Title
People vs. XXX
Case
G.R. No. 260639
Decision Date
Mar 29, 2023
NBI agents conducted an entrapment operation, arresting accused-appellant for trafficking minors. SC affirmed guilt, imposing life imprisonment and fines.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 260639)

Background and Criminal Charges

The accused-appellant was arraigned and entered a plea of "not guilty." The prosecution, supported by witnesses including the minor complainants and Intelligence Agents (IA), brought forth documentary evidence such as affidavits, registered marked money, and birth certificates. The fatal allegation was that the accused recruited and maintained minors for prostitution and facilitated sexual exploitation on a large scale.

Incident and Investigation Details

NBI Anti-Human Trafficking Division (AHTRAD) received information about sexual trafficking of minors in a particular shopping mall. Surveillance operations by IA Sarno and IA Natalia confirmed the accused-appellant’s involvement through his active approach to undercover agents posing as customers. He offered sexual services of minors at a price, serving effectively as their broker or “bugaw.” A formal entrapment and rescue operation was authorized, culminating in the arrest of the accused and the rescue of the minor complainants.

Defense and Trial Court Findings

The accused-appellant claimed that he was simply approached by unknown men, forced into custody, and denied knowing the complainants or involvement in any trafficking activities. The RTC, in its July 21, 2018 decision, found the accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Qualified Trafficking in Persons, emphasizing the credibility and consistency of victims’ testimonies, and sentenced him to life imprisonment without parole and a P2,000,000 fine.

Appellate Court Decision

On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC’s conviction on September 15, 2020, dismissing accused-appellant’s allegations of inconsistencies in the testimonies as minor details irrelevant to the core facts. The CA imposed the penalty of life imprisonment and a P2,000,000 fine and ordered the accused to pay each of the four victims P500,000 as moral damages and P100,000 as exemplary damages, with six percent interest per annum on monetary awards from finality until full payment.

Issues on Appeal

The central issue before the Supreme Court was whether the CA correctly affirmed the RTC’s finding that the accused-appellant was guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Qualified Trafficking in Persons.

Legal Elements of Trafficking in Persons under RA 9208, as amended

To convict for Trafficking in Persons, the prosecution must establish:

  1. The act of recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring, or receipt of persons (with or without the victims’ consent);
  2. The means used such as threat, force, coercion, abduction, fraud, abuse of power, or giving or receiving payments to control another; and
  3. The purpose of exploitation, including prostitution or sexual exploitation.

Qualified Trafficking requires the commission of any of these acts (Sections 4, 4A–4C, or 5) plus the existence of qualifying circumstances under Section 6, such as the victim being a child or the crime committed on a large scale.

Application of the Law to the Case

The accused-appellant was charged specifically under Section 4 (a) and (e) for recruiting and maintaining persons for prostitution, qualified by Section 6 (c) for the large-scale nature of the crime. The court noted that when minors are involved, consent is immaterial, and the law recognizes trafficking even without the use of means enumerated in Section 3 (a).

Sufficiency of the Evidence and Identification of the Accused

The prosecution adequately proved that the accused-appellant:

  • Approached undercover agents and offered minors for sexual services at P1,000 per child;
  • Instructed a minor to recruit others to entertain customers;
  • Imposed a system where minors remitted part of their earnings to him as commission.

The agents and victims consistently identified the accused-appellant as the pimp. The defense’s alibi and denial were unsubstantiated and weak compared to the affirmative, positive, and credible testimony of prosecution witnesses.

On the Age of the Victims and Qualifying Circumstance

The prosecution failed to sufficiently prove the minority of the victims AAA, BBB, CCC, and DDD. Certificates of live birth and authentic documents were either unavailable or contradictory. For at least two complainants, their presented birth certificates indicated ages above 18 at the time of the incident, thus negating the application of the qualifying circumstance of trafficking involving children (Section 6 (a)). However, the large-scale nature of the crime (involving four victims) sat

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.