LAZARO-JAVIER, J.:
That sometime in the month of November 2008, in the City of Cebu, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused, conniving and confederating together and mutually helping one another, with deliberate intent, with intent of gain, did then and there recruit, transport and then maintain for purpose of prostitution, pornography, or sexual exploitation eight (8) female and one (1) male, seven (7) of which are children, namely, [EEE] [fourteen] 14 years old, [FFF] [seventeen] 17 years old, [BBB] [seventeen] 17 years old, [GGG] [sixteen] 16 years old, [DDD] [seventeen] 17 years old, [CCC] [fifteen] 15 years old[,] and [AAA] [sixteen] 16 years old, with the qualifying aggravating circumstance:
1. The trafficked persons are children;
2. The crime is committed by a syndicate;
3. That the crime is committed in large scale.
CONTRARY TO LAW.[4]
x x x xThe case was raffled to the Regional Trial Court-Branch 6, Cebu City.
WHEREFORE, the court finds the accused Dhayme Jamuad a.k.a. Nikki Muring Ferrer and Candy a.k.a. Baby/Jillian Muring Ferrer, guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Violation of R.A. 9208 and sentences them to each suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and to each pay a fine of Two Million Pesos (Php2,000,000.00). The accused are entitled to full credit of their preventive imprisonment.
SO ORDERED.
x x x xThe verdict of conviction was hinged on the credible testimonies of the three (3) minor victims who positively identified petitioners as the ones who recruited them to work as club dancers and sex workers. As the victims categorically stated, it was petitioners who organized their transport, paid for their fares, gave them an orientation on the work they would be doing in Cebu, and instructed them on what to say if police officers question them. In light of these positive testimonies from the victims themselves, petitioners' defense of denial crumbled. Finally, petitioners' offense was qualified by the fact that there were at least three (3) trafficked persons and the victims were minors.
WHEREFORE, this appeal is DENIED. The Decision dated November 28, 2011 and Order dated August 7, 2012 of Branch 6 of the Regional Trial Court of Cebu City in Crim. Case No. CBU-86668 is AFFIRMED. Accused-appellants are likewise required to jointly and severally pay each of the victims AAA, BBB, CCC, DDD, EEE, FFF, and GGG the amount of P500,000 as moral damages and P100,000 as exemplary damages.
SO ORDERED.
x x x xFirst. All the elements of the crime of recruitment and transportation of victims for purposes of exploitation were duly established in accordance with Section 4(a), in relation to Sections 6(a) and (c) of RA 9208.[25]
Section 3. How appeal taken. —
(a) The appeal to the Regional Trial Court, or to the Court of Appeals in cases decided by the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its original jurisdiction, shall be taken by filing a notice of appeal with the court which rendered the judgment or final order appealed from and by serving a copy thereof upon the adverse party.
(b) The appeal to the Court of Appeals in cases decided by the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction shall be by petition for review under Rule 42.
(c) The appeal to the Supreme Court in cases where the penalty imposed by the Regional Trial Court is death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment, or where a lesser penalty is imposed but for offenses committed on the same occasion or which arose out of the same occurrence that gave rise to the more serious offense for which the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment is imposed, shall be by filing a notice of appeal in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section.
(d) No notice of appeal is necessary in cases where the death penalty is imposed by the Regional Trial Court. The same shall be automatically reviewed by the Supreme Court as provided in section 10 of this Rule.
(e) Except as provided in the last paragraph of section 13, Rule 124, all other appeals to the Supreme Court shall be by petition for review on certiorari under Rules 45. (3a) (Emphases and italics supplied)
x x x xIn Arambullo v. People,[45] the Court clarified that as a general rule, appeals in criminal cases shall be brought to the Court via a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court[46] except when the Court of Appeals imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, in which case, the appeal shall be made by a mere notice of appeal before the Court of Appeals.[47]
The Court has consistently ruled that any objection involving a warrant of arrest or the procedure for the acquisition by the court of jurisdiction over the person of the accused must be made before he enters his plea; otherwise, the objection is deemed waived. We have also ruled that an accused may be estopped from assailing the illegality of his arrest if he fails to move for the quashing of the information against him before his arraignment. And since the legality of an arrest affects only the jurisdiction of the court over the person of the accused, any defect in the arrest of the accused may be deemed cured when he voluntarily submits to the jurisdiction of the trial court. We have also held in a number of cases that the illegal arrest of an accused is not a sufficient cause for setting aside a valid judgment rendered upon a sufficient complaint after a trial free from error; such arrest does not negate the validity of the conviction of the accused.
