The Importance of Protecting Minors from Trafficking and Sexual Exploitation

People of the Philippines v. Emma Leocadio y Salazar and Sherryl Leocadio y Salazar, G.R. No. 237697, July 15, 2020

In the heart of Cebu City, a group of young girls from Bohol were promised a better life through work in an internet cafe in Pampanga. This promise, however, turned into a nightmare as they were trafficked for the purpose of sexual exploitation. This case, involving Emma and Sherryl Leocadio, sheds light on the grim reality of human trafficking in the Philippines, particularly the exploitation of minors.

The central legal question in this case revolves around the application of Republic Act No. 9208, known as the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003. The Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether the actions of the accused constituted qualified trafficking, and if the elements of the crime were sufficiently established to warrant a conviction.

Legal Context: Understanding the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act

Republic Act No. 9208 is a crucial piece of legislation in the Philippines aimed at combating human trafficking. Under Section 3(a) of the Act, trafficking in persons is defined as the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring, or receipt of persons with or without the victim’s consent or knowledge, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation includes prostitution, sexual exploitation, forced labor, slavery, or the removal or sale of organs.

When the trafficked person is a child, defined as someone below eighteen years of age, the crime becomes qualified trafficking under Section 6(a). Additionally, if the trafficking is committed in large scale, involving three or more persons, it is also considered qualified trafficking under Section 6(c).

The consent of the victim, especially if a minor, is irrelevant under this law. As stated in Antonio Planteras, Jr. v. People of the Philippines, “Knowledge or consent of the minor is not a defense under Republic Act No. 9208. The victim’s consent is rendered meaningless due to the coercive, abusive, or deceptive means employed by perpetrators of human trafficking.”

This law is vital in protecting vulnerable individuals, particularly minors from impoverished backgrounds, who are often targeted by traffickers promising better opportunities. For example, a young girl from a poor family might be lured with the promise of a job in a city, only to find herself exploited in the sex trade.

Case Breakdown: The Journey from Bohol to Cebu and Beyond

The story begins with Emma and Sherryl Leocadio, who were accused of recruiting twelve girls, mostly minors, from the island barangays of Jagoliao and Nasingin in Bohol. The girls were promised work in an internet cafe in Angeles, Pampanga, but the true intention was to exploit them through cybersex.

CCC, one of the victims, recounted how Sherryl approached her, saying, “I will bring you to Manila and work in an internet cafe to dance strip wearing only bra and panty.” This promise was made with the condition that her mother would receive an advance payment, which would be deducted from CCC’s future earnings.

The group of girls was transported from Bohol to Cebu City, where they were caught by the Maritime Police at the Supercat Terminal. The police found that the girls’ tickets had been altered to show them as legal adults, despite most being minors. The Leocadios were unable to produce the necessary documents for the minors’ travel, leading to their arrest.

The trial court found Emma and Sherryl guilty of qualified trafficking, a decision upheld by the Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court affirmed this ruling, emphasizing that all elements of the crime were met. The Court noted, “The prosecution has successfully established all the elements of trafficking in persons.”

Key points in the case included:

• The recruitment and transportation of the minors from Bohol to Cebu.
• The use of advance payments to the victims’ parents to secure their consent.
• The clear intention to exploit the minors through cybersex in Pampanga.

The Supreme Court also addressed the issue of conspiracy, stating, “Conspiracy is said to exist where two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it.” The actions of Emma and Sherryl, from recruitment to transportation, demonstrated a concerted effort to traffic the minors for sexual exploitation.

Practical Implications: Safeguarding Minors and Preventing Trafficking

This ruling reinforces the stringent measures against human trafficking, particularly when minors are involved. It serves as a reminder to law enforcement agencies and social workers to remain vigilant in identifying and rescuing potential victims of trafficking.

For businesses, especially those operating in areas known for trafficking, it is crucial to implement strict background checks and ethical hiring practices to prevent becoming unwitting facilitators of such crimes. Individuals, particularly parents, should be cautious of offers that seem too good to be true, especially when they involve their children moving to unfamiliar places for work.

Key Lessons:

• Minors are particularly vulnerable to trafficking, and their consent is irrelevant under the law.
• Trafficking can be committed even if the victims are not yet exploited at the time of apprehension.
• Conspiracy can be inferred from the coordinated actions of the accused, even without direct evidence.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is qualified trafficking in persons?

Qualified trafficking occurs when the trafficked person is a child or when the crime is committed on a large scale, involving three or more persons.

Can a minor’s consent to being trafficked be a defense?

No, the consent of a minor is not a defense under Republic Act No. 9208. The law aims to protect minors from exploitation, regardless of their consent.

What are the penalties for qualified trafficking in persons?

Convicted individuals face life imprisonment and a fine ranging from Two Million to Five Million Pesos.

How can parents protect their children from trafficking?

Parents should be wary of job offers that involve their children moving away, especially if the job seems too good to be true. They should verify the legitimacy of the employer and seek advice from local authorities or social workers.

What should businesses do to prevent involvement in trafficking?

Businesses should conduct thorough background checks on employees and partners, especially in industries prone to trafficking. They should also implement strict ethical guidelines and report any suspicious activities to the authorities.

ASG Law specializes in criminal law and human rights. Contact us or email hello@asglawpartners.com to schedule a consultation.