People vs. Racho (2017)

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. ERLINDA RACHO

G.R. No. 227505, October 02, 2017

PERLAS-BERNABE, J.:

Facts: Appellant was charged with Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale in an Information which alleges that the accused, did then and there without first obtaining a license or authority to recruit workers for overseas employment from the POEA, feloniously recruit and promise employment/job placement and collect fee[s] from the fifteen (15) complainants as contract workers, without any license/authority from the POEA or by the DOLE to recruit workers for overseas employment. The senior Labor and Employment Officer from the POEA confirmed that appellant was neither licensed nor authorized to recruit workers for employment abroad as certified in a document.

Appellant denied the charges against her and argued that she was an auditor of PET Plans, Inc. from March 23, 2000 to August 31, 2005, making it highly unlikely for her to have engaged in the business of recruitment and promised employment abroad.

Issue: Whether or not appellant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale and of Estafa.

Ruling: Yes. The elements of the offense are: (a) the offender has no valid license or authority to enable him to lawfully engage in recruitment and placement of workers; (b) he undertakes any of the activities within the meaning of "recruitment and placement" under Article 13 (b) of the Labor Code or any prohibited practices enumerated under Article 34 of the Labor Code (now Section 6 of RA 8042); and (c) he commits the same against three or more persons, individually or as a group.

In this case, the POEA certification sufficiently established that appellant is neither licensed nor authorized to recruit workers for overseas employment. The definition of "recruitment and placement" under Article 13 (b) of the Labor Code includes promising or advertising for employment, locally or abroad, whether for profit or not, provided, that any person or entity which, in any manner, offers or promises for a fee, employment to two or more persons shall be deemed engaged in recruitment and placement. Appellant’s act of offering and promising to deploy the complainants to East Timor for work and collecting placement fees from more than three (3) persons, despite not being authorized to do so, renders her liable for Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale. In this relation, her defense of denial cannot overcome complainants' categorical and positive testimonies against her/.

Ratio Decidendi: A person or entity engaged in recruitment and placement activities without the requisite authority is engaged in illegal recruitment.

Gist: This is an appeal from the Decision of the CA, which affirmed the Decision of the RTC convicting appellant of Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale under Republic Act No. 8042.