You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. MELISSA CHUA

This case has been cited 1 times or more.

2012-09-13
VILLARAMA, JR., J.
Appellant cannot escape liability by conveniently limiting her participation as a cashier of Golden Gate.  The provisions of Article 13(b) of the Labor Code and Section 6 of R.A. No. 8042 are unequivocal that illegal recruitment may or may not be for profit.  It is immaterial, therefore, whether appellant remitted the placement fees to "the agency's treasurer" or appropriated them.  The same provision likewise provides that the persons criminally liable for illegal recruitment are the principals, accomplices and accessories.  Just the same, therefore, appellant can be held liable as a principal by direct participation since she personally undertook the recruitment of private complainants without a license or authority to do so.  Worth stressing, the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995 is a special law, a violation of which is malum prohibitum, not mala in se.  Intent is thus, immaterial[26] and mere commission of the prohibited act is punishable.