View full case

PEOPLE v. ESMERALDO 'JAY' AMURAO Y TEJERO

FACTS:

In February 2013, accused-appellant Esmeraldo "Jay" Amurao and his co-accused Marlyn "Lyn" Dizon Valencia were charged with Trafficking in Persons under five separate sets of Information. They were also charged with violation of RA 7610 or the Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation, and Discrimination Act under four sets of Information. The charges arose from their alleged recruitment, hiring, and exploitation of several victims, including minors, for the purpose of prostitution and sexual exploitation. The Regional Trial Court convicted Amurao and Valencia, and this decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeals.

According to the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) version of the events, the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) received a report from the International Justice Mission (IJM) regarding Amurao's involvement in prostituting women, including minors. NBI agents posed as customers and met Amurao at Natalia Hotel, where they inquired about the minor girls he was selling. Amurao offered to provide them with girls for a price. The NBI agents then organized a rescue and entrapment operation, wherein Amurao and Valencia arrived with six minor girls and accepted marked money from the agents. The NBI signaled the rest of the team and proceeded with the rescue operation, resulting in the arrest of Amurao and the recovery of the marked money from him and one of the girls.

On the other hand, Amurao presented a different version of events. He claimed that the NBI agents gave him money to look for girls and even though he failed to provide them, they still gave him a tip. He also stated that on the day of the operation, the agents asked him to look for girls again and promised to give him a tip. Amurao contacted Valencia to help him and they were able to bring four girls to the agents. When they introduced the girls to the agents, they all boarded the agents' van. The agents then handed Amurao money, and it was only after this that they revealed themselves as NBI agents and arrested him.

In the lower court, Amurao was found guilty of Trafficking in Persons and Violation of Section 4(a) of Republic Act No. 9208 in connection with the trafficking of minors. Valencia was also found guilty of Trafficking in Persons. However, Valencia was acquitted in some cases, and other cases were dismissed on the ground of double jeopardy. Amurao appealed his conviction, arguing instigation as a defense and that he should only be convicted of White Slave Trade. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, but modified the damages awarded.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether or not Amurao's guilt for the offense of Trafficking in Persons against AAA and Qualified Trafficking in Persons against minors BBB and CCC for the purpose of prostitution was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

  2. Whether or not the defense of instigation is applicable in this case.

  3. Whether or not the entrapment operation conducted by the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) agents was valid.

RULING:

  1. The Court affirms the factual findings of the RTC, as affirmed by the CA, that Amurao's guilt for the offense of Trafficking in Persons against AAA and Qualified Trafficking in Persons against minors BBB and CCC for the purpose of prostitution was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

  2. The defense of instigation is not applicable in this case. Instigation refers to a situation where the criminal intent originates from the mind of the law enforcement officials, and the accused is merely lured or induced to commit the offense. On the other hand, entrapment occurs when law enforcement officials facilitate the apprehension of the criminal by employing ruses and schemes. In this case, the testimony of witnesses confirmed that the accused had already been involved in the illegal trafficking of women even before the entrapment operation. Additionally, there is no indication that the accused was forced or induced to commit the crime. Thus, the defense of instigation has no merit.

  3. The entrapment operation conducted by the NBI agents was valid. The NBI agents acted on a report regarding the accused's illegal activities and devised a scheme to facilitate his actions in order to arrest him. Entrapment is a valid means of apprehending criminals, and it does not bar prosecution and conviction. In this case, the entrapment operation was conducted in accordance with the law, and therefore, the accused's conviction stands.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Factual findings of the trial court, including its assessment of the credibility of witnesses, probative weight of their testimonies, as well as of the documentary evidence, are accorded great weight and respect. (Stare decisis)

  • The elements of Trafficking in Persons are: (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. (People v. Casio)

  • The crime of Trafficking in Persons is qualified when the trafficked person is a child, which is defined as a person below the age of 18 years old or above 18 years old but is unable to fully take care of or protect himself/herself from abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation, or discrimination because of a physical or mental disability or condition. (Section 6(a) of RA 9208)

  • Instigation and entrapment are distinct concepts. In instigation, the criminal intent originates from the law enforcement officials, and the accused is lured or induced to commit the offense. On the other hand, entrapment occurs when the accused already has the criminal intent, and law enforcement officials merely facilitate the apprehension of the criminal by employing ruses and schemes.

  • Instigation is a defense that can result in the acquittal of the accused, while entrapment does not bar prosecution and conviction.

  • In order for entrapment to be valid, there must be no indication that the accused was forced or induced to commit the crime, and the entrapment operation must be conducted in accordance with the law.