Republic of the Philippines Department of Justice National Prosecution Service OFFICE OF THE CIT PROSEC!TOR "anila
#$O%REC "&NPO'ER SER(ICES) INC* Complainant)
+versus+
I%R&HI" T* "&"&NT!C) JR) Respon,ent*
I.S. No. XV-07-INV-14G04397 For: Estafa and Illegal Recr!t"ent
-..........***CO!NTER+&FFID&(IT I) I%R&HI" T* "&"&NT!C) JR*) of legal age, married, and with residence or postal
address at 1029 Marquez St., Ph 5 atchalian, Manu!o 2, "as Pinas #it! after ha$ing %een dul! sworn to in accordance with law, here%! depose and sa! sa ! that& ' am the respondent in the a%o$e(entitled case. )he complaint is anchored mainl! on per*urious statements and %eing filed for harassment purposes onl!. +or this reason, this complaint should %e dismissed outright. )o re%ut and contradict lo%rec Manpower Ser$ices, 'nc. malicious malicious lies. ' set forth the true circumstances leading to the incident& 1. )o %egin %egin with, with, ' ha$e learne learned d a%out a%out lo%rec lo%rec Manpower Manpower Ser$ice Ser$ices, s, 'nc., throug through h the person in the name of -anc! -anc ! ena%enti and someone named /em! since the! are the one who processed the papers pape rs of m! relati$es who went a%road to Middle ast. 2. )hat, )hat, n -o$em%er -o$em%er 201, 201, 3 friend friend from from 4u%ai 4u%ai came and ased ased me to loo for an agenc! to process his *o% orders and ' recommended lo%rec Manpower Ser$ices, 'nc. to do the processing. . )hat )hat,, ther theree is no trut truth h to the the alle allegat gatio ions ns in the the compl complai aint nt of lo%re lo%recc Manp Manpowe ower r Ser$ices, 'nc. )here is no factual nor legal %asis to charge me with stafa and 'llegal /ecruitment in /elation to 3rticle 15 of the /e$ised Penal #ode and /3 6072 as amended %! /310022. 7. )hat, )he )he lements lements of stafa stafa %! means of deceit deceit under 3rticl 3rticlee 15 more particula particularl! rl! in Paragraph 2 8a of /P# are as follows& a. )hat there there must must %e a false false pretense pretense,, fraudulent fraudulent act act or fraudul fraudulent ent means. means. %. )hat such false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means must %e made or e:ecuted prior to or simultaneousl! with the commission of the fraud.
c. )hat the offended part! must ha$e relied on the false pretense, fraudulent act, or fraudulent means, that is, he was induced to part with his mone! or propert! %ecause of the false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means. d. )hat as a result thereof, the offended part! suffered damage. 5. )hat, Paragraphs 11, 15 and 1; contains allegations of the first element of stafa %! means of S3 m%ass! that the respondent was authorized to act on %ehalf of MS' with respect to the stamping of passports. ?. )hat, /espondent $ehementl! denies the allegation in paragraph 11 that he in his letter attached to the complaint as 3nne: 4 admitted to an! deception and fraud. -o such admission was made in said letter. )he letter is merel! an acnowledgment that a pro%lem in$ol$ing the stamped passports indeed occurred in the >S3 m%ass! and that MS' agenc! had no in$ol$ement in the collection of the amount of @17,000.00 from 3%dullah. )he pro%lem consisted in the dela! in the stamping of the passports for recruits of Aic! %rought a%out %! lac of compliance with the documentar! requirements prescri%ed %! the >S3 m%ass!. 6. )hat, Paragraphs ?, 17 and 15 is allegations of the fourth element of stafa under 3rt. 15 82a of the /e$ised Penal #ode which is S3 m%ass! suspended the transactions of MS' with its offices %ut denies the claim that MS' incurred damages due to the suspension %! the >S3 m%ass! of its transactions. MS' su%mitted no e$idence of the e:istence of the transactions pending at the time of the suspension and the e:tent of the damages corresponding to each of the transactions suspended. /espondent further denies the allegation in the same paragraph 15 that it incurred damages when it paid 3%dullah the amount of @17,000.00 in order for the >S3 m%ass! to lift the order of suspension on its transactions as this pa!ment is not su%stantiated %! an! receipt or other documentar! e$idence. )he truth is that 3%dullah refused to %e reim%ursed the said amount and insisted onl! on ha$ing his transactions processed. 