People V Panis

Republic of the Philippines operate a fee-charging employment agency, other hand, the petitioner argues that the
SUPREME COURT did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and requirement of two or more persons is
Manila criminally operate a private fee charging imposed only where the recruitment and
employment agency by charging fees and placement consists of an offer or promise of
EN BANC expenses (from) and promising employment employment to such persons and always in
in Saudi Arabia" to four separate individuals consideration of a fee. The other acts
G.R. Nos. L-58674-77July 11, 1990 named therein, in violation of Article 16 in mentioned in the body of the article may
relation to Article 39 of the Labor Code. 1 involve even only one person and are not
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, necessarily for profit.
vs. Abug filed a motion to quash on the ground
HON. DOMINGO PANIS, Presiding Judge that the informations did not charge an Neither interpretation is acceptable. We fail
of the Court of First Instance of Zambales & offense because he was accused of illegally to see why the proviso should speak only of
Olongapo City, Branch III and SERAPIO recruiting only one person in each of the an offer or promise of employment if the
ABUG, respondents. four informations. Under the proviso in purpose was to apply the requirement of
Article 13(b), he claimed, there would be two or more persons to all the acts
illegal recruitment only "whenever two or mentioned in the basic rule. For its part, the
more persons are in any manner promised petitioner does not explain why dealings
CRUZ, J: or offered any employment for a fee. " 2 with two or more persons are needed where
the recruitment and placement consists of
The basic issue in this case is the correct Denied at first, the motion was reconsidered an offer or promise of employment but not
interpretation of Article 13(b) of P.D. 442, and finally granted in the Orders of the trial when it is done through "canvassing,
otherwise known as the Labor Code, court dated June 24 and September 17, enlisting, contracting, transporting, utilizing,
reading as follows: 1981. The prosecution is now before us on hiring or procuring (of) workers.
certiorari. 3
(b) Recruitment and placement' refers to As we see it, the proviso was intended
any act of canvassing, enlisting, contracting, The posture of the petitioner is that the neither to impose a condition on the basic
transporting, hiring, or procuring workers, private respondent is being prosecuted rule nor to provide an exception thereto but
and includes referrals, contract services, under Article 39 in relation to Article 16 of merely to create a presumption. The
promising or advertising for employment, the Labor Code; hence, Article 13(b) is not presumption is that the individual or entity is
locally or abroad, whether for profit or not: applicable. However, as the first two cited engaged in recruitment and placement
Provided, That any person or entity which, articles penalize acts of recruitment and whenever he or it is dealing with two or
in any manner, offers or promises for a fee placement without proper authority, which is more persons to whom, in consideration of
employment to two or more persons shall the charge embodied in the informations, a fee, an offer or promise of employment is
be deemed engaged in recruitment and application of the definition of recruitment made in the course of the "canvassing,
placement. and placement in Article 13(b) is enlisting, contracting, transporting, utilizing,
unavoidable. hiring or procuring (of) workers. "
Four informations were filed on January 9,
1981, in the Court of First Instance of The view of the private respondents is that The number of persons dealt with is not an
Zambales and Olongapo City alleging that to constitute recruitment and placement, all essential ingredient of the act of recruitment
Serapio Abug, private respondent herein, the acts mentioned in this article should and placement of workers. Any of the acts
"without first securing a license from the involve dealings with two or mre persons mentioned in the basic rule in Article 13(b)
Ministry of Labor as a holder of authority to as an indispensable requirement. On the win constitute recruitment and placement
even if only one prospective worker is and, as in the instant case, certain esoteric
involved. The proviso merely lays down a provisions that one cannot read against the
rule of evidence that where a fee is background facts usually reported in the
collected in consideration of a promise or legislative journals.
offer of employment to two or more
prospective workers, the individual or entity At any rate, the interpretation here adopted
dealing with them shall be deemed to be should give more force to the campaign
engaged in the act of recruitment and against illegal recruitment and placement,
placement. The words "shall be deemed" which has victimized many Filipino workers
create that presumption. seeking a better life in a foreign land, and
investing hard- earned savings or even
This is not unlike the presumption in article borrowed funds in pursuit of their dream,
217 of the Revised Penal Code, for only to be awakened to the reality of a
example, regarding the failure of a public cynical deception at the hands of theirown
officer to produce upon lawful demand countrymen.
funds or property entrusted to his custody.
Such failure shall be prima facie evidence WHEREFORE, the Orders of June 24,
that he has put them to personal use; in 1981, and September 17, 1981, are set
other words, he shall be deemed to have aside and the four informations against the
malversed such funds or property. In the private respondent reinstated. No costs.
instant case, the word "shall be deemed"
should by the same token be given the force SO ORDERED.
of a disputable presumption or of prima
facie evidence of engaging in recruitment
and placement. (Klepp vs. Odin Tp.,
McHenry County 40 ND N.W. 313, 314.)
It is unfortunate that we can only speculate

on the meaning of the questioned provision
for lack of records of debates and
deliberations that would otherwise have
been available if the Labor Code had been
enacted as a statute rather than a
presidential decree. The trouble with
presidential decrees is that they could be,
and sometimes were, issued without
previous public discussion or consultation,
the promulgator heeding only his own
counsel or those of his close advisers in
their lofty pinnacle of power. The not
infrequent results are rejection, intentional
or not, of the interest of the greater number

People V Panis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

People V Panis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

People V Panis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines operate a fee-charging employment agency, other hand, the petitioner argues that the

It is unfortunate that we can only speculate

You might also like