightened AAA to the barangay hall for
investigation.
Before the barangay chairperson and Rebenito,
AAA disclosed that she was sixteen (16) years old,
and that the 43-year-old accused-appellant was her
live-in partner, as well as her pimp.
She underwent ano-genital examination by Dr.
Hernandez and the latter testified that she found
laceration and absence of hymenal tissue, which are
diagnostic of blunt force and penetrating trauma.
Social worker Clementino Dumdum, Jr. (Dumdum)
caused the dental examination of AAA upon order of
the court to determine her age.
Dr. Michael Puertollano (Dr. Puertollano), found that
all of AAA's wisdom teeth have not yet erupted and
concluded that she was at least sixteen (16) years of
age and a minor.
RTC
RTC did not find enough basis to convict accused-
appellant as charged under Republic Act (R.A.) No.
7610 because there was no evidence that he himself
transacted directly or spoke with any of AAA's
clients, even if he taught her the tricks of the flesh
trade.
However, for having
 enticed AAA to live with him by taking
advantage of her vulnerability,
 facilitating her entry into prostitution and
benefiting from it,
the RTC convicted the accused-appellant as
charged under R.A. No. 9208.
CA
Affirmed the decision of the RTC for his conviction in
violation of Section 4(a) in relation to Section 6(a)
of Republic Act No. 9208, as amended by Republic
Act No. 10364
SC
We affirm the RTC's valuation of AAA's testimony,
as affirmed by the CA, in light of its spontaneity,
steadfastness and consistency on material points
There is no merit in the claim that the RTC relied
solely on AAA's testimony.
The testimonies of the barangay kagawad and Dr.
Hernandez also bolster the truthfulness of AAA's
testimony.
Furthermore, settled is the rule that the testimony of
a single witness may be sufficient to produce a
conviction, if the same appears to be trustworthy
and reliable. If credible and convincing, that alone
would be sufficient to convict the accused.
Without a doubt, AAA was a minor when she was
enticed by accused-appellant to live with him, and
was still a minor when she was compelled to engage
in prostitution up to the time of accused-appellant's
arrest. Her minority was expressly alleged in the
Information and sufficiently established by the
prosecution.
Section 4. Acts of Trafficking in Persons. - It shall
be unlawful for any person, natural or juridical, to
commit any of the following acts:
(a) To recruit, transport, transfer; harbor, provide, or
receive a person by any means, including those
done under the pretext of domestic or overseas
employment or training or apprenticeship, for the
purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary
servitude or debt bondage;
xxxx
(e) To maintain or hire a person to engage in
prostitution or pornography;
xxxx
Section 6. Qualified Trafficking in Persons. - The
following are considered as qualified trafficking:
(a) When the trafficked person is a child;
xxxx
All the elements of human trafficking, relating to the
act, the means, and the purpose, are present in this
case. Accused-appellant makes much of the fact
that there is no evidence that he transacted directly
with AAA's clients.
Accused-appellant himself admitted that his
earnings were not enough to support himself and
AAA when he took her under his wing. Despite the
fact that they could barely afford to pay their rent and
basic necessities, AAA eventually acquired an iPad
and a laptop computer. The Court finds it incredible
that accused-appellant was turning a blind eye to the
source of these items, or that he also had no hand
in AAA's engagement in prostitution. Initiation into
the flesh trade with foreign clients requires a level of
familiarity with its ways and inner workings that an
untrained minor, particularly one living under the
same roof and under the economic control of her
middle-aged lover, would not have stumbled into on
her own.
People vs Susan Sayo
Facts:
AAA, BBB and CCC, known as the plaza girls, were
under the control and supervision of Sayo as
commercial sex workers.
AAA and BBB were minors when they began
working for Sayo. Sayo acted as their PIMP
providing them with male customers for a certain
percentage.
The "plaza girls" give her a flat rate of Fifty Pesos
(P50.00) for every male customer who will pay them
Three Hundred Pesos (P300.00) and Two Hundred
Pesos (P200.00) for every Seven Hundred Pesos
(P700.00) paying customer
SAYO would regularly furnish AAA, BBB and CCC
with male customers on the average five (5)
customers per week. Whenever they have
customers, SAYO would bring them either to a motel
or to ALFREDO ROXAS's house who provides them
a room for One Hundred Pesos (P100.00) for thirty
(30) minutes use of the room. ROXAS also provides
condom for the male customers at Thirty Pesos
(P30.00).
Authorities received information about the
exploitation of these minors and so a surveillance
was conducted.
It was verified and confirmed that there were
rampant offerings of minor prostitutes at the
Pasig Plaza, specifically by a pimp named SUSAN
SAYO.
November 15, 2005- agents posed as customers
and negotiated with Sayo for the price of the girls.
They then proceeded to the house of Roxas who
openly discussed with Sayo the transaction that
night. Roxas told them the room rate for each
couple.