x x x xThe same is true with respect to formal defects in the Information. Section 9, Rule 117 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure decrees:
Section 9. Failure to move to quash or to allege any ground therefor. – The failure of the accused to assert any ground of a motion to quash before he pleads to the complaint or information, either because he did not file a motion to quash or failed to allege the same in said motion, shall be deemed a waiver of any objections based on the grounds provided for in paragraphs (a), (b), (g), and (i) of section 3 of this Rule.[52]Hence, in People v. Solar,[53] the Court deemed appellant to have waived his right to question the defects of the Information filed against him upon noting that the latter did not file a motion to quash or for bill of particulars before entering his plea.
x x x x
Trafficking in Persons - refers to the recruitment, transportation, transfer or harboring, or receipt of persons with or without the victim's consent or knowledge, within or across national borders by means of 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 payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person for the purpose of exploitation which includes at a minimum, the exploitation or the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of organs.Arambullo[54] clarified though that Section 3(a) of RA 9208 merely provides the general definition of "Trafficking in Persons." The specific acts punishable under the law are found in Sections 4 and 5, viz.:
The recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring or receipt of a child for the purpose of exploitation shall also be considered as "trafficking in persons" even if it does not involve any of the means set forth in the preceding paragraph.
x x x x
It must be clarified that Section 3 (a) of RA 9208 merely provides for the general definition of "Trafficking in Persons" as the specific acts punishable under the law are found in Sections 4 and 5 of the same (including Sections 4-A, 4- B, and 4-C if the amendments brought about by RA 10364 are taken into consideration). This is evinced by Section 10 which provides for the penalties and sanctions for committing the enumerated acts therein. Notably, Section 10(c) of RA 9208 (renumbered as Section 10 [e] under RA 10364) of the law also provides for penalties for "Qualified Trafficking in Persons" under Section 6. Nonetheless, since Section 6 only provides for circumstances which would qualify the crime of "Human Trafficking," reference should always be made to Sections 4, 4-A, 4-B, 4-C, or 5 of the law. Hence, convictions for "Qualified Trafficking in Persons" shall rest on: (a) the commission of any of the acts provided under Sections 4, 4-A, 4-B, 4-C, or 5; and (b) the existence of any of the circumstances listed under Section 6. Otherwise stated, one cannot be convicted of "Qualified Trafficking in Persons" if he is not found to have committed any of the punishable acts under the law. (Emphases added)Verily, Sections 4 and 5 must be read in relation to Section 3(a), RA 9208.
x x x x
Section 4. Acts of Trafficking in Persons. - It shall be unlawful for any person, natural or juridical, to commit any of the following acts:On this score, the successful prosecution of trafficking in persons under Section 4(a) requires:
(a) To recruit, transport, transfer; harbor, provide, or receive a person by any means, including those done under the pretext of domestic or overseas employment or training or apprenticeship, for the purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary servitude or debt bondage;
x x x x
Section 5. Acts that Promote Trafficking in Persons. – x x x
x x x x
As invariably found by the courts below, these elements were all duly established here.
