Labor Law and Social Legislation › Recruitment and Placement › Regulation of Recruitment and Placement › Illegal Recruitment
b. Distinguished from Estafa
Illegal recruitment as distinguished from estafa
| ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT | ESTAFA |
| It is malum prohibitum | It is malum in se |
| The criminal intent of the accused is not necessary | The criminal intent is imperative |
| Penalized under the Labor Code or, for overseas employment, RA 8042, secs. 6–7, as amended by RA 10022 | Penalized under the Revised Penal Code |
| Limited in scope | Wider in scope and covers deceits whether related or not related to recruitment activities |
Note: Conviction under the Labor Code for illegal recruitment does not preclude punishment under the RPC for estafa (People v. Fernandez, G.R. No. 199211, 2014)
A worker who suffers pecuniary damage, regardless of amount, as a result of previous or simultaneous false pretense resorted to by a non-licensee or nonholder of authority, may complain of estafa under Art. 315, par. 2(a) of the RPC, aside from illegal recruitment. (People v. Fernandez, G.R. Nos. 141221-36, 2002)
Estafa is committed by any person who defrauds another by using fictitious name, or falsely pretends to possess power, influence, qualifications, property, credit, agency, business or imaginary transactions, or by means of similar deceits executed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud. (Revised Penal Code, Art. 315)
The offended party must have relied on the false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means of the accused-appellant and as a result thereof, the offended party suffered damages.
Liability of Local Recruitment Agency and Foreign Employer