SECOND DIVISION
G.R. No. 240692, July 15, 2020
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. IMELDA GARCIA Y TORDEDO AND NOEL E. OLEDAN, Accused,
NOEL E. OLEDAN, Accused-Appellant.
D E C I S I O N
INTING, J.:
Before the Court is an ordinary appeal1 filed by Noel E. Oledan (Oledan) assailing the Decision2 dated August 31, 2017 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 07688 which affirmed with modifications the Decision3 dated August 29, 2014 of Branch 11, Regional Trial Court (RTC), Laoag City convicting Oledan, in Criminal Case No. 14370, of Qualified Trafficking in Persons defined and penalized under Section 4(e)4 in relation to Section 6(a)5 of Republic Act No. (RA) 9208, as amended,6 otherwise know as the "Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003."
The accusatory portion of the Information7 dated January 27, 2010 charging Oledan, in Criminal Case No. 14370, of the offense of Qualified Trafficking in Persons, reads;
That on or about the 12th day of December 2009 in the City of Laoag, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above named accused, NOEL E. OLEDAN alias "Tita Welcome" and by means of fraud, deception, taking advantage of the vulnerability of the private complainants, and the giving of payments or benefits to maintain or hire a person to engage in prostitution or pornography, did then and there, Willfully, unlawfully and feloniously and knowingly recruit and hired [AAA]8 , and thereafter, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously received monetary consideration and transacting and employing scheme and designed to engage [AAA], for sexual intercourse and prostitution, and in fact engaged in prostitution, in return for money and profit.The prosecution established the following:
That the crime was attended by tire qualifying circumstances of minority - private complainants [AAA] was only seventeen years old during the commission of the crime.
CONTRARY TO LAW.9
For two (2) successive nights, particularly of December 10 and 11, 2009, Ramos and NBI confidential agent Manuel Villanueva (Agent Villanueva) pretended to be customers of, and conducted further surveillance, on Saigon Disco. They were able to establish that [AAA] was indeed a GRO thereat, and that she was "bar fined" twice for a fee of P2,500.00 each. Based thereon, the NBI planned an entrapment operation. NBI asset Cortez and Ramos were designated as poseur-customers while Agent Manding, Agent Villanueva, [BBB], Mrs. Mary Joan Pasigui, City Social Welfare Officer of Laoag (Officer Pasigui) and other NBI agents constituted as back-up. Agent Manding furnished the marked money comprising of two (2) P1,000.00 bills and a P500.00 bill bearing his initials "HM" and date "12/12/09."For his part, Oledan denied recruiting AAA as the latter was only introduced to him by a certain Tita Butz, He asserted the following:
On December 12, 2009, at around 9:35 o'clock in the evening, Cortez and Ramos went to Saigon Disco using a motorcycle. Initially, they went inside, and Ramos saw AAA dancing on the stage. At around 9:45 o'clock in the evening, the back-up learn arrived and parked their vehicle on the road fronting Saigon Disco's open porch. In the meantime, Cortez and Ramos went out, and as planned, occupied a table in the open porch of Saigon Disco where the back-up team could visibly see them. Ramos ordered two (2) bottles of beer for himself and Cortez. Shortly thereafter, appellant Garcia approached Cortez "and Ramos and asked them whether they want to "table" girls. After Ramos described [AAA], appellant Garcia brought her out to Cone; and Ramos. [AAA] sat beside Cortez, drank ladies' drink and talked to them. Upon appellant Garcia's return to their table, Cortez asked her whether he could ''bar fine" [AAA] to which appellant Garcia replied in the affirmative. Appellant Garcia told Cortez that the "bar fine" is at P2,500.00. Appellant Garcia then called [AAA] twice and talked to her. The second lime [AAA] went out, she already changed her clothes. Moments later, appellant Garcia returned to their table and sat at the arm of the long chair therein. Then Cortez stood up and handed the marked money to appellant Garcia which the latter received.
