SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 250476. October 13, 2021.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.RIECHEL1BASANTA LIMBANG, accused-appellant.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames:
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 13 October 2021which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 250476 (People of the Philippines v. RiechelBasanta Limbang). — This is an appeal 2 from the Decision 3 dated November 29, 2018 of the Court of Appeals, _________ (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 02372. The assailed CA Decision affirmed the Decision 4 dated July 18, 2016 of Branch 24, Regional Trial Court (RTC), ________ finding Riechel Basanta Limbang (accused-appellant) guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violation of Section 4 (a), 5 qualified by Section 6 (a) 6 and (c), 7 of Republic Act (RA) No. 9208 or the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003. 8
The Facts
The instant case stemmed from an Information charging accused-appellant with qualified trafficking in persons, the accusatory portion of which states:
That on or about the 31st day of August 2010, and for sometime prior thereto, in the _________, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused, having been previously determined, after a discreet police surveillance operation, to be hiring and maintaining women to engage in prostitution based in _____________, with deliberate intent, did then and there hire four (4) women namely, AAA, 9 20 years old, BBB, 20 years old, CCC, 18 years old and DDD, 17 years old, to meet the accused and the would be sex clients to ________, more particularly at ___________, this city, whereupon the accused delivered the said women to police decoy-customers for sexual services in exchange for money, resulting in immediate arrest of the accused as a result of a police-entrapment operation and in the rescue of the said women-victims.
That the commission of the offense is attended by the following qualifying aggravating circumstances:
1. that one of the victims is a 17-year-old minor, and
2. that the crime is committed in a large scale.
CONTRARY TO LAW. 10
When arraigned, accused-appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge. 11
Trial ensued. 12
Version of the Prosecution
The prosecution established that on August 27, 2010, after the members of the Anti-Human Trafficking Task Force of the Philippine National Police (PNP), Region 7 conducted a surveillance operation, it was confirmed that one "Batching," later identified as the accused-appellant, was engaged in the trafficking of women in ______. 13
In the morning of August 31, 2010, "Batching" contacted PO1 Nef Nemenzo (PO1 Nemenzo) for a meeting at Bo's Cafe at _____________ and promised to bring the girls who would perform sexual services for the latter. PO1 Nemenzo agreed, and he was able to get a discounted price of P1,500.00 for each or a total of P6,000.00 for four girls. 14 DHITCc
Subsequently, the police officers arranged an entrapment operation. During the briefing, the head of the entrapment team designated PO1 Nemenzo as the decoy-customer with PO1 Ariel Llanes (PO1 Llanes), PO2 Lyman Arsua (PO2 Arsua), and PO2 Rodrigo Inoc (PO2 Inoc) as back-up officers. The team prepared the P6,000.00 marked money. 15
At around 6:45 p.m. of even date, PO1 Nemenzo and his team met "Batching" at Bo's Cafe in ___________________. After a few minutes, AAA, BBB, CCC, and DDD arrived. Thereafter, "Batching" demanded payment from PO1 Nemenzo, and the latter gave P6,000.00 in exchange for the girls' sexual services. All of them then boarded a van. When they stopped at a Caltex Station, PO2 Inoc announced that they were police officers and immediately arrested "Batching." PO1 Llanes recovered the marked money from "Batching," and the latter was brought to the police station. The police officers turned over the custody of the four girls to the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD). 16 There, the police officers found that one of them, DDD, was still a minor. 17
Version of the Defense
For his part, accused-appellant denied the accusation that he was engaged in the trafficking of women for prostitution. He averred that he only agreed on the request of PO1 Nemenzo to bring the girls for drinks and fun. He met with PO1 Nemenzo for coffee and food at Bo's Cafe in _______________ when the girls arrived. They all got in a van and, after a while, the van stopped at a gas station. Suddenly, someone opened the door and announced an arrest. 18
The Ruling of the RTC
In the Decision 19 dated July 18, 2016, the RTC found accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the offense of qualified trafficking in persons. It sentenced accused-appellant to suffer the penalty of life imprisonment, pay a fine of P2,000,000.00, and pay each of the victims P500,000.00 as moral damages and P100,000.00 as exemplary damages. 20
The RTC ruled that the prosecution had proven beyond reasonable doubt all the elements of qualified trafficking in persons. It further ruled that the act committed by accused-appellant was the offense of qualified trafficking considering that one of the victims was a minor, and that the offense was committed in large scale as it involved four victims. 21
Aggrieved, accused-appellant appealed to the CA.
