Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Set 2 Case 4 People Vs Valenciano
Set 2 Case 4 People Vs Valenciano
180926
FACTS
ISSUE
Whether or not appellant guilty of the crime of large scale illegal recruitment despite the claim that she
is just a mere employee of the recruitment agency?
HELD
The claim of accused-appellant that she was a mere employee of her other co-accused does not relieve
her of liability. An employee of a company or corporation engaged in illegal recruitment may be held liable
as principal, together with his employer, if it is shown that the employee actively and consciously
participated in illegal recruitment. The accused appellant must he held accountable for her acts. The Court
did not err in convicting her of Illegal Recruitment. Appellant cannot escape liability by claiming that she
was not aware that before working for her employer in the recruitment agency, she should first be
registered with the POEA. It is a legal maxim that “Ignorance of the law excuses no one. “Furthermore,
illegal recruitment in large scale is malum prohibitum, not malum in se, thus, intent is immaterial. It is also
a well settled rule that it is immaterial whether the accused profit or not from the illegal acts. Likewise, to
allow the accused to use a defense of good faith would be a circumvention of the law. Good faith cannot
be used as a defense since it will only warrant the illegal recruiters to use it as cloak of their illegal acts.