Key Takeaway: The Supreme Court’s Ruling Reinforces the Strict Enforcement of Anti-Trafficking Laws in the Philippines

People of the Philippines v. Esmeraldo ‘Jay’ Amurao y Tejero, G.R. No. 229514, July 28, 2020

In the bustling streets of Angeles City, a dark underbelly of human trafficking was exposed through the arrest of Esmeraldo ‘Jay’ Amurao and his co-accused Marlyn ‘Lyn’ Dizon Valencia. The case, which reached the Supreme Court of the Philippines, not only highlighted the severity of human trafficking but also set a precedent for how such cases are handled legally. At the heart of this case was the question of whether Amurao’s actions constituted trafficking in persons under Republic Act No. 9208, and if so, how the law would be applied to ensure justice for the victims.

The case began with a tip from the International Justice Mission about Amurao’s involvement in prostituting women, some of whom were minors. This led to an entrapment operation by the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), resulting in Amurao’s arrest. The central legal question was whether the evidence presented by the prosecution was sufficient to prove Amurao’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Legal Context: Understanding the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act

The Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003 (Republic Act No. 9208) is a comprehensive law aimed at combating human trafficking in the Philippines. It defines trafficking in persons as the recruitment, transportation, transfer, or harboring of individuals for the purpose of exploitation, which includes prostitution, sexual exploitation, forced labor, slavery, and the removal or sale of organs.

Section 4(a) of the Act criminalizes the act of recruiting, transporting, transferring, harboring, or receiving a person for the purpose of exploitation. When the trafficked person is a child, defined as someone below 18 years of age, the crime is considered qualified trafficking under Section 6(a), which carries a heavier penalty.

Understanding these legal terms is crucial. ‘Recruitment’ in this context refers to any act of persuading or luring someone into a situation of exploitation. ‘Exploitation’ includes the use of a person for sexual activities in exchange for money, profit, or any other consideration, as defined in Section 3(c) of the Act.

For instance, if a person promises a job abroad but instead forces the individual into prostitution, this would fall under trafficking in persons. The law is designed to protect vulnerable individuals from being exploited through deceit or coercion.

Case Breakdown: The Journey from Entrapment to Supreme Court

The case against Esmeraldo ‘Jay’ Amurao began when NBI agents, acting on a tip, posed as customers and met Amurao in front of Natalia Hotel in Angeles City. Amurao, known for selling cigarettes and Viagra, was approached by the agents who asked for minor girls for prostitution. Amurao agreed to provide six girls the following night for a fee.

On the night of February 20, 2013, Amurao and his co-accused Marlyn Valencia brought six minor girls to the NBI agents. After the transaction was completed, the NBI agents arrested Amurao and Valencia, and the girls were taken to the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) for their protection.

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted Amurao of trafficking in persons for the exploitation of AAA, and qualified trafficking in persons for the exploitation of minors BBB and CCC. Valencia was also convicted in some of the cases. Both appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA), which affirmed the RTC’s decision but modified the damages awarded.

Amurao’s defense of instigation was rejected by the CA, which found that the NBI’s operation was an entrapment, not instigation. The CA emphasized that Amurao was already engaged in the illegal activity, and the NBI merely facilitated his apprehension.

The Supreme Court, in its decision, upheld the findings of the lower courts, stating:

“Upon judicious review of the records of the case, the Court affirms the factual findings of the RTC, as affirmed by the CA. The Court upholds the findings of the courts a quo that Amurao’s guilt for the offense of Trafficking in Persons against AAA and Qualified Trafficking in Persons against minors BBB and CCC for the purpose of prostitution was proven beyond reasonable doubt.”

The Supreme Court also clarified the distinction between entrapment and instigation, quoting from People v. Hirang:

“Instigation is the means by which the accused is lured into the commission of the offense charged in order to prosecute him. On the other hand, entrapment is the employment of such ways and means for the purpose of trapping or capturing a lawbreaker.”

The procedural steps in this case included:

1. Initial report and investigation by the NBI.
2. Entrapment operation leading to Amurao’s arrest.
3. Trial at the RTC, resulting in conviction.
4. Appeal to the CA, which affirmed the conviction but modified damages.
5. Final appeal to the Supreme Court, which upheld the lower courts’ decisions.

Practical Implications: Impact on Future Cases and Advice

This ruling reinforces the strict enforcement of anti-trafficking laws in the Philippines, particularly the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act. It sends a clear message that those involved in human trafficking, especially of minors, will face severe penalties.

For businesses and individuals, this case highlights the importance of vigilance against human trafficking. Employers should ensure that their recruitment practices are transparent and ethical, and individuals should be aware of the signs of trafficking and report any suspicious activities to authorities.

Key Lessons:

• Human trafficking, especially involving minors, is treated with utmost seriousness under Philippine law.
• Entrapment operations are a valid law enforcement tool to combat trafficking.
• Businesses must maintain ethical recruitment practices to avoid legal repercussions.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is considered human trafficking under Philippine law?

Human trafficking under Republic Act No. 9208 involves recruiting, transporting, or harboring individuals for exploitation, such as prostitution, forced labor, or organ removal.

How does the law treat trafficking of minors differently?

Trafficking of minors is considered qualified trafficking, which carries a harsher penalty, including life imprisonment and higher fines.

What is the difference between entrapment and instigation?

Entrapment is when law enforcement uses ruses to catch a criminal in the act, while instigation involves luring an innocent person into committing a crime.

What should businesses do to prevent involvement in human trafficking?

Businesses should ensure transparent and ethical recruitment practices, conduct background checks, and report any suspicious activities to authorities.

How can individuals help combat human trafficking?

Individuals can report suspicious activities, support organizations fighting trafficking, and educate themselves and others about the signs of trafficking.

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