View full case

PEOPLE v. ROMULO SAULO

FACTS:

Accused-appellant Romulo Saulo, along with Amelia de la Cruz and Clodualdo de la Cruz, were charged with violation of Article 38 (b) of the Labor Code for illegal recruitment in large scale. They were also charged with three counts of estafa.

The information for illegal recruitment alleges that the accused, acting in conspiracy, falsely represented themselves as capable of recruiting workers for employment abroad from April 1990 to May 1990 in Quezon City. They recruited Leodegario Maullon, Beny Maligaya, and Angeles Javier without the necessary license from the Department of Labor and Employment.

The informations for estafa, which were identical, stated that accused-appellant and the other accused defrauded the complainants by falsely claiming that they could deploy workers for overseas employment. The complainants were convinced to give money as fees for the promised employment, but the accused failed to fulfill their promise and misappropriated the funds.

Accused-appellant pleaded not guilty to the charges. The prosecution presented three witnesses, including the complainants, who testified that accused-appellant promised them overseas employment and collected fees from them but failed to deliver. The complainants filed complaints with the POEA after discovering that they had been deceived.

On the other hand, accused-appellant denied being involved in overseas employment recruitment, denying that he received money from the complainants or signed any receipts. He also claimed that the cases were instigated by his mother-in-law with whom he had a disagreement. The trial court found accused-appellant guilty of estafa and illegal recruitment in large scale, imposing a prison sentence and ordering him to compensate the complainants.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the accused engaged in illegal recruitment and placement activities.

  2. Whether the accused had the necessary license or authority to engage in recruitment and placement activities.

  3. Whether a person may be charged and convicted for both illegal recruitment and estafa.

  4. Whether the elements of estafa are present in the case.

  5. What is the penalty for the crime of estafa under Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code.

  6. What is the indeterminate sentence for the estafa charge against the accused.

  7. What penalties should be imposed for each criminal case filed against the accused.

  8. What is the proper penalty for the crime of estafa committed by the accused-appellant in Criminal Case No. Q-91-21908?

  9. What is the proper penalty for the crime of estafa committed by the accused-appellant in Criminal Case No. Q-91-21909?

  10. What is the proper penalty for the crime of estafa committed by the accused-appellant in Criminal Case No. Q-91-21910?

  11. What is the proper penalty for the crime of illegal recruitment in large scale committed by the accused-appellant in Criminal Case No. Q-91-21911?

RULING:

  1. The court held that the accused engaged in unlawful recruitment and placement activities. The prosecution established that the accused promised employment to the complainants and asked for money to process their papers and procure passports. The complainants entrusted their money to the accused based on these representations. It was also proven that the accused was not authorized or licensed by the Department of Labor and Employment to engage in recruitment and placement activities.

  2. The court rejected the accused's argument that he could not have committed illegal recruitment in large scale because licenses for recruitment and placement are only issued to corporations. The court held that the Labor Code defines recruitment and placement as "any act of canvassing, enlisting, contracting, transporting, etc. workers" and includes promising or advertising for employment. It does not require that the person engaged in recruitment and placement be a corporation. As such, the accused's lack of a license or authority rendered his recruitment activities criminal.

  3. Yes, a person may be charged and convicted for both illegal recruitment and estafa. Illegal recruitment is a malum prohibitum offense, while estafa is a malum in se offense. It is not necessary to prove criminal intent in illegal recruitment, but it is required in estafa.

  4. The trial court was correct in finding the accused liable for estafa. The elements of estafa under Article 315, paragraph 2(a) of the Revised Penal Code are: (1) the accused defrauded another by abuse of confidence or deceit, and (2) damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is caused to the offended party or a third person. In this case, the accused made false assurances that he could provide employment in another country, causing the complainants to part with their money, resulting in damage and prejudice.

  5. The penalty for the crime of estafa under Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code depends on the amount of fraud involved. If the amount of fraud exceeds P12,000 but does not exceed P22,000, the penalty is prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its minimum period. If the amount exceeds P22,000, the penalty is adjusted accordingly, adding one year for each additional P10,000.

  6. The indeterminate sentence for the estafa charge against the accused is a minimum term within the range of prision correccional minimum to medium, and a maximum term determined based on the prescribed penalty of prision correccional maximum to prision mayor minimum. The maximum term is divided into three equal portions, with each portion forming one period.

  7. The specific penalties and damages to be imposed for each criminal case filed against the accused are enumerated in the ruling, depending on the amount of fraud involved. For the crime of illegal recruitment in large scale, the accused shall suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of P100,000.

  8. The accused-appellant shall suffer the indeterminate penalty of four (4) years and two (2) months of prision correccional medium, as minimum to nine (9) years of prision mayor as maximum. The accused-appellant shall also pay Benny Maligaya P35,000.00 by way of actual damages.

  9. The accused-appellant shall suffer the indeterminate penalty of one (1) year, eight (8) months and twenty-one (21) days of prision correccional minimum to five (5) years, five (5) months and eleven (11) days of prision correccional maximum. The accused-appellant shall also pay Angeles Javier P20,000.00 by way of actual damages.

  10. The accused-appellant shall suffer the indeterminate penalty of four (4) years and two (2) months of prision correccional medium, as minimum to eight (8) years of prision mayor, as maximum. The accused-appellant shall also pay Leodigario Maullon P30,400.00 by way of actual damages.

  11. For the crime of illegal recruitment in large scale, the accused-appellant shall suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,000.00).

PRINCIPLES:

  • The essential elements of illegal recruitment in large scale are: (1) engaging in recruitment and placement activities; (2) non-compliance with guidelines issued by the Secretary of Labor and Employment; and (3) committing the offense against three or more persons.

  • A person may be convicted of illegal recruitment on the strength of the complainants' testimonies if found credible and convincing.

  • Lack of receipts to evidence payment does not necessarily weaken the prosecution's case in an illegal recruitment charge.

  • Non-licensees or nonholders of authority are any person, corporation, or entity that has not been issued a valid license or authority to engage in recruitment and placement.

  • The Indeterminate Sentence Law allows for the imposition of an indeterminate prison term, which consists of a minimum term within the range of the penalty next lower to that prescribed by the law for the offense, and a maximum term within the range of the penalty prescribed by the law.

  • For the crime of estafa, the penalty is determined based on the amount defrauded, with an additional period added for each additional amount in excess of a certain threshold.

  • For the crime of illegal recruitment in large scale, the penalty is life imprisonment and a fine.