The agents, Sayo and Roxas talked about the
payment for the services of the girls. When the 900
was handed over to Sayo, they then announced that
they are CIDG-WCCO agents. The Plaza girls were
brought to the head quarters for investigation and a
day later they were brought to the DSWD.
RTC
The RTC first discussed the procedural infirmity in
the Information as it contained more than one
offense. Under Section 13, Rule 110 of the Revised
Rules of Criminal Procedure, the Information must
charge only one offense except when the law
prescribes a single punishment for various offenses
Sayo was charged with recruiting and transporting
AAA and BBB (minors), as well as CCC (of legal
age) for prostitution
Roxas was separately accused of managing and
operating a room in his apartment to be used for
prostitution.
Thus, the Information was duplicitous. Be that as it
may, the RTC held that the accused-appellants had
waived any objection to the Information as they
failed to object prior to their arraignment.
The testimonies of AAA, BBB, and. CCC were
CLEAR, CATEGORICAL, and CORROBORATIVE
of each other's testimony. The testimony of the
arresting officer, PO2 Anthony Ong (PO2 Ong),
was also categorical and straightforward regarding
the investigation, pre-surveillance, entrapment
procedure, and arrest of the accused-appellants.
On the other hand, both accused-appellants merely
interposed the defenses of denial and alibi which are
both inherently weak defenses.
SAYO was found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt
of Qualified Trafficking in Persons under Section
4 (a,e) and Section 6 (a) of R.A. 9208 insofar as
minors AAA and BBB
Accused ALFREDO ROXAS y SAGON is likewise
found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of
Qualified Trafficking in Persons under Section 5
(a) and Section 6 (a) of R.A. 9208, insofar as
minors AAA and BBB are concerned,
CA
CA affirmed the RTC Decision with modification, by
adding an award of moral and exemplary damages,
but only to AAA and BBB.
Issue:
Whether the guilt of Roxas was proven beyond
reasonable doubt
SC
At the outset, the Court notes that Sayo had already
died on November 30, 2011. Thus, the death of
Sayo extinguished her criminal liability, since the
death occurred BEFORE FINAL JUDGEMENT.
only the civil liability directly arising from and based
solely on the offense committed
Roxas committed Acts that Promote Trafficking in
Persons as defined under Section 5(a) of RA
9208
Roxas was convicted of Qualified Trafficking of
Persons, under Section 5(a) in relation to Section
6 of RA 9208 in connection with minors AAA and
BBB
With regard to CCC, who was of legal age at the
time of the offense, Roxas was convicted of
Trafficking in Persons under Section 5(a) of RA
9208
SEC. 4. Acts of Trafficking in Persons. — It shall
be unlawful for any person, natural or juridical, to
commit any of the following acts:
(a) To recruit, transport, transfer; harbor, provide, or
receive a person by any means, including those
done under the pretext of domestic or overseas
employment or training or apprenticeship, for the
purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary
servitude or debt bondage;
xxxx
(e) To maintain or hire a person to engage in
prostitution or pornography;
xxxx
SEC. 5. Acts that Promote Trafficking in Persons.
— The following acts which promote or facilitate
trafficking in persons, shall be unlawful:
(a) To knowingly lease or sublease, use or allow to
be used any house, building or establishment for the
purpose of promoting trafficking in persons;
xxxx
SEC. 6. Qualified Trafficking in Persons. — The
following are considered as qualified trafficking:
(a) When the trafficked person is a child[.] (Emphasis
supplied)
Prosecution established that Roxas owned a
house/apartment in which the rooms were leased to
every customer and allow customers to use the
room and engage in sex therein. He had
knowledge of the fact that they had engaged in sex
as he would thereafter clean the room.
He would even sell condoms to male customers
before using the room.
All of these acts promoted trafficking in persons as
defined under Section 5 of [RA 9208]
The RTC and the CA thus committed serious error
as the proper denomination of the offense is Acts
that Promote Trafficking in Persons under Section
5(a). In this regard, it should be noted that the
offenses punished under Section 5 cannot be
qualified by Section 6 as what the latter seeks to
qualify is the act of trafficking and not the promotion
of trafficking.
The denomination of his conviction is CORRECTED
to Acts that Promote Trafficking in Persons
under Section 5(a) of RA 9208
People vs Aguirre
Facts:
Of the ten girls, four testified in Court against
accused-appellants - private complainants AAA,
BBB, CCC and DDD.
Their testimonies showed that at different times on
November 16, 2010, they were convinced by
accused-appellants to go swimming and drinking,
and to have sex, with foreigners in exchange for
money and/or shabu.
Private complainants and six other girls (EEE, FFF,
GGG, HHH, III and JJJ) were later assembled at
Arabit's house where accused-appellants told them
to primp themselves as they had to look good for the
foreigners. Subsequently, a white van arrived and all
ten girls, together with accused-appellants and
Roxas, boarded the van and travelled to Quezon
City. On the way, Aguirre told the girls that they
would be meeting some foreigners who would take
them abroad.
