THIRD DIVISION
G.R. No. 217978, January 30, 2019
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. NANCY LASACA RAMIREZ A.K.A. "ZOY" OR "SOY", ACCUSED-APPELLANT.
D E C I S I O N
LEONEN, J.:
This is an Appeal assailing the Court of Appeals October 23, 2014 Decision1 in CA-G.R. CEB-CR HC No. 01655, which affirmed the Regional Trial Court January 9, 2013 Judgment2 in Crim. Case No. R-LLP-09-05622-CR. The trial court found Nancy Lasaca Ramirez a.k.a. "ZOY" or "SOY" (Ramirez) guilty beyond reasonable doubt of qualified trafficking of persons in relation to Section 4(e)3 of Republic Act No. 9208, or the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003.
In an Information, Ramirez was charged with qualified trafficking of persons in relation to Section 4(e) of Republic Act No. 9208. It read:
That on the 5th day of December, 2009, at or about 9:45 o'clock (sic) in the evening, in xxxxxxxxxxx, Lapu-Lapu City, Philippines, within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the aforenamed accused, did then and there willfully and unlawfully maintain or hire Nica Jean U. Goc-ong, 20 years old, AAA, 16 year old minor, Cindy Pancho, 20 years old and BBB, 15 year old minor, to engage in prostitution and offered them for sex or any form of sexual exploitation to poseur customers.Ramirez pleaded not guilty on arraignment. Trial on the merits ensued.5
CONTRARY TO LAW.4
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing premises, judgment is hereby rendered finding the accused, Nancy Lasaca Ramirez guilty of the crime of Qualified Trafficking of Person in Relation to Sec. 4 (e) of R.A. 9208 beyond reasonable doubt and sentences her to suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of Two million pesos (P2,000,000.00).Ramirez appealed before the Court of Appeals.18 She argued that she does not work at xxxxxxxxxxx KTV Bar, and that it was BBB who negotiated with the poseur customers about the girls' prices and received the supposed payment for sexual services.19 She posits that the advanced payment made to BBB was "contrary to human nature and natural course of events"20 since no sexual activity had occurred yet. She insists that she was in the area just to watch a live band.21
SO ORDERED.17
SECTION 3. Definition of Terms. — As used in this Act:The crime is still considered trafficking if it involves the "recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring[,] or receipt of a child for the purpose of exploitation" even if it does not involve any of the means stated under the law.34 Trafficking is considered qualified when "the trafficked person is a child[.]"35
(a) Trafficking in Persons — refers to the recruitment, transportation, transfer or harboring, or receipt of persons with or without the victim's consent or knowledge, within or across national borders by means of threat or use of force, or other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or of position, taking advantage of the vulnerability of the persons, or, the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person for the purpose of exploitation which includes at a minimum, the exploitation or the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of organs.
The elements of trafficking in persons can be derived from its definition under Section 3 (a) of Republic Act No. 9208, thus:Republic Act No. 9208 has since been amended by Republic Act No. 1036438 on February 6, 2013. In recognition of the amendments to the law, Casio clarifies that crimes prosecuted under Republic Act No. 10364 must have the following elements:
(1) The act of "recruitment, transportation, transfer or harbouring, or receipt of persons with or without the victim's consent or knowledge, within or across national borders." (2) The means used which include "threat or use of force, or other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or of position, taking advantage of the vulnerability of the person, or, the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another["]; and (3) The purpose of trafficking is exploitation which includes "exploitation or the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of organs."37
Under Republic Act No. 10364, the elements of trafficking in persons have been expanded to include the following acts:Here, accused-appellant was charged with having violated qualified trafficking in relation to Section 4(e) of Republic Act No. 9208, which provides that it is unlawful for anyone "[t]o maintain or hire a person to engage in prostitution or pornography[.]"
(1) The act of "recruitment, obtaining, hiring, providing, offering, transportation, transfer, maintaining, harboring, or receipt of persons with or without the victim's consent or knowledge, within or across national borders[";] (2) The means used include "by means of threat, or use of force, or other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or of position, taking advantage of the vulnerability of the person, or, the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person"[;] (3) The purpose of trafficking includes "the exploitation or the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of organs[.]"39 (Emphasis in the original)
The victim's consent is rendered meaningless due to the coercive, abusive, or deceptive means employed by perpetrators of human trafficking. Even without the use of coercive, abusive, or deceptive means, a minor's consent is not given out of his or her own free will.45Similarly, in People v. De Dios:46
It did not matter that there was no threat, force, coercion, abduction, fraud, deception or abuse of power that was employed by De Dios when she involved AAA in her illicit sexual trade. AAA was still a minor when she was exposed to prostitution by the prodding, promises and acts of De Dios. Trafficking in persons may be committed also by means of taking advantage of the persons' vulnerability as minors, a circumstance that applied to AAA, was sufficiently alleged in the information and proved during the trial. This element was further achieved through the offer of financial gain for the illicit services that were provided by AAA to the customers of De Dios.47Accused-appellant hired children to engage in prostitution, taking advantage of their vulnerability as minors. AAA's and BBB's acquiescence to the illicit transactions cannot be considered as a valid defense.