The Ruling of the Court of Appeals
In the Decision 22 dated November 29, 2018, the CA upheld accused-appellant's conviction for the offense of qualified trafficking in persons. It found correct the RTC's imposition of the penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of P2,000,000.00 against accused-appellant. The CA likewise affirmed the award of moral damages of P500,000.00 and exemplary damages of P100,000.00 to each of the victims. 23
Hence, the instant appeal 24 before the Court.
Plaintiff-appellee, through the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), adopts its Brief for the Plaintiff-Appellee 25 filed before the CA as its supplemental brief before the Court. 26
In its Brief for Plaintiff-Appellee filed before the CA, the OSG argues that (1) the prosecution had clearly proven that accused-appellant hired and delivered the four girls, including the minor, for sexual services in exchange for money; (2) DDD, the minor victim, testified that it was accused-appellant who asked them to go to Bo's Cafe to meet him and the would-be clients; and (3) in their testimonies, PO1 Nemenzo and PO1 Llanes positively identified accused-appellant as the one who provided the four girls to them for sexual services in exchange for money. 27
On the other hand, in his Supplemental Brief 28 dated September 11, 2020 filed before the Court, accused-appellant reiterates that (1) he did not hire the girls to engage in prostitution; (2) DDD, the minor victim, was merely invited by BBB and CCC to go to Bo's Cafe and meet PO1 Nemenzo; and (3) the testimony of PO1 Nemenzo is inconsistent with his affidavit. 29
According to accused-appellant, PO1 Nemenzo testified that he "texted" him about the alleged agreement to meet the girls. However, in his affidavit, PO1 Nemenzo stated that he "called" accused-appellant to arrange a meeting with the girls to go out and have fun. 30
The Issue
Whether the CA correctly upheld the findings of the RTC that accused-appellant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of qualified trafficking in persons.
The Court's Ruling
The appeal has no merit.
Well settled is the rule that findings of the trial court which are factual in nature and which involve the credibility of witnesses are accorded with respect, if not finality, by the appellate court, when no glaring errors, gross misapprehension of facts, and speculative, arbitrary, and unsupported conclusions can be gathered from such findings. The reason is quite simple: the trial judge is in a better position to ascertain the conflicting testimonies of witnesses after having heard them and observed their deportment and mode of testifying during the trial. 31 cEaSHC
After a judicious perusal of the records of the instant appeal, the Court finds no compelling reason to depart from the RTC and CA's uniform factual findings. The Court affirms accused-appellant's conviction.
Accused-appellant is charged with violation of Section 4 (a), qualified by Section 6 (a) and (c) of RA 9208. It reads:
Section 4. Acts of Trafficking in Persons. — It shall be unlawful for any person, natural or judicial, to commit any of the following acts:
(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[.]
The elements of trafficking in persons can be derived from its definition under Section 3 (a) of RA 9208, thus:
(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." 32
Section 3 (a) of RA 9208, as amended by RA 10364, 33 likewise provides that "the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring or receipt of a child for the purpose of exploitation shall also be considered as 'trafficking in persons' even if it does not involve any of the means set forth in the preceding paragraph."
In the case, the prosecution satisfactorily established the presence of the elements of the offense. Both the RTC and the CA found that accused-appellant recruited and offered AAA, BBB, CCC, and DDD for sexual exploitation in exchange for money to the poseur-customers.