(a) the act of "recruitment, transportation, transfer or harboring, or receipt of persons with or without the victim's consent or knowledge, within or across national borders;" (b) 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 payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another;" and (c) the purpose of trafficking is exploitation which includes "exploitation or the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of organs."[55]
Second. Petitioners took advantage of the victims' vulnerability as impoverished minors by enticing them with an opportunity to earn "bigger money" from foreigners in Cebu. CCC testified:[57]
PROS. AVILA x x x x Q Could you still remember what month and year did you first meet Nik[ki] [Dhayme Jamuad] and Candy? A The first time I met them was in 2008 November. Q What were you doing in Fantastic Bar in Cagayan de Oro in November of 2008? A I worked as a dancer. Q When did you start working as a dancer? A Mid[-]June 2008. Q So you were already working as a dancer in Fantastic Bar in Cagayan de Oro City for around 5 months when you first met Nikki and Candy? A Yes. COURT: Q How old were you at that time? A 16. PROS. AVILA: Q Flow did you notice the presence of Nikki and Candy? A I learned about them through my uncle working in the bar as waiter[,] that Nikki and Candy are coming over here in Cebu. Q What is the name of your uncle[?] A Uncle Jude. Q What did you do upon learning that Nikki and Candy are going to Cebu? A When I talked to Nikki I learned that they will be going to Cebu. I asked her if I could go with them and I will pay for my own fare. Nikki said that I don't have to bother because they will pay for my fare. x x x x PROS. AVILA: Q You said that when you called Candy, (sic) were you fetched from your boarding house or you went to Nikki's place? A I was fetched. Q How many days did you stay in Nikki's house? A 1 could no longer recall. Q What happened when you were at Nikki's house? A When we were about to go on that day and on November 12 the fiancée of Candy called up and said that the money of P25,000.00 is ready to be picked up. x x x x Q Do you know what was that P25,000.00 for? x x x x A Yes, for the fare of the girls. x x x x PROS. AVILA: Q Who claimed the P25,000.00, if you know? A It was Nikki. Q What happened after that? A Then we went to Gaisano to buy tickets for the girls['] fare. We dropped by the restaurant to meet the other girls who are going with us. Q You mean Gaisano in Cagayan? A Yes. Q You still remember what time was that when you met with the girls? A I can no longer remember. Q Who were with you in going to Gaisano Cagayan? A The two of them. INTERPRETER LACHICA: The witness is pointing to the 2 accused, Nikki and Candy. PROS. AVILA: Q You mentioned of girls that you met in Gaisano Cagayan, upon arrival thereat how many girls did you see? A 5. Q Do you know these 5 girls before you met them in Gaisano Cagayan? A Only one I know. x x x x Q After you met with the girls in Gaisano Cagayan together with Nikki and Candy, what happened next? A We went then to the pier. Q Where did you go, where were you going? A Here in Cebu. x x x x Q What happened while you were still in the boat? A We were told to go to the room of Nikki and Candy and we had a meeting and we were instructed that if anyone would ask us we will just tell them that we are having a vacation in Cebu. Q What time did the boat arrive in Cebu? A 8:00 o'clock in the morning the following day. x x x x Q Aside from the instruction given of (sic) Nikki and Candy that if somebody asks you where are you going, you are going [o]n a vacation, what else did they say? A When we got to the police station[,] we were instructed that if we would be asked[,] we would tell them that we would be attending a wedding of Candy who is getting married to her Korean fiancé. (Emphases added) x x x x
Taking advantage of the victims' desperation, petitioners were able to gain control over them. This "control" over the victims manifested in several ways: petitioners themselves organized their transport, briefed the victims on their would-be jobs in Cebu, instructed them to lie to police officers in case they get asked about the purpose of their travel, and practically served as adult supervisors of the minor victims.
ATTY. TAN x x x x Q When did Shane introduce you to Nikki? A November 9, 2008. Q When you were introduced to Nikki, what did Nikki say? A She asked if I have (sic) experience being a dancer. Q And what did you tell Nikki? A I said, yes. Q When you said yes to Nikki, what did Nikki do? A She asked me if I could go with her to Cebu. x x x x Q What did you say about Nikki's offer? A We agreed. Q What happened after you agreed? A We were told to meet them at the Gaisano Mall. Q When? A November 12, 2008. x x x x ATTY. ARCHIVAL Q Will you tell this Honorable Court that you filed a case against them these two accused whom you immediately identified would not victimize other people (sic). Did you say that? A Yes. Q Are you saying, [CCC], that you are a victim in this case because the accused conspiring and confederating with each other, they acted as manager or acting in your behalf so that you will be bar fine (sic)? A Yes. Q But that alleged bar fine which you declared before this honorable court that the customer whom you do not know, you were not told what to do (sic), never materialized because while walking to the corner you were accosted by the policemen and you were asked by (sic) your respective ages, is that correct? A Yes. (Emphases added) x x x x
Clearly, the testimonies of the victims sufficiently established that petitioners are guilty of trafficking in persons under Section 4(a) of RA 9208. Indubitably, petitioners' acts of recruiting and transporting the victims to Cebu were for the purpose of prostituting them to foreigners in a bar co-owned by Candy's Korean boyfriend. To gain control over their victims, petitioners enticed them with the possibility of earning more from foreign clients in Cebu than in Cagayan de Oro.
