Title
Supreme Court
People vs. XXX
Case
G.R. No. 252230
Decision Date
Oct 5, 2022
XXX convicted of Qualified Trafficking for sexually exploiting minor AAA, proven through valid entrapment, victim testimony, and evidence; life imprisonment imposed.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 141011)

Charges and Proceedings

Accused-appellant XXX was charged on October 18, 2016, with Qualified Trafficking in Persons for maintaining and harboring AAA, a minor, by offering and peddling her for monetary consideration in exchange for sexual services, constituting sexual exploitation and prostitution of a child, which is contrary to law. The accused pleaded not guilty, and trial ensued with testimony from police officers, the victim, an Australian Federal Police liaison, and the accused himself.

Prosecution’s Evidence and Investigation

Evidence showed that an international investigation initiated by the Australian Federal Police revealed an online trafficking operation involving a Filipino suspect identified through the email address ivyian1823@protonmail.com. The Philippine National Police-Women and Children Protection Center (PNP-WCPC) undertook an undercover operation with PCI Virtudazo posing as a customer. Communications with the suspect confirmed the offer of a 10-year-old girl for sexual services at a price initially set at Php 30,000 and later reduced to Php 20,000.

Entrapment Operation and Arrest

An entrapment was conducted at SM Megamall’s J.CO Donuts Cafe on September 27, 2017, where accused-appellant met with supposed customers, introduced AAA as the person offered for sex, and accepted Php 5,000 as a down payment. The team then arrested accused-appellant based on the pre-arranged signal and presented evidence such as marked money, a cellphone, and items indicative of sexual exploitation. The minor victim was immediately taken into protective custody.

Victim’s Testimony

AAA testified that she was coerced by her uncle to perform sexual acts including oral sex on foreigners as well as on the accused himself, under threats and promises of discipline that instilled fear and obedience. She confirmed details of the transaction and the arrest, recounting her experiences from a young age, highlighting the abuse and exploitation she endured.

Defense’s Version

Accused-appellant denied the charges, claiming the backpack and items found were not his and that the meeting at SM Megamall was to return personal belongings to an acquaintance named Asian Lover, connected to an online personality JORDY59. He asserted ignorance of the alleged sexual exploitation, claiming he was merely seeking to retrieve lost items, and that the incriminating words heard were misunderstood or misinterpreted.

Regional Trial Court’s Decision

The RTC found the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Qualified Trafficking in Persons, emphasizing the credibility of prosecution witnesses, especially the victim, and the regularity of police procedures during the investigation and entrapment. The accused’s denial was deemed self-serving, inconsistent, and uncorroborated. The court sentenced him to life imprisonment, a fine of Php 2,000,000, and ordered damages for the victim.

Court of Appeals’ Affirmation

The CA affirmed the RTC’s decision, citing that all elements of trafficking were sufficiently proven: the act of recruitment and harboring; the means of coercion and taking advantage of vulnerability; and the purpose of sexual exploitation. It especially noted the qualified nature of the offense due to the victim’s minority. The CA found the testimony of the victim and the police as credible and well-substantiated, rejecting the accused’s defense for lack of evidence.

Issues on Appeal

The accused-appellant argued on appeal that the prosecution failed to prove the victim’s minority by documentary evidence and to sufficiently establish that he was the person behind the incriminating email account. He contended this in an attempt to undermine the qualified nature of the offense and the identity of the perpetrator.

Supreme Court Ruling on the Appeal

The Supreme Court ruled that the appeal was without merit. It held that:

  • The prosecution sufficiently proved the elements of trafficking, including the recruitment, coercion, and purpose of sexual exploitation.
  • The victim’s minority was established through parties’ stipulation and the accused’s own admission.
  • Even absent documentary proof, the victim’s credible and detailed testimony demonstrating coercion satisfied the requirements to prove qualified trafficking, where consent of a minor is irrelevant by law.
  • The accused-appellant was correctly identified as the person controlling the email account, as he communicated and arranged the meeting under the said account, accepted marked money, and introduc

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.