People vs. Bautista

When the trafficked person is a child, the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring, or receipt for the purpose of exploitation need not involve threat, force, coercion, deception, or other similar means; the child’s consent is immaterial and the crime of qualified trafficking is committed even if the minor participated willingly. The elements of trafficking are: (1) the act of recruitment, obtaining, hiring, providing, offering, transportation, transfer, maintaining, harboring, or receipt of persons; (2) the use of threat, force, coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or position, taking advantage of vulnerability, or the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to obtain consent; and (3) the purpose of exploitation, prostitution, or sexual exploitation. When the victim is a child, the second element need not be proved as to the means; the act and the exploitative purpose suffice for qualified trafficking.

AAA270003, a 14-year-old female, first received a phone call in November 2017 from an unknown person asking her to meet at a certain location. The caller was later identified as Ria Liza Bautista y Cariaga (Bautista). AAA270003 met Bautista on November 23, 2017 at the latter’s boarding house. Over the following days, Bautista arranged for AAA270003 to engage in sexual acts with different men in exchange for money, transporting her to a police camp and hotels, and receiving a share of the payments. AAA270003 eventually disclosed the incidents to her mother, who reported the matter to the police.

• Identity of the parties and the victim: The accused-appellant is Ria Liza Bautista y Cariaga. The private offended party is identified as AAA270003, who was 14 years old in November 2017 and 16 years old when she testified. The minority of AAA270003 was admitted by Bautista during pre-trial and cross-examination.

• First contact and meeting: On November 16, 2017, AAA270003 received a call from an unknown number. The caller asked, “sika ba ni █████?” and told her to stay at █████. AAA270003 did not comply. She later learned the caller was Bautista. They first met on November 23, 2017 at Bautista’s boarding house. AAA270003 stayed there for a day. When she had a stomach ache, they went out ostensibly to buy medicine but instead fetched Nicole, Bautista’s constant companion, and Bautista began to pimp AAA270003 to men for money.

• First incident – November 24, 2017, police camp: Bautista and AAA270003 went to a police camp. Bautista pimped AAA270003 to a former soldier, over 50 years old. The man took AAA270003 into a room and had carnal knowledge of her. Bautista and Nicole waited outside. The soldier paid Bautista PHP 1,500.00, and Bautista gave PHP 1,000.00 to AAA270003, saying “this is your money.”

• Second incident – November 25, 2017, hotel: Bautista again contacted AAA270003. At a computer shop, Bautista spoke on the phone with someone looking for girls. They went to █████, a hotel. Bautista told AAA270003 a man was waiting upstairs and said, “you can come down if you are done.” AAA270003 entered the room; a man over 30 years old undressed her. She begged him to stop because of abdominal pain, got dressed, and ran out. The man did not follow. Bautista showed no reaction. They returned to the computer shop, and Bautista handed AAA270003 PHP 700.00.

• Third incident – early morning, November 2017, hotel: Bautista introduced AAA270003 to her friend Arnel at a gasoline station. Two other men arrived on a motorcycle, and the group proceeded to █████ hotel. Bautista instructed AAA270003 to follow one of the men into a room. The man had carnal knowledge of AAA270003. He gave her PHP 2,500.00, of which PHP 2,000.00 was for her and PHP 500.00 was for Bautista. This was the last instance; AAA270003 stopped going out with Bautista thereafter.

• Discovery and report: AAA270003 eventually told her mother what had happened. They went to the police station to report the incidents. At the police station, the mother first learned that her daughter had been pimped by Bautista to multiple men.

• Defense of Bautista: Bautista denied the accusations, claiming AAA270003 was merely retaliating because of an argument between AAA270003 and Nicole.

• RTC and CA findings: The RTC gave full credence to AAA270003’s testimony. The CA affirmed, emphasizing that the trial court’s assessment of the victim’s credibility is entitled to utmost respect.

• Sufficiency of Evidence for Trafficking: Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that Bautista recruited, obtained, offered, and transported AAA270003 for the purpose of prostitution and sexual exploitation.

• Taking Advantage of Vulnerability and the Role of Minority: Whether Bautista’s acts constituted taking advantage of AAA270003’s vulnerability, and whether proof of threat, force, coercion, or deception was necessary given that the victim was a child.

• Credibility of the Victim and Weight of Denial: Whether AAA270003’s positive testimony overcame Bautista’s denial and claim of ill motive.

• Sufficiency of Evidence for Trafficking: All three elements of trafficking were established. The testimony of AAA270003 proved the act: Bautista offered AAA270003 to multiple men, received payment, and transported her to different locations to meet customers. The first element—recruitment, offering, and transportation—was satisfied by AAA270003’s detailed narration of each incident.