ATTY. TAN:
Q While onboard the ship when Nikki and Candy gathered you in that room, what happened?
A We discussed about our work, our workplace and our salary.
Q What did Nikki or Candy talk about your work?
A Our work will start at 8:00 in the evening and would end at 3:00 o[']clock in the morning.
Q How about your uniform, what will you wear at work?
A Panty and bra or t-back.
Q How about the salary?
A Our salary if you are a dancer, it would be P300.00.
Q If you are not a dancer, how much?
A GRO would be P200.00.
Q What will your work be when you reached Cebu?
A I would be a dancer and bar fine (sic) with customers.
x x x x
Q What else did Nikki or Candy tell you about your work in Cebu?
x x x x
A The bar fine is P6,000.00 and we have a share of P3,000.00 and the bar will have P3, 000.00. (Emphases added)
x x x x
a. Consent is not an element of the crimeThe allegation that petitioners never forced the victims to travel with them is not a valid defense. Section 3(a) of RA 9208 is clear – the crime may be perpetrated "with or without the victim's consent or knowledge." More so, when the victims are minors who could not validly give consent. People v. Ramirez,[61] citing People v. Casio,[62] elucidates:
The victim's consent is rendered meaningless due to the coercive, abusive, or deceptive means employed by perpetrators of human trafficking. Even without the use of coercive, abusive, or deceptive means, a minor's consent is not given out of his or her own free will.Here, the three (3) victims who testified were all minors when the crime was committed. In 2008, AAA was sixteen; BBB, seventeen; and CCC, fifteen. In fine, their supposed willingness to join petitioners in going to Cebu would not dissolve petitioners' criminal liability.
x x x x
Similarly, in People v. De Dios:It did not matter that there was no threat, force, coercion, abduction, fraud, deception or abuse of power that was employed by De Dios when she involved AAA in her illicit sexual trade. AAA was still a minor when she was exposed to prostitution by the prodding, promises[,] and acts of De Dios. Trafficking in persons may be committed also by means of taking advantage of the persons' vulnerability as minors, a circumstance that applied to AAA, was sufficiently alleged in the information and proved during the trial. This element was further achieved through the offer of financial gain for the illicit services that were provided by AAA to the customers of De Dios.[63] (Emphases added)x x x x
b. Even prostitutes may become liable for trafficking in personsThe fact that petitioners are prostitutes themselves does not render them incapable of committing the crime of trafficking in persons. On the contrary, their occupation rendered them well-placed and experienced to do just that.
c. There was conspiracy to commit trafficking in personsConspiracy exists where two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit the same. The essence of conspiracy is the unity of action and purpose. Its elements, like the physical acts constituting the crime itself, must be proved beyond reasonable doubt.[64]
d. RA 9208 does not require the victim to actually be prostitutedPetitioners further assert that even assuming they recruited and transported the victims for prostitution, the latter were not actually subjected to such purpose. Hence, the crime was only committed in its attempted stage which is not punishable under RA 9208.