3ssuming that such damages were su%stantiated, the! are not the ind of damages contemplated %! the /e$ised Penal #ode. )he damages contemplated are those which arise when the offended part! parts with his mone! as a result of the commission of fraud or false pretenses. Bere, the damages that could ha$e %een incurred %! MS' do not result from an! fraud %ut rather from the unilateral suspension made %! the >S3 m%ass! on its transactions. 9. )hat, the undersigned counsel disco$ered that prior appro$al of the 4epartment of "a%or and mplo!ment for the appointment of personnel as required under 3rt. 29 of the "a%or #ode ha$e not %een secured in the case of respondent. Bowe$er, it is
respectfull! su%mitted that the requirement presupposes the e:istence of an emplo!er( emplo!ee relationship %etween the agenc! and the appointee. 3ssuming that the requirement applies squarel! to an agent under a contract of agenc!, the responsi%ilit! for the omission lies more on MS' which is presumed to %e more nowledgea%le of the requirements prescri%ed %! the "a%or #ode on recruitment and placement acti$ities. 10. )hat, )he respondent denies the allegation in paragraph 1; that /espondent has no authorit! to recruit for the same reasons discussed in paragraph ; of this counter( affida$it. Bence, the ruling of the Supreme #ourt in a plethora of illegal recruitment cases that persons who gi$e the impression of ha$ing the a%ilit! to send worers a%road for emplo!ment there%! commit the offense of illegal recruitment does not find application to respondentCs case. 11. )he respondent cannot %e considered a non(licensee or non(holder of authorit!. Section 10 /ule '' oo '' of the /ules and /egulation o$erning $erseas mplo!ment 81991 requires that e$er! change, termination or appointment of officers, representati$es and personnel of licensed agencies %e registered with the P3. 3gents or representati$es appointed %! a licensed recruitment agenc! whose appointments are not pre$iousl! appro$ed %! the P3 are considered Dnon( licenseeD or Dnon(holder of authorit!D and therefore not authorized to engage in recruitment acti$it!. 83%aca $s. #3, 290 S#/3 ;5? 81996. Bowe$er, it must %e shown that the emplo!ee or representati$e is aware that the agenc! failed to secure P3 appro$al of their appointment and that despite this nowledge, the emplo!ee or representati$e engaged in recruitment and placement acti$ities in order that he ma! %e held lia%le for illegal recruitment. )he o%ligation to register its personnel with the P3 %elongs to the officers of the agenc!. 3 mere emplo!ee of the agenc! cannot %e e:pected to now the legal requirements for its operation. 8People of the philippines $. #howdur! ./. -o. 1295??(60 +e%ruar! 15, 2000 'n this case, the respondent was unaware of MS'Cs failure to register his name with the P3 and that he acti$el! engaged in recruitment despite this nowledge. n the contrar!, respondent is *ustified in %elie$ing that he had the authorit! to recruit on %ehalf of MS' %ecause the latter allowed him to esta%lish an office in room ;11 in " E S %uilding under MS'Cs name. 'n fine, the respondent cannot %e held lia%le for illegal recruitment %ecause he had no nowledge of the failure of MS' to register his appointment with the P3. 'HEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfull! pra!ed that the
instant complaint %e dismissed for utter lac of merit. ther relief *ust and equita%le are also pra!ed. FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFat FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF, Metro Manila.
I%R&HI" T* "&"&NT!C) JR* Respon,ent /&ffiant
S!%SCRI%ED &ND S'ORN to %efore me this FFFFFFFF 2017 at FFFFFFFF#it!. '
further certif! that ' ha$e e:amined the affiant and that ' am satisfied that he has read and full! understood the contents of her affida$it.
&SSIST&NT CIT PROSEC!TOR