Arabit and Paralejas also instructed the girls not to
leave the house. Arabit and Aguirre then offered to
the girls what appeared to be shabu, which was
payment for sex with the foreigners in addition to
money. Six of the girls accepted and they were
separated from the rest. They were looking for
aluminum foil for the shabu when there was
suddenly a commotion. Several people, who came
running down from the second floor of the
apartment, identified themselves as the police and
told the girls to sit together. The police officers
arrested accused-appellants and Roxas.
The police officers were members of the Criminal
Investigation Division Group - Women and Children
Protection Division (CIDG-WCPD) who acted on
information from a civilian informant of "Tutok-Tulfo,"
a television program aired over TV Channel 5, that a
certain "Booba" and his cohorts would be bringing at
least ten women to said informant in an unoccupied
apartment in Quezon City, to be distributed in clubs
and videoke bars around Metro Manila as
prostitutes/entertainers.
Arabit admitted knowing Paralejas, Aguirre and
Roxas. Among the ten10 girls found in the
apartment, he claimed to know only GGG, JJJ and
EEE, alleging that their arrest was the first time had
seen the other girls
According to Roxas, he agreed to join them when
Paralejas invited him to a drinking party. A van
subsequently took them, along with the other
accused-appellants and "many girls," to a two-storey
apartment in Quezon City. While he was left outside
the apartment, he was handcuffed and brought
inside by a man wearing a black jacket after he
admitted knowing Paralejas.
RTC
RTC convicted accused-appellants of the crime of
Qualified Trafficking in Persons
According to the RTC, while CCC and DDD were
minors at the time of the commission of the crime,
the Information alleged that DDD was already of
legal age. It nonetheless considered CCC's
MINORITY as a qualifying circumstance
but not that the crime was committed by a
syndicate (involving three or more conspirators)14
and in large scale (involving three or more
victims)15 as the same was not alleged in the
Information.
The RTC did not convict accused-appellants under
RA 7610, holding that such a conviction would
violate accused-appellants' constitutional right as
the Information did not state the particular provision
of said law - whether it is "Child Prostitution and
Other Sexual Abuse" under Section 5 or "Child
Trafficking" under Section 7 - that was violated.
CA
CA rendered the assailed Decision affirming the
RTC's Judgment, subject to the modification that: (a)
accused-appellants are jointly and severally liable to
pay each of the private complainants the sums of
Pl00,000 as moral damages and ₱50,000 as
exemplary damages, and (b) interest at six percent
(6%) per annum is imposed on the total monetary
award from the finality of the decision until full
payment.
SC
The appeal lacks merit.
The Court finds no reason to overturn the CA's
findings and conclusion as to the guilt of accused-
appellants.
Based on Section 3(a) of RA 9208,24 the elements
of trafficking in persons are:
(1) The act of "recruitment, transportation, transfer
or harbouring, or receipt of persons with or without
the victim's consent or knowledge, within or across
national borders;"
(2) The means i1sed which include "threat or use of to intense cross-examination by defense counsel,
force, or other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud, these same testimonies were consistent and strong
deception, abuse of power or of position, taking in their essential facts, and even upon further
advantage of the vulnerability of the person, or, the questioning from the court, remained solid and
giving or receiving of payments or benefits to unshaken. The court saw and heard the witnesses
achieve the consent of a person having control over testify and found that the substance of their
another;" and respective testimonies were further strengthened by
the private complainants' candid and spontaneous
(3) The purpose of trafficking is exploitation which demeanor on the witness stand
includes at a minimum "exploitation or the
prostitution of others or other forms of sexual
exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery,
servitude or the removal or sale of organs."25
The prosecution has satisfactorily established these
elements.
Private complainants' testimonies show that
accused-appellants lured them into prostitution with
the promise of financial benefit, the chance to use
shabu and to travel abroad.
Accused-appellants' actions clearly indicate their
intention to exploit private complainants. They
establish beyond reasonable doubt that accused-
appellants recruited and transported private
complainants for purposes of prostitution and sexual
exploitation.
As the RTC found, private complainants were still in
their teens when· they testified. That accused-
appellants took advantage of their youth and
vulnerability is, thus, beyond doubt.
To be sure, the recruitment and transportation
punished under Section 3(a) of RA 9208 may be
"with or without the victim's consent or knowledge."
Thus, it is of no moment that accused-appellants
obtained the consent of private complainants.
Furthermore, as the CA noted, BBB, CCC and DDD
were proven to be below 18 years old on the date
the crime was committed; BBB was 14 years of age,
while CCC and DDD were both 17 years old.
Private complainants' testimonies have likewise
established conspiracy among accused-appellants.
Accused-appellants' actions, as consistently and
categorically narrated34 by private complainants
under oath, unmistakably reveal "a common
purpose and a community of interest indicative of a
conspiracy."35 They were manifestly aimed at
recruiting and transporting the victims for the
purpose of exploiting them and offering them for
prostitution.
The testimonies of the private complainants are
worthy of belief, very credible and significantly
corroborative of each other, directly and
categorically, on its material points. When subjected