• Taking Advantage of Vulnerability and the Role of Minority: The second element—taking advantage of vulnerability—was proven by AAA270003’s youth and minority. The judicial admission that AAA270003 was a minor at the time dispensed with any need to prove threat, force, coercion, fraud, or deception. Under Section 3(a), paragraph 2 of Republic Act No. 9208, as amended, when the victim is a child, the recruitment, transportation, or receipt for exploitation “shall also be considered as ‘trafficking in persons’ even if it does not involve any of the means” listed in the first paragraph. Consequently, the victim’s consent is immaterial; the crime is consummated regardless of the minor’s willingness. The prosecution was not required to show how Bautista convinced AAA270003 to engage in prostitution. The third element—purpose of prostitution and sexual exploitation—was undisputed, as Bautista profited from each sexual encounter.

• Credibility of the Victim and Weight of Denial: AAA270003’s positive and categorical testimony prevailed over Bautista’s bare denial. Denial is an intrinsically weak defense and cannot overcome positive identification. The trial court’s assessment of credibility was accorded great respect, as it had the opportunity to observe the witness’s demeanor.

• Elements of trafficking in persons under Section 3(a) of Republic Act No. 9208, as amended — (1) The act of recruitment, obtaining, hiring, providing, offering, transportation, transfer, maintaining, harboring, or receipt of persons, with or without consent, within or across national borders; (2) The means used: threat, force, coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or position, taking advantage of vulnerability, or giving or receiving payments or benefits to obtain consent; (3) The purpose: exploitation, prostitution, sexual exploitation, forced labor, slavery, servitude, or removal/sale of organs. People v. Casio, 749 Phil. 458 (2014).

• Qualified trafficking when the victim is a child — Under Section 6(a) of Republic Act No. 9208, trafficking is qualified when the trafficked person is a child. The minority of the victim elevates the crime and increases the penalty to life imprisonment and a fine.

• Minority dispenses with proof of means — Section 3(a), paragraph 2 of Republic Act No. 9208, as amended, provides that the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring, adoption, or receipt of a child for exploitative purposes constitutes trafficking even without threat, force, coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power, or taking advantage of vulnerability. The child’s consent is immaterial. This was applied in People v. Dela Cruz, 904 Phil. 566 (2021).

• Denial cannot prevail over positive testimony — Denial is an intrinsically weak defense and cannot overcome affirmative and credible evidence of guilt. People v. San Miguel, 887 Phil. 777 (2020).

• “This implies that accused-appellant can be held liable for qualified trafficking in persons even if she did not employ threat, force, intimidation or any other forms of coercion upon the minor victims. Neither can she evade criminal liability by claiming that the decision to have sexual intercourse with the customers depended on the will of the private complainants. In fact, regardless of the willingness of the minor victims, the crime of qualified trafficking in persons can still be committed.”

• “The victim's consent is rendered meaningless due to the coercive, abusive, or deceptive means employed by perpetrators of human trafficking. In fact, 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.”

• “It has been settled that denial is an intrinsically weak defense, which must be supported by strong evidence of nonculpability to merit credibility and that alibi, on the other hand, is the weakest of all defenses, for it is easy to contrive and difficult to disprove and for which reason it is generally rejected.”

• People v. Casio, 749 Phil. 458 (2014) — Enumerated the three elements of trafficking in persons as derived from Section 3(a) of Republic Act No. 9208, as amended, and held that trafficking is qualified when the victim is a child. Followed.

• People v. Dela Cruz, 904 Phil. 566 (2021) — Reiterated that the victim’s consent is immaterial when the trafficked person is a child, and that even without the use of coercive means, the crime of qualified trafficking can be committed. Followed.

• People v. San Miguel, 887 Phil. 777 (2020) — Affirmed the rule that denial is an intrinsically weak defense and cannot prevail over positive identification. Followed.

• Section 3(a), Republic Act No. 9208, as amended by Republic Act No. 10364 — Definition of trafficking in persons. Applied to establish the elements of the crime; the second paragraph specifically applied to hold that proof of coercive means is unnecessary when the victim is a child.

• Section 3(b), Republic Act No. 9208, as amended — Definition of a child as a person below 18 years of age. Applied to confirm AAA270003’s status as a child.

• Section 4, Republic Act No. 9208, as amended — Acts constituting trafficking in persons. The accused’s conduct fell under several enumerated acts, particularly matching for money and maintaining a person for prostitution.

• Section 6, Republic Act No. 9208 — Qualified trafficking, applicable when the trafficked person is a child. Used to impose the higher penalty of life imprisonment.

• Section 10(c) and (e), Republic Act No. 9208, as amended — Penalties for qualified trafficking: life imprisonment and a fine of not less than PHP 2 million but not more than PHP 5 million. The RTC correctly imposed life imprisonment and a fine of PHP 2 million.

• Article 2206, Civil Code (damages) and prevailing jurisprudence on interest — The award of moral and exemplary damages and the imposition of 6% interest per annum from finality of judgment were in accord with law.

Leonen, S.A.J. (Chairperson), Lazaro-Javier, and M. Lopez, JJ., concurred. Kho, Jr., J., was on leave.