PEOPLE vs. TAN TIONG MENG (Labor Law Review)

G.R. No. 120835-40 April 10, 1997 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, 

vs.

TAN TIONG MENG alias "TOMMY TAN", accused-appellant.

FACTS:

The above-named accused by means of false representations that he can secure an employment in Taiwan for Ernesto Orcullo y Nicolas as a factory worker induced the latter to entrust to him the amount of P15,000.00, in consideration of the promised employment, but the herein accused, once in possession of the amount, with intent to defraud, with grave abuse of confidence and without fulfilling his promise, did, then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and knowingly, misapply, misappropriate and convert the same to his own personal use and benefit and notwithstanding repeated demands made upon him for the return of the amount, accused herein failed and refused to do so. There were other informations for estafa involving different person.

Accused-appellant pleaded not guilty to all the informations and all seven (7) cases were tried jointly.

ISSUE:

Whether the accused were guilty of the offense illegal recruitment in large scale  and estafa.

RULING:

YES.

The Labor Code defines recruitment and placement thus:

(A)ny act of canvassing, enlisting, contracting, transporting, utilizing, hiring or procuring workers, and includes referrals, contract services, promising or advertising for employment, locally or abroad, whether for profit or not; Provided, that any person or entity which, in any manner, offers or promises for a fee employment to two or more persons shall be deemed engaged in recruitment and placement. 13

It is clear that accused-appellant's acts of accepting placement fees from job applicants and representing to said applicants that he could get them jobs in Taiwan constitute recruitment and placement under the above provision of the Labor Code.

The Labor Code prohibits any person or entity, not authorized by the POEA, from engaging in recruitment and placement activities thus:

(a) Any recruitment activities, including the prohibited practices enumerated under Article 34 of this Code, to be undertaken by non-licensees or non-holders of authority shall be deemed illegal and punishable under Article 39 of this Code . . . .

(b) Illegal recruitment when committed by a syndicate or in large scale shall be considered an offense involving economic sabotage and shall be penalized in accordance with Article 39 hereof.

Illegal recruitment is deemed committed by a syndicate if carried out by a group of three (3) or more persons conspiring and/or confederating with one another in carrying out any unlawful or illegal transaction, enterprise or scheme defined under the first paragraph hereof. Illegal recruitment is deemed committed in large scale if committed against three (3) or more persons individually or as a group. 14

The POEA having certified that accused-appellant is not authorized to recruit workers for overseas employment, it is clear that the offense committed against the six (6) complainants in this case is illegal recruitment in large scale punishable under Article 39 (a) of the Labor Code with life imprisonment and a fine of One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,000.00).

Accused-appellant's guilt of six (6) separate crimes of estafa has likewise been proven

The argument that the deceit was employed by Jose Percival Borja and not by accused-appellant is specious, even ridiculous. All the complainants agreed that it was accused-appellant Tan who assured them of jobs in Taiwan. The assurances were made intentionally to deceive the would-be job applicants to part with their money.

In People v. Calonzo, 15 the Court reiterated the rule that a person convicted for illegal recruitment under the Labor Code can be convicted for violation of the Revised Penal Code provisions on estafa provided the elements of the crime are present. In People v. Romero 16 the elements of the crime were stated thus:

a) that the accused defrauded another by abuse of confidence or by means of deceit, and

b) that damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is caused to the offended party or third person.

Both elements have been proven in this case.