One Person Can Be Liable for Large Scale Illegal Recruitment

n

TLDR: This case clarifies that a single individual can be convicted of large-scale illegal recruitment if they victimize three or more people, regardless of whether they are part of a syndicate. Desistance by victims after restitution does not automatically absolve the accused.

n

G.R. No. 120353, February 12, 1998

nn

Introduction

n

Imagine losing your life savings to a false promise of overseas employment. Illegal recruitment schemes prey on the hopes and dreams of Filipinos seeking better opportunities abroad. This Supreme Court case, People v. Laurel, sheds light on the crucial issue of large-scale illegal recruitment and clarifies when a single individual can be held liable for victimizing multiple aspiring overseas workers.

nn

In this case, Flor N. Laurel was convicted of large-scale illegal recruitment for defrauding four individuals with false promises of overseas jobs. The central legal question was whether a single person could be convicted of large-scale illegal recruitment or if that charge only applied to syndicates.

nn

Legal Context

n

The legal framework for addressing illegal recruitment is found in the Labor Code of the Philippines. It specifically outlines the definition of illegal recruitment, its penalties, and the circumstances under which it can be considered an act of economic sabotage.

nn

Article 38 of the Labor Code defines illegal recruitment, stating that any recruitment activity without the necessary license or authority from the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) is unlawful. Article 39 outlines the penalties for illegal recruitment, including imprisonment and fines. The critical distinction lies in when illegal recruitment becomes an act of economic sabotage, as defined in Article 38 (b):

nn

n

Illegal recruitment when committed by a syndicate or in large scale shall be considered an offense involving economic sabotage x x x x

n

nn

The Labor Code further defines what constitutes a syndicate and large scale illegal recruitment:

nn

n

Illegal recruitment is deemed committed by a syndicate if carried out by a group of three (3) or more persons conspiring and/or confederating with one another in carrying out any unlawful or illegal transaction, enterprise or scheme defined under the first paragraph hereof.

n

nn

n

Illegal recruitment is deemed committed in large scale if committed against three (3) or more persons individually or as a group.

n

nn

This distinction is crucial. Illegal recruitment by a syndicate focuses on the number of perpetrators, while large-scale illegal recruitment focuses on the number of victims.

nn

Case Breakdown

n

Between October 1991 and May 1992, Flor N. Laurel promised overseas employment to Ricardo San Felipe, Rosauro San Felipe, Juanito Cudal, and Cenen Tambongco, Jr. She collected fees ranging from ₱6,000 to ₱12,000 from each of them. However, she failed to deliver on her promises and disappeared.

nn

After verifying with the POEA that Laurel was not licensed to recruit overseas workers, the victims filed a complaint, leading to her arrest and prosecution for large-scale illegal recruitment. During the trial, Laurel did not deny the charges. Instead, she presented an affidavit of desistance from one complainant and receipts showing she had refunded the money to the others, claiming full settlement of her obligations.

nn

The trial court denied her motion to dismiss, emphasizing that the testimonies of the four victims established the elements of large-scale illegal recruitment beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that the affidavit and receipts were presented after the prosecution had rested its case. Laurel was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of ₱100,000.

nn

Laurel appealed, arguing that she should only be convicted of simple illegal recruitment, not large-scale, because she was not part of a syndicate. Here is how the Supreme Court addressed this argument:

nn

n

The language of the law is very clear that illegal recruitment is committed in large scale if done against three or more persons individually or as a group. The number of offenders, whether an individual or a syndicate, is clearly not considered a factor in the determination of its commission.

n

nn

The Supreme Court emphasized the plain meaning of the law. The number of victims, not the number of recruiters, determines whether the crime is considered large-scale illegal recruitment. The Court further stated:

nn

n

The rule is well-settled that when the language of the statute is clear, plain and free from ambiguity, there is no room for attempted interpretation or extended court rationalization of the law. The duty of the court is to apply it, not to interpret it.

n

nn

Regarding the affidavits of desistance, the Court acknowledged that they could be given due course under special circumstances that cast doubt on the accused’s guilt. However, in this case, the Court found no such circumstances. The Court noted that the complainants merely stated they had