At this juncture. Agent Manding and the other NBI operatives rushed to the scene, arrested appellant Garcia for child trafficking and child prostitution and informed her of her constitutional rights. Thereafter, all the GROs working at Saigon Disco were turned over to Officer Pasigui and brought to the NBI-Laoag Office for interview and records processing, x x x17
WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered as follows:Oledan filed an appeal to the CA. He argued that the prosecution failed to prove the elements of the offense charged beyond reasonable doubt.
1. In Criminal Case No. 14314, accused IMELDA GARCIA alias "SALVE" is hereby declared GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT of the crime charged against her. She is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of LIFE IMPRISONMENT and a fine of TWO MILLION (P2,000,000.00) PESOS. Further, she is hereby ordered to pay minor complainant [AAA] the amount of One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,000.00) as moral-damages;
2. In Criminal Case No. 14315, accused IMELDA GARCIA alias "SALVE" is hereby ACQUITTED of the crime charged against her;
3. In Criminal Case No. 14369, accused NOEL E. OLEDAN alias "TITA WELCOME" is hereby ACQUITTED of the crime charged against him; and
4. In Criminal Case No. 14370, accused NOEL E. OLEDAN alias "TITA WELCOME" is hereby declared GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT of the crime charged against him. He is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of LIFE IMPRISONMENT and a fine of TWO MILLION (P2,000,000.00) PESOS. Further, he is hereby ordered to pay minor complainant [AAA] the amount of One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100.000.00) as moral damages.
SO ORDERED.22
xxx [I]t was established during trial that appellant Oledan had been recruiting and deploying young girls for customers in sex trade. Trapped in Saigon Disco, no less than the victim, [AAA] asked the help of her own mother [BBB], who in turn, sought the aid of the IJM and the NBI-Manila. Ramos, IJM's investigator, went to Saigon Disco and placed it under surveillance, precisely becausc of these reported illicit activities. When Ramos confirmed that JJJ was indeed being "bar fined" thereat, he coordinated with the NBI-Laoag and personally endorsed [BBB's] report. Another surveillance was conducted by Ramos together with Agent Villanueva and again confirmed the earlier report. On the day of the entrapment operation, appellant Garcia actually offered girls to the poseur-customers and she brought out [AAA] to them after the latter danced on stage. Clearly, there was a valid entrapment operation in this case and there could be no instigation by officers, as barred by law, to speak of.26The CA disposed of the case in this wise:cralawred
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Appeals are DISMISSED. The August 29, 2014 Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Laoag City, Branch 11, convicting accused-appellants Imelda Garcia y Tordedo also known as Salve" and Noel B. Oledan also known as "Tita Welcome" of Qualified Trafficking in Persons in Criminal Case Nos. 14314 and 14370 is AFFIRMED with the following MODIFICATIONS: (1) the amount of moral damages is hereby increased from P100,000.00 to P500,000.00; and (2) exemplary damages is hereby awarded in the amount of P100,000,00. Said moral and exemplary damages are subject to interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the finality of this decision until fully paid.Hence, this appeal.
SO ORDERED.27
SEC. 4. Acts of Trafficking in Persons. — It shall be unlawful for any person, natural or juridical, to commit any of the following acts:This, notwithstanding, Oledan's conviction must be sustained as the prosecution was able to establish his guilt beyond reasonable doubt under Section 4(a) of RA 9208.
(a) To recruit, obtain, hire, provide, offer, transport, transfer, maintain, harbor, or receive a person by any means, including those done under the pretext of domestic or overseas employment or training or apprenticeship, for the purpose of prostitution, pornography, or sexual exploitation;
x x x x
(e) To maintain or hire a person to engage in prostitution or pornography;x x x x
With respect to appellant Oledan, it was duly established by proof beyond reasonable doubt that he recruited, transported, and provided [AAA] to numerous customers on different occasions at Saigon Disco in exchange for money under the pretext of a "bar fine," by taking advantage of her vulnerability, sometime in September until December of 2009; With respect to appellant Garcia, while she may not have anything to do with [AAA's] recruitment, it was equally proved that she maintained, provided and hired her to engage in prostitution activities at Saigon Disco. It was indubitably established that both appellants managed all the GROs at Saigon Disco, provided for their customers and received the "bar fine" for the services rendered by the; said GROs including those of [AAA], It must be emphasized that [AAA's] testimony with regard to the payment of a "bar fine" particularly in the amount of P2,500.00, which necessarily included the rendering of sexual services to customers, was evidently established and confirmed in the entrapment operation conducted by the NBI with the assistance of the IJM on December 12, 2009. x x x.28It must be added that 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.29 The trafficked victim's testimony that she had been sexually exploited is material to the cause of the prosecution.30 In this case, AAA's testimony was corroborated by the testimonies of the persons who were part of the entrapment operation.
