The Supreme Court (SC) has upheld the maximum prison term plus P2 million fines for two women convicted to recruiting minors and peddling them for sex in 2014.
In a decision penned by Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen, the SC denied the petition filed by Rizalina Janario Gumba, alias “Mommy Riza,” and Gloria Bueno Rellama, alias “Mommy Glo” who assailed the 2021 decision of the Court of Appeals which sustained their conviction that was handed down in 2017 by a trial court.
They were convicted of qualified human trafficking under Section 4(a), in relation to Section 6(a), of Republic Act No. 9208, the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003, as amended by RA 10364, the Expanded Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2012.
“Accordingly, the appeal is denied. The June 28, 2021 decision of the Court of Appeals in CA GR CR HC No. 12675 is hereby affirmed. Accused-appellants Rizalina Janario Gumba a.k.a. ‘Mommy Riza’ and Gloria Bueno Rellama a.k.a. ‘Mommy Glo’ are found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of qualified human trafficking, under Section 4(a), in relation to Section 6(a), of Republic Act No. 9208, as amended by Republic Act No. 10364,” the SC ruled.
“Accused-appellants are thus sentenced to suffer the penalty of life imprisonment, and are ordered to pay the fine of P2,000,000 each,” the high court also held.
The SC also ordered the accused-appellants to pay their victims, who were then aged 15-year-old, P500,000 each in moral damages, and P100,000 each in exemplary damages, both sums with legal interest of six percent per annum from the finality of the decision until fully paid.
Case records showed that Gumba and Rellama worked as floor managers of a bar in Cavite. They hired two girls, both 15 years old; two other girls who were 18 years old; and several others who were 20 years old and above.
Law enforcers, informed that sex trade or prostitution were taking place in the bar, conducted surveillance on Oct. 10, 2014.
Later, undercover agents went to bar and were told by Gumba and Rellama that they could have sexual intercourse with the girls for P1,500 per girl. Those offered for prostitution were the two 15-year-old girls.
The police then conducted an entrapment and rescue operation on Oct. 22, 2014, resulting in the of Gumba and Rellama who were subsequently charged criminally in court.
In its July 18, 2017 decision, the trial court handed down its verdict convicting Gumba and Rellama after finding them guilty beyond reasonable doubt of qualified human trafficking.
On top of life imprisonment, the trial court imposed a fine of P2 million on each of them. They appealed to the CA.
On June 28, 2021, the CA affirmed the trial court’s decision. But the CA also imposed the payment of P500,000 each to the two minors as moral damages and P100,000 each as exemplary damages.
Insisting on their innocence, Gumba and Rellama appealed their conviction before the SC which denied their petition.
In ruling against the two accused, the SC said the prosecution was able to prove and the trial court and the CA sustained that Gumba and Rellama committed qualified human trafficking for the purpose of prostitution, and violated Section 4(a), in relation to 6(a), of RA 9208, as amended.
The high court stressed that to sustain a conviction, the State must establish the concurrence of the following elements: the act, which can be the “recruitment, obtaining, hiring, providing, offering, transportation, transfer, maintaining, harboring, or receipt of persons with or without the victim’s consent or knowledge, within or across national borders; “the means used,” which include “threat, or use of force, or other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or of position, taking advantage of the vulnerability of the person, or, the giving or receiving of payment or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person; the purpose of trafficking,” which is prostitution; and the victim’s age, which should be below 18 years.”
In the case of Gumba and Rellama, the SC held that all the four elements were met and proven by the prosecution.
It said that it was established that Gumba and Rellama offered the two 15-year-old girls to customers, not merely for entertainment but also for sexual intercourse; it was proven that Gumba and Rellama took advantage of two girls’ vulnerability as minors; both girls confirmed that they were offered and provided to customers for sex in exchange for money; and the certificates of live birth of the two girls show that they were minors at the time of the crime.