Case Digest: Arambulo vs People GR 241834 24 July 2019
RA 9208 | Criminal Law
FACTS:
The RTC and CA convicted Fernando B. Arambulo for the crime of Qualified Trafficking in Persons. Petitioner and his minor son, Dominique Dimple Arambulo, invited the latter's three (3) schoolmates who were also minors, namely AAA, BBB, and CCC, 10 to their house sometime in 2011. It was then revealed that the purpose of the meeting was to discuss petitioner's plans to commit robberies with the help of AAA, BBB, and CCC. Upon learning about this, CCC expressed his desire to leave but petitioner got angry and punched him; thus, he was forced to join the group. AAA, BBB, and CCC then similarly testified that not only was petitioner the mastermind of the series of robberies they subsequently committed against various people, but he was also the driver of their getaway tricycle.
ISSUE:
WoN the petitioner's conviction for trafficking in persons should be set aside because the specific provision under which he was convicted was introduced after the period when he committed the acts.
CONTENTION:
In an attempt to absolve himself from criminal liability, petitioner similarly contends that the acts imputed to him, i.e., recruiting minors to commit a series of robberies, constitute the crime defined and penalized under Section 4 (k) (4) of RA 9208, as amended by RA 10364.
He then posits that since this specific provision was only introduced by the amendatory law in 2013 as the original iteration of Section 4 of RA 9208 did not contain the same, and the acts imputed to petitioner were committed sometime in September 2011 to January 12, 2012 as indicated in the Information against him, it may be said that at the time he committed said acts, there was no specific provision in RA 9208 in its original form which specifically defines and penalizes the said acts as Trafficking in Persons. As such, his conviction must be set aside.
HELD:
NO.
While petitioner correctly pointed out that he cannot be convicted under Section 4 (k) (4) of RA 9208 as amended by RA 10364 since said provision was only enacted on February 28, 2013, or after the period stated in the Information when he committed the acts imputed against him, this will not ipso facto result in his acquittal, as his acts of recruiting minors for the purpose of committing a series of robberies reasonably fall under Section 4 (a) of RA 9208 in its original form, which reads:
Section 4. Acts of Trafficking in Persons. - It shall be unlawful for any person, natural or juridical, 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; (Emphases and underscoring supplied)
Relatedly, Section 3 (d) of RA 9208 in its original form defines the term "forced labor and slavery" as "the extraction of work or services from any person by means of enticement, violence, intimidation or threat, use of force or coercion, including deprivation of freedom, abuse of authority or moral ascendancy, debt-bondage or deception."
Comments
Post a Comment