Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 56 views

    Sto. Tomas V. Salac G.R. NO. 152642, NOVEMBER 13, 2012

    Uploaded by

    Catherine Mones
    Section 6 and 9 of R.A. 8042 are valid and constitutional. Section 6 clearly distinguishes between licensed and unlicensed recruiters, with those operating without proper authorization guilty of illegal recruitment regardless of other actions, while licensed recruiters must commit additional wrongful acts. Section 9 permissibly establishes alternative venue for illegal recruitment cases in the region where the offense was committed or where the victim resides, which is consistent with the law's goal of protecting victims. The Court ruled both sections were clear and did not violate any constitutional principles.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Sto. Tomas V. Salac G.R. NO. 152642, NOVEMBER 13, 2012

    Uploaded by

    Catherine Mones
    56 views1 page
    Section 6 and 9 of R.A. 8042 are valid and constitutional. Section 6 clearly distinguishes between licensed and unlicensed recruiters, with those operating without proper authorization guilty of illegal recruitment regardless of other actions, while licensed recruiters must commit additional wrongful acts. Section 9 permissibly establishes alternative venue for illegal recruitment cases in the region where the offense was committed or where the victim resides, which is consistent with the law's goal of protecting victims. The Court ruled both sections were clear and did not violate any constitutional principles.

    Original Description:

    sto

    Original Title

    Sto

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Section 6 and 9 of R.A. 8042 are valid and constitutional. Section 6 clearly distinguishes between licensed and unlicensed recruiters, with those operating without proper authorization guilty of illegal recruitment regardless of other actions, while licensed recruiters must commit additional wrongful acts. Section 9 permissibly establishes alternative venue for illegal recruitment cases in the region where the offense was committed or where the victim resides, which is consistent with the law's goal of protecting victims. The Court ruled both sections were clear and did not violate any constitutional principles.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    56 views1 page

    Sto. Tomas V. Salac G.R. NO. 152642, NOVEMBER 13, 2012

    Uploaded by

    Catherine Mones
    Section 6 and 9 of R.A. 8042 are valid and constitutional. Section 6 clearly distinguishes between licensed and unlicensed recruiters, with those operating without proper authorization guilty of illegal recruitment regardless of other actions, while licensed recruiters must commit additional wrongful acts. Section 9 permissibly establishes alternative venue for illegal recruitment cases in the region where the offense was committed or where the victim resides, which is consistent with the law's goal of protecting victims. The Court ruled both sections were clear and did not violate any constitutional principles.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    STO. TOMAS V.

    SALAC
    G.R. NO. 152642, NOVEMBER 13, 2012

    Facts:
    On June 7, 1995 Congress enacted Republic Act (R.A.) 8042 or the Migrant Workers and Overseas
    Filipinos Act of 1995 that, for among other purposes, sets the Government’s policies on overseas
    employment and establishes a higher standard of protection and promotion of the welfare of migrant
    workers, their families, and overseas Filipinos in distress. On January 8, 2002 respondents filed a
    petition for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus with application for temporary restraining order
    (TRO) and preliminary injunction against petitioners, the DOLE Secretary, the POEA Administrator, and
    the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) Secretary-General before the
    Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City. These consolidated cases pertain to the constitutionality
    of certain provisions of the aforementioned law.

    Issues:
    Whether or not Sections 6, 7, and 9 of R.A. 8042 are constitutional

    Ruling:

    Section 6 is valid and constitutional. “illegal recruitment” as defined in Section 6 is clear and
    unambiguous and, contrary to the RTC’s finding, actually makes a distinction between licensed and non-
    licensed recruiters. By its terms, persons who engage in “canvassing, enlisting, contracting, transporting,
    utilizing, hiring, or procuring workers” without the appropriate government license or authority are
    guilty of illegal recruitment whether or not they commit the wrongful acts enumerated in that section.
    On the other hand, recruiters who engage in the canvassing, enlisting, etc. of OFWs, although with the
    appropriate government license or authority, are guilty of illegal recruitment only if they commit any of
    the wrongful acts enumerated in Section 6.

    Section 9 is valid and constitutional. SEC. 9. states that Venue. – A criminal action arising from illegal
    recruitment as defined herein shall be filed with the Regional Trial Court of the province or city where
    the offense was committed or where the offended party actually resides at the time of the commission
    of the offense: Provided, That the court where the criminal action is first filed shall acquire jurisdiction to
    the exclusion of other courts: Provided, however, That the aforestated provisions shall also apply to
    those criminal actions that have already been filed in court at the time of the effectivity of this Act.
    There is nothing arbitrary or unconstitutional in Congress fixing an alternative venue for violations of
    Section 6 of R.A. 8042 that differs from the venue established by the Rules on Criminal Procedure.
    Indeed, Section 15(a), Rule 110 of the latter Rules allows exceptions provided by laws. Thus: SEC. 15.
    Place where action is to be instituted.— (a) Subject to existing laws, the criminal action shall be
    instituted and tried in the court of the municipality or territory where the offense was committed or
    where any of its essential ingredients occurred. (Emphasis supplied). Section 9 of R.A. 8042, as an
    exception to the rule on venue of criminal actions is, consistent with that law’s declared policy15 of
    providing a criminal justice system that protects and serves the best interests of the victims of illegal
    recruitment.

    You might also like