The criminal case of Trafficking in Persons as a Prostitute is an analogous case to the crimes of seduction, abduction, rape, or other lascivious acts. In fact[,] it is worse, thus, justifying the award of moral damages. Exemplary damages are imposed when the crime is aggravated, as in this case.55Thus, in line with jurisprudence, this Court deems it proper to impose moral damages of P500,000.00 and exemplary damages of P100,000.00.
| Very truly yours, |
(SGD) WILFREDO V. LAPITAN | |
Division Clerk of Court |
Endnotes:
* Designated additional Member per Raffle dated January 28, 2019.
1Rollo, pp. 3-14. The Decision was penned by Associate Justice Ramon Paul L. Hernando (now an Associate Justice of this Court) and concurred in by Associate Justices Ma. Luisa C. Quijano-Padilla and Marie Christine Azcarraga-Jacob of the Twentieth Division, Court of Appeals, Cebu City.
2 CA rollo, pp. 38-41. The Judgment was penned by Presiding Judge Toribio S. Quiwag of Branch 27, Regional Trial Court, Lapu-Lapu City.
3 Rep. Act No. 9208 (2003), sec. 4 provides:
SECTION 4. Acts of Trafficking in Persons. — It shall be unlawful for any person, natural or juridical, to commit any of the following acts: (e) To maintain or hire a person to engage in prostitution or pornography[.]
4 RTC records, p. 2.
5 CA rollo, p. 38.
6 Id. at 39.
7 Id. at 38-39.
8 Id. at 39.
9 Id.
10 Id.
11 CA rollo, p. 39.
12 Id.
13 Id.
14 Id. at 39-40.
15 Id. at 40.
16 Id. at 38-41.
17 Id. at 41.
18 Id. at 25-37.
19 Id. at 33-34.
20 Id. at 34.
21 Id. at 34-35.
22Rollo, pp. 3-14.
23 Id. at 8.
24 Id. at 11-12.
25 Id. at 13.
26 Id. at 15-16.
27 Id. at 17.
28 Id. at 1.
29 Id. at 19-20.
30 Id. at 22-26 and 29-31.
31 Id. at 34-41.
32 Id. at 35.
33 Id. at 37.
34 Rep. Act No. 9208 (2003), sec. 3(a).
35 Rep. Act No. 9208 (2003), sec. 6(a).
36 749 Phil. 458 (2014) [Per J. Leonen, Third Division].
37 Id. at 472-473 citing Rep. Act No. 9208, sec. 3(a).
38 Expanded Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2012.
39People v. Casio, 749 Phil. 458, 474 (2014) [Per J. Leonen, Third Division].
40 G.R. No. 211721, September 20, 2017, 840 SCRA 388 [Per J. Martires, Third Division].
41 793 Phil. 877 (2016) [Per J. Peralta, Third Division].
42 G.R. No. 235652, July 9, 2018, [Per J. Perlas-Bemabe, Second Division].
43People v. Casio,749 Phil. 458 (2014) [Per J. Leonen, Third Division]. See also People v. Aguirre, G.R. No. 219952, November 20, 2017, [Per J. Tijam, First Division].
44 749 Phil. 458 (2014) [Per J. Leonen, Third Division].
45 Id. at 475-476 citing United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, "Human Trafficking FAQs".
46 G.R. No. 234018, June 6, 2018, [Per J. Reyes, Jr., Second Division].
47 Id. at 7-8.
48See People v. Bandojo, Jr., G.R. No. 234161, October 17, 2018, [Per J. Reyes, A., Jr., Second Division].
49Rollo, pp. 34-41.
50 Id. at 35.
51 CA rollo, p. 39.
52 Rep. Act No. 9208 (2003), sec. 10. Penalties and Sanctions. — The following penalties and sanctions are hereby established for the offenses enumerated in this Act:
....
(c) Any person found guilty of qualified trafficking under Section 6 shall suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of not less than Two million pesos (P2,000,000.00) but not more than Five million pesos (P5,000,000.00)[.]
53 749 Phil. 458 (2014) [Per J. Leonen, Third Division].
54 G.R. No. 219952, November 20, 2017, [Per J. Tijam, First Division].
55 Id. at 11, citing People v. Lalli, et al., 675 Phil. 126 (2011) [Per J. Carpio, Second Division]; People v. Casio, 749 Phil. 458 (2014) [Per J. Leonen, Third Division]; and People v. Hirang, 803 Phil. 277 (2017) [Per J. Reyes, Third Division].
56Nacar v. Gallery Frames, 716 Phil. 267 (2013) [Per J. Peralta, En Banc].