People v. Mora
G.R. No. 242682
July 1, 2019
FACTS:
The RTC
and CA convicted Nerissa Mora a.k.a. Neri Balagta Mora for the crim of
Qualified Trafficking in Persons. That on November 26, 2011, Mora was able to
convince AAA, then a minor, to come with her to Buraburan, Buhi, Camarines Sur.
Upon arriving thereat, Mora left AAA at Otoy's Videoke Bar (Otoy's) owned by
Polvoriza; thereafter, Polvoriza locked AAA inside a room therein, prohibited
her from going out, and took her mobile phone and destroyed its SIM card.
Polvoriza then made AAA work as an entertainer at Otoy's under the stage name
"Rizza M. Rañada," forcing her to take shabu, dance naked, and even
have sex with the customers. Eight (8) months later, AAA was able to escape from
Polvoriza's custody and return to her father, to whom she narrated her ordeal.
Her father then took AAA to the police station to report the matter and also to
a medico-legal, who, after examination, confirmed, inter alia, that AAA
sustained multiple hymenal lacerations which could have resulted from
consensual and forcible sexual contact.
ISSUE:
Whether
or not Mora's conviction for Qualified Trafficking in Persons should be upheld.
HELD:
Yes. Section
3 (a) of RA 9208 defines the term "Trafficking in Persons" as the
"recruitment, transportation, transfer or harboring, or receipt of persons
with or without the victim's consent or knowledge, within or across national
borders by means of 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 person
for the purpose of exploitation which includes at a minimum, the 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."
The same provision further 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."The crime of
"Trafficking in Persons" becomes qualified when, among others, the
trafficked person is a child. As correctly ruled by the courts a quo, Mora and
Polvoriza are guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crimes charged as the
prosecution had clearly established the existence of the elements thereof, as
seen in the following: (a) Mora, through deception and by taking advantage of
AAA's vulnerability as a minor, was able to "convince" the latter to
go to Buraburan, Buhi, Camarines Sur; (b) upon arrival thereat, Mora took AAA
to Polvoriza's videoke bar, i.e., Otoy's, and left her there; and (c) since
then and for the next eight (8) months, Polvoriza forced AAA to work as a
prostitute in Otoy's, coercing her to perform lewd acts on a nightly basis,
such as dancing naked in front of male customers and even having sex with them.
In this regard, the courts a quo correctly found untenable Mora and Polvoriza's
insistence that it was AAA who voluntarily presented herself to work as an'
entertainer/sex worker in Otoy's, as trafficking in persons can still be
committed even if the victim gives consent -.most especially in cases where the
victim is a minor; In this regard, case law instructs that "the victim's
consent is rendered meaningless due to the coercive, abusive, or deceptive
means employed by perpetrators of human trafficking. Even without the use of
coercive, abusive, or deceptive means, a minor's consent is not given out of
his or her own free will.
