Case Summary (G.R. No. 117010)
Charges and Applicable Law
Patricio Botero and his co-accused were charged with illegal recruitment on a large scale under Article 38(b) and penalized under Article 39(a) of the Labor Code of the Philippines, as amended by Presidential Decree Nos. 1920 and 2018. The charges stem from recruitment activities conducted without the necessary Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) license or Philippine Overseas Employment Agency (POEA) authority.
Facts on Recruitment Activities
Between February and March 1992, the complainants applied for various overseas positions (e.g., seamen, cook, waiter) at Ricorn’s office located at Jovan Building, Mandaluyong. Ricorn, represented as a recruitment agency, required applicants to submit identification and travel documents but also charged a P5,000 processing fee payable to Luisa Miraples, Ricorn’s treasurer. Receipts issued bore Ricorn’s letterhead and Miraples’ signature. Garcia (self-styled president) and Botero (vice-president) promised employment after the May 11, 1992 election. However, following abandonment of Ricorn’s office for nonpayment of rent, the complainants discovered that Ricorn was not incorporated with SEC nor licensed by DOLE.
Testimonies of Accused and Complainants
Garcia, a professional engineer, denied involvement and claimed he never received payments or issued receipts, refusing to become Ricorn’s president knowing the entity was unlicensed. Botero testified as a marine engineer turned employee of Ricorn, asserting he only performed minimal tasks such as following up on applicants' documents and conducting simple interviews. Botero denied direct recruitment or monetary dealings with complainants. Yet, he admitted to contributing funds for Ricorn’s incorporation, which remained unconsummated, and acknowledged holding the position of vice-president.
RTC Decision
The RTC found both Garcia and Botero guilty beyond reasonable doubt of illegal recruitment on a large scale, sentencing each to life imprisonment and imposing a P100,000 fine. They were ordered to pay indemnity of P5,000 each to six complainants and to shoulder court costs. The case against Miraples was archived, and she remained at large.
Issues on Appeal
Botero appealed, contesting the sufficiency and credibility of evidence, particularly attacking the testimony of complainant Jose Erwin Esclada as inconsistent and improbable. He argued lack of conspiracy and denied responsibility for Garcia’s illegal recruitment activities.
Court’s Assessment of Testimonies
The Supreme Court rejected Botero’s reliance on the doctrine falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, which discredits all testimony because of falsehood in part. Modern jurisprudence allows partial credit to witness testimony depending on corroboration and overall credibility. Esclada’s admission of a prior falsehood and subsequent truthful account increased the trustworthiness of his assertion that Botero, not Garcia, processed his application.
Participation and Liability of Botero
The Court emphasized Botero’s substantial role as vice-president of Ricorn, introduced to complainants as such and wielding a nameplate verifying his position. He processed travel documents, handled inquiries, and was financially involved in Ricorn’s attempted incorporation. These facts undermine his claim as an innocent employee and establish his active participation in recruitment.
Legal Definition and Elements of Illegal Recruitment
Under the 1987 Philippine Constitution and the Labor Code (Articles 13(b), 38(b), and 39(a)), illegal recruitment is defined as the act of canvassing, enlisting, contracting, transporting, utilizing, hiring, or procuring workers for employment, with or without profit motive, without a valid license or authority. The elements of illegal recruitment in large scale include:
(1) Engagement in recruitment or prohibited activities;
(2) Failure to secure required license/authority; and
(3) Commission against three or more persons.
Non-Licensing and Corporate Responsibility
Ricorn lacked DOLE or POEA license and was not registered with SEC. Despite this, Botero and Garcia held themselves out as corporate officers and actively collected fees, thus incurring liability under Section 25 of the Corporation Code. Persons assuming to act as a corporation without aut
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 117010)
Facts of the Case
- The appellant, Patricio Botero, along with Carlos P. Garcia and Luisa Miraples (at large), were charged with illegal recruitment in large scale under Article 38 (b) and Article 39 (a) of the Labor Code, penalized under the amended provisions by Presidential Decrees Nos. 1920 and 2018.
- The charges stemmed from the recruitment and promise of overseas employment to at least sixteen individuals without securing the required license from the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE).
- Garcia and Botero pleaded not guilty; Miraples remained at large.
- A joint trial was conducted involving two accused due to common parties and issues.
Prosecution Evidence
- Six complainants who were applicants for overseas jobs applied through Ricorn Philippine International Shipping Lines, Inc. ("Ricorn"), located in Mandaluyong, Manila, which purportedly offered overseas employment.
- The complainants applied for various shipboard and domestic jobs such as seaman, cook, waiter, chambermaid, or laundrywoman.
- Applicants were required to present National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and police clearance, birth certificates, passports, seaman’s books, and Survival of Life at Sea (SOLAS) certificates.
- Unable to provide the last three documents, the complainants were charged P5,000 each as a processing fee, which was paid to Luisa Miraples, Ricorn’s treasurer, who issued receipts under Ricorn’s letterhead.
- Garcia and Botero assured employment after the May 11, 1992 election, with Botero following up on documentation and status of applications.
- Post-election, complainants found Ricorn’s office abandoned for nonpayment of rent and discovered that Ricorn was neither incorporated with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) nor licensed by the DOLE or Philippine Overseas Employment Agency (POEA) to conduct recruitment.
- Complainants filed complaints with the police station.
Defense Testimonies
- Carlos Garcia claimed he was an electrical engineer approached by a group including Botero and Miraples to join Ricorn and initially agreed to contribute money to the corporation but declined the presidency to avoid liability, asserting knowledge of Ricorn’s unlicensed and unincorporated status.
- Botero testified as a marine engineer working as a barber during trial, initially applying for a job as a machinist through Ricorn.
- Botero insisted he was only an employee of Ricorn conducting minimal functions such as following up travel documents and interviews, denying recruitment activities or receiving payments from applicants.
- However, he admitted to meeting Garcia and giving money for Ricorn’s SEC registration and acknowledged Ricorn’s use of an office with signage n