DDD, the minor victim, positively identified accused-appellant as the person who asked her, together with BBB and CCC, to go to Bo's Cafe in ______________ to meet him and the would-be clients on the evening of August 31, 2010. Likewise, PO1 Nemenzo and PO1 Llanes pointed to accused-appellant as the one who delivered and provided them the four girls for sexual services in exchange for money. 34
To emphasize, even before the entrapment operation, the police officers conducted a surveillance operation to verify whether the tip provided by an informant that accused-appellant was engaged in the trafficking of women is true. After it was confirmed that, indeed, accused-appellant was engaged in selling women for sexual services, the police officers conducted an entrapment operation which resulted in accused-appellant's arrest. 35
Under Section 6 (a) and (c) of RA 9208, the offense of trafficking in persons becomes qualified under the following circumstances:
Section 6. Qualified Trafficking in Persons. — The following are considered as qualified trafficking:
(a) When the trafficked person is a child;
xxx xxx xxx
(c) When the crime is committed by a syndicate, or in large scale. Trafficking is deemed committed by a syndicate if carried out by a group of three (3) or more persons conspiring or confederating with one another. It is deemed committed in large scale if committed against three (3) or more persons, individually or as a group[.]
As correctly ruled by the courts a quo, accused-appellant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of qualified trafficking in persons. The prosecution was able to prove that DDD, one of the victims, was a child 36 at the time of the commission of the crime. Her minority was sufficiently alleged in the Information and proved through her birth certificate. Moreover, there is no doubt that the offense was carried out in large scale as it was committed against four victims. 37
As a last-ditch effort to exonerate himself, accused-appellant cited inconsistencies in the statements of PO1 Nemenzo. He insisted that PO1 Nemenzo stated during his testimony that he "texted'' him about the alleged agreement to meet the victims. The statement is allegedly contrary to PO1 Nemenzo's affidavit wherein he stated that he "called" accused-appellant to arrange a meeting with the victims. 38
Accused-appellant is grasping at straws.
It is well settled that inconsistencies in the testimonies of witnesses which refer only to minor details and collateral matters do not affect the veracity and weight of their testimonies where there is consistency in relating the principal occurrence and the positive identification of the accused. 39 CTIEac
In the instant case, the inconsistencies cited by accused-appellant pertained to minor details which do not affect PO1 Nemenzo's credibility. Likewise, the inconsistencies of PO1 Nemenzo's statements regarding the manner of his communication to accused-appellant do not negate accused-appellant's unlawful activity. Significantly, the statements of PO1 Nemenzo were in harmony with the testimony of PO1 Llanes that it was accused-appellant who offered the four victims for sexual services in exchange for money.
Moreover, the testimonies of PO1 Nemenzo and PO1 Llanes were consistent with the statements of DDD. Undoubtedly, what is material in the case is the fact that accused-appellant offered the victims to the poseur-customers for sexual services in exchange for a sum of money.
Anent the proper penalty to be imposed on accused-appellant, Section 10 (c) of RA 9208 states:
Section 10. Penalties and Sanctions. — The following penalties and sanctions are hereby established for the offenses enumerated in this Act:
xxx xxx xxx
(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)[.]
Thus, the RTC and the CA correctly imposed the penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of P2,000,000.00 against accused-appellant.
Finally, the award of P500,000.00 as moral damages and P100,000.00 as exemplary damages to each of the victim is consistent with prevailing jurisprudence. 40 However, the Court deems it proper to impose legal interest at the rate of 6% per annum on all monetary awards from finality of this Resolution until full payment. 41
WHEREFORE, the appeal is DISMISSED. The Decision dated November 29, 2018 of the Court of Appeals, _________ in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 02372 sentencing accused-appellant to suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and ordering him to pay a fine of P2,000,000.00 and pay each of the victims P500,000.00 as moral damages and P100,000.00 as exemplary damages is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION in that the award of damages shall bear an interest of 6% per annum from the finality of this Resolution until full payment.
SO ORDERED." (PERLAS-BERNABE,S.A.J., on official leave; HERNANDO, J., Acting Chairperson per Special Order No. 2846 dated October 6, 2021.)
By authority of the Court:
(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. "Richiel" in some parts of the rollo.
