PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.

ROSARIO ROSE OCHOA

G.R. No. 173792, 31 August 2011 FIRST DIVISION (LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.)

It is well-settled that to prove illegal recruitment, it must be shown that appellant gave
complainants the distinct impression that she had the power or ability to send complainants abroad
for work such that the latter were convinced to part with their money in order to be employed.

Rosario Ochoa is charged with the crime of illegal recruitment in a large scale and estafa by
the prosecution wherein they were able to state that from February 1997 up to April 1999 in
Quezon City, Rosario Ochoa recruited fifteen (15) persons which includes Robert Gubat, Junior
Agustin, and many others. Ochoa promised them an employment opportunity in Saudi Arabia and
Taiwan in exchange for a large consideration. Ochoa received the placement fees from her victims
although she has no authority to do so, as she was not licensed by the necessary government
agencies.
Ochoas promise of employment did not materialize thus the complainants asked for a
refund of their money. However, Ochoa has not able to give back their money hence they decided to
file a case of illegal recruitment in large scale and estafa against Ochoa. Ochoa contends that she has
employed by AXIL International Services and Consultant (AXIL) as recruiter on December 20, 1997.
AXIL had a temporary license to recruit Filipino workers for overseas employment. She claims to
have remitted the money to AXIL but the latter failed to issue a receipt.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found Ochoa guilty of illegal recruitment in a large scale and
estafa. The Court of Appeals (CA) however directed the issue to the Supreme Court since it does not
have jurisdiction over the case.

ISSUE:

Whether or not Ochoa should be guilty.

RULING:

YES. It is well-settled that to prove illegal recruitment, it must be shown that appellant gave
complainants the distinct impression that she had the power or ability to send complainants abroad
for work such that the latter were convinced to part with their money in order to be employed. It is
shown in this case that all those who complained were able to testimony with consistency that
Ochoa had given them the illusion that she was clothed with power and authority to recruit
laborers for work abroad wherein she was able to get them to give the necessary vital documents
such as birth certificate, passports, and placement fees.