Title
People vs. Lalli y Purih
Case
G.R. No. 195419
Decision Date
Oct 12, 2011
Accused-appellants were found guilty of illegal recruitment and trafficking for deceiving a victim into sex exploitation, resulting in a Supreme Court affirmation of life imprisonment.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. 195419)

Facts:

  • The case involves the People of the Philippines as the plaintiff-appellee against accused-appellants Hadja Jarma Lalli y Purih and Ronnie Aringoy y Masion, with Nestor Relampagos at large.
  • On June 3, 2005, 23-year-old Lolita Sagadsad Plando was approached by Ronnie and Rachel Aringoy in Tumaga, Zamboanga City, regarding work in Malaysia.
  • Lolita expressed interest and was invited to Ronnie's house the next day, where he promised her a job as a restaurant entertainer in Malaysia for a salary of 500 Malaysian ringgits.
  • Lacking a passport, Lolita borrowed her sister Marife's passport, which was presented to Hadja Jarma Lalli, who would facilitate her travel.
  • On June 6, 2005, Lolita and other women boarded the M/V Mary Joy to Sandakan, Malaysia, where they were introduced to an employer intending to exploit them as prostitutes.
  • Lolita was forced into prostitution, suffering daily sexual assaults until she escaped and reported her situation to authorities on August 2, 2005.
  • The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found the accused guilty of Illegal Recruitment and Trafficking in Persons, sentencing them to life imprisonment and imposing fines and damages.
  • The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed this decision on February 26, 2010, leading to an appeal to the Supreme Court.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal for lack of merit and affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision.
  • The damages awarded to the victim were modified.
  • Each accused was sentenced to life imprisonment and fined P2,000,000 for Trafficking in Persons and P500,000 for Illegal Recru...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • The Supreme Court upheld the lower courts' findings, noting the credibility and consistency of Lolita's testimonies despite minor inconsistencies.
  • The accused's denials and claims of Lolita's prior knowledge did not absolve them of liability.
  • The elements of syndicated illegal recruitment were present, as the accused conspired to recruit and transport Lolita without the necessary authority from the Philippine Overseas Employment Administra...continue reading

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.

© 2024 Jur.ph. All rights reserved.