2.Rollo, pp. 16-17.
3.Id. at 3-15; penned by Associate Justice Louis P. Acosta with Associate Justices Pamela Ann Abella Maxino and Dorothy P. Montejo-Gonzaga, concurring.
4. CA rollo, pp. 72-81; penned by Presiding Judge Jose Nathaniel S. Andal.
5. Section 4. Acts of Trafficking in Persons. — It shall be unlawful for any person, natural or judicial, to commit any of the following acts.
(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;
xxx xxx xxx
6. Section 6. Qualified Trafficking in Persons. — The following are considered as qualified trafficking:
(a) When the trafficked person is a child;
xxx xxx xxx
7. Section 6. Qualified Trafficking in Persons. — The following are considered as qualified trafficking:
xxx xxx xxx
(c) When the crime is committed by a syndicate, or in large scale. Trafficking is deemed committed by a syndicate if carried out by a group of three (3) or more persons conspiring or confederating with one another. It is deemed committed in large scale if committed against three (3) or more persons, individually or as a group;
xxx xxx xxx
8. CA rollo, p. 81.
9. The identity of the victims or any information to establish or compromise their identities, as well as those of their immediate family or household members, shall be withheld pursuant to Republic Act No. 7610, "An Act Providing for Stronger Deterrence and Special Protection Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination, and for Other Purposes," approved on June 17, 1992; Republic Act No. 9262, "An Act Defining Violence Against Women and Their Children, Providing for Protective Measures for Victims, Prescribing Penalties Therefor, and for Other Purposes," approved on March 8, 2004; Section 40 of A.M. 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, 709 (2006); 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.
10. CA rollo, p. 72.
11.Rollo, p. 4.
12.Id.
13. CA rollo, p. 98.
14.Id. at 99.
15.Id.
16.Id. at 99-100.
17.Rollo, p. 6.
18. CA rollo, p. 75.
19.Id. at 72-81.
20.Id. at 81.
21.Id. at 76.
22.Rollo, pp. 3-15.
23.Id. at 15.
24.Id. at 16-17.
25. CA rollo, pp. 93-111.
26.Rollo, pp. 24-26.
27.Id. at 100-104.
28.Rollo, pp. 38-83.
29.Id. at 44-64.
30.Id. at 64-68.
31.People v. Aspa, 838 Phil. 302, 311-312 (2018), citing People v. De Guzman, 564 Phil. 282, 290 (2007) and People v.Villamin, 625 Phil. 698, 713 (2010).
32.People v. Casio, 749 Phil. 458, 473 (2014), citing Section 3 (a) of RA 9208. Note that this definition is the original definition, considering that the crime was committed on August 31, 2010 or prior to the enactment of RA 10364 in 2013. In the resolution of this case, the provisions in RA 9208 prior to its amendment are applicable.
33. Entitled "An Act Expanding Republic Act No. 9208, entitled 'An Act to Institute Policies to Eliminate Trafficking in Persons Especially Women and Children. Establishing the Necessary Institutional Mechanisms for the Protection and Support of Trafficked Persons, Providing Penalties for its Violations and for Other Purposes,'" approved on February 6, 2013.
34. CA rollo, pp. 101-104.
35.Rollo, pp. 5-6.
36. Section 3. Definition of Terms. — As used in this Act:
xxx xxx xxx
(b) Child — refers to a person below eighteen (18) years of age or one who is over eighteen (18) 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.
xxx xxx xxx
37. CA rollo, p. 76.
38.Rollo, pp. 64-68.
39.People v. Bis, 728 Phil. 568, 575 (2014).
40.People v. Aguirre, et al., 820 Phil. 1085, 1105 (2017), citing People v. Lalli, et al., 675 Phil. 126, 158 (2011); People v. Casio, 749 Phil. 458, 482 (2014); and People v. Hirang, 803 Phil. 277, 292-293 (2017).
41.People v. XXX, et al., 835 Phil. 1083, 1096 (2018), citing People v. Jugueta, 783 Phil. 806, 854 (2016).