Endnotes:
* Designated additional member per Special Order "No. 2780 dated May 11, 2020.
1 See Notice of Appeal dated September 25, 2017, rollo, pp. 22-23.
2Id. at 2-21; penned by Associate Justice Edwin D, Sorongon with Associate Justices Ramon R. Garcia and Victoria Isabel A. Paredes, concurring.
3 CA rollo, pp. 70-191; penned by Judge Perla B. Querubin.
4 Section 4(e) of Republic Act No. (RA) 9208 provides:
SECTION 4. Acts of Trafficking in Persons.– x x x
x x x x
(e) To maintain or hire a person to engage in prostitution or pornography[.]
5 Section 6(a) of RA 9208 provides:
SECTION 6. Qualified Trafficking, in Persons. — The following are considered as qualified trafficking:
(a) When the trafficked person is a child[.]
6 As amended by Republic Act No. (RA) 10364.
7 CA rollo, pp. 24-25.
8 The identity of the victim or any information to establish or compromise her identity, as well as those of her immediate family or household members, shall be withheld pursuant to RA 7610, "An Act Providing for Stronger Deterrence and Special Protection against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination, and "or Other Purposes;" RA 9262, "An Act Defining Violence against Women and Their Children, Providing for Protective Measures for Victims, Prescribing Penalties Therefor, and for Other Purposes;" Section 40 of Administrative Matter "No. 04-10-11-SC, known as the "Rule on Violence against Women and Their Children," effective 'November 15, 2004; People v. Cabalquinto, 533 Phil. 703 (200:6); and Amended Administrative Circular No. 83-2015 dated September 5, 2017, Subject: Protocols and Procedures in the Promulgation, Publication, and Posting on the Websites of Decisions, Final Resolutions, and Final Orders Using Fictitious Names/Personal Circumstances.
9Rollo, p. 24.
10Rollo, p. 5.
11Id. at 6.
12Id.
13Id.
14Id.
15Id. at 7.
16Id.
17Id. at 8-9.
18Id. at 9.
19Id. at 9-10.
20Id. at 10.
21Id.
22 CA Rollo, pp. 190-191. Italics and underscoring omitted.
23Rollo, pp. 2-21.
24 Section 4 of R A 9208 provides:
Section 4. Acts of Trafficking in Persons. — xxx
(a) To recruit, transport, transfer, harbor, provide, or receive a.person by any means, including those done under the pretext of domestic or overseas employment or training or apprenticeship, for the purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary servitude or debt bondage[.]
25Rollo, p.. 18, citing People v Hirang, 803 Phil. 277, 291 (2017), further citing People v. Bartolome, 703 Phil. 148. 16) (2013).
26Id. at 19.
27Id. at 20.
28Id. at 15-16.
29People v. Mora, G.R. No. 242682, July 1, 2019, citing People v. Casio, 749 Phil. 458, 475-476 (2014).
30Santiago, Jr. v. People, G.R. No. 213760, July 1, 2019, citing People v. Rodriguez, 818 Phil. 625, 638 (2017).
31People v. Dela Rosa, G.R. No. 227880, November 6, 2019, citing People v. Dimapilit, 816 Phil. 523, 540-541 (2017).
32Id., citing People v. Diu, 708 Phil. 218, 232 (2013).
33Arambulo v. People, G.R. No. 241834, July 24, 2019.