In this regard, the CA erred in opining that no trafficking existed as "there was no person to whom [Estonilo] endorsed or recruited his victims," (sic) and further stressing that the sexual acts transpired not between AAA or BBB and any of Estonilo's clients, but between AAA and BBB themselves. As aptly pointed out by Associate Justice Ramon Paul L. Hernando, neither the presence of the trafficker's clients, nor their intercourse with the victim/s, is required to support a finding of trafficking. As held in People v. Aguirre:Indeed, what is essential under RA 9208 is that a person is recruited and transported for the purpose of prostitution. The victim does not have to be actually subjected to prostitution, had danced as a GRO, or had sex with a client before the recruiters can be held liable under the law. Precisely, the law was passed to curtail human trafficking. This entails punishing the acts themselves that would lead to prostituting the victims, as here.Furthermore, the presence of the trafficker's clients is not an element of the crime of recruitment or transportation of victims under Sections 3 (a) and 4 (a) of RA 9208. In the same vein, the law does not require that the victims be transported to or he found in a brothel or a prostitution den for such crime of recruitment or transportation to be committed. In fact, it has been held that the act of sexual intercourse need not have been consummated for recruitment to be said to have taken place. It is sufficient that the accused has hired, enticed or engaged its victims or transported them for the established purpose of exploitation, which includes prostitution, sexual exploitation, forced labor, slavery, and the removal or sale of organs. In this case, the prosecution has satisfactorily established accused-appellants' recruitment and transportation of private complainants for purposes of prostitution and sexual exploitation.[67] (Emphases supplied)Thus, the fact that neither AAA nor BBB had sexual contact with any of Estonilo's clients will not affect the latter's criminal liability for Qualified Trafficking in Persons. To be sure, the gravamen of the crime of trafficking is "the act of recruiting or using, with or without consent, a fellow human being for [inter alia,] sexual exploitation" – which, as already discussed, was established to have been committed by Estonilo.[68] (Emphases added)
x x x x
e. The crime cannot be categorized as attempted trafficking in persons under RA 10364Finally, petitioners argue that their actions merely constituted attempted, trafficking in persons under RA 10364, viz.:
Section 5. A new Section 4-A is hereby inserted in Republic Act No. 9208, to read as follows:It must be stressed though that petitioners were charged with qualified trafficking in persons committed in November 2008. Thus, the governing law is RA 9208 before it got amended by RA 10364 on February 6, 2013. Consequently, the provisions of RA 10364 cannot, as a general rule, apply to petitioners' case. By way of exception, however, the provisions of RA 10364 may find retroactive applications if they are beneficial to the accused.
"SEC. 4-A. Attempted Trafficking in Persons. – Where there are acts to initiate the commission of a trafficking offense but the offender failed to or did not execute all the elements of the crime, by accident or by reason of some cause other than voluntary desistance, such overt acts shall be deemed as an attempt to commit an act of trafficking in persons. As such, an attempt to commit any of the offenses enumerated in Section 4 of this Act shall constitute attempted trafficking in persons.
"In cases where the victim is a child, any of the following acts shall also be deemed as attempted trafficking in persons:"(a) Facilitating the travel of a child who travels alone to a foreign country or territory without valid reason therefor and without the required clearance or permit from the Department of Social Welfare and Development, or a written permit or justification from the child's parent or legal guardian;x x x x
"(b) Executing, for a consideration, an affidavit of consent or a written consent for adoption;
"(c) Recruiting a woman to bear a child for the purpose of selling the child;
"(d) Simulating a birth for the purpose of selling the child; and
"(e) Soliciting a child and acquiring the custody thereof through any means from among hospitals, clinics, nurseries, daycare centers, refugee or evacuation centers, and low-income families, for the purpose of selling the child." (Emphasis added)
As correctly ruled by the RTC and affirmed by the CA, the existence of the elements of Qualified Trafficking in Persons was sufficiently established by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt, to wit: (1) that AAA was a minor when the offense against her was committed; (2) that accused-appellant introduced AAA to different customers on several occasions to engage in sexual intercourse; and (3) that accused-appellant received money in exchange for the sexual exploitation of AAA.Just the same, the Court would arrive at the same conclusion had petitioners committed the crime after the enactment of RA 10364; petitioners would still be held liable for qualified trafficking in persons in the consummated stage, not in the attempted stage. To be sure, Ramirez compared the elements of trafficking in persons under RA 9208 and RA 10364, thus:
The offense is Qualified Trafficking in Persons because AAA was a minor. The means used to commit the offense becomes immaterial. At any rate, it may not be denied that accused-appellant took advantage of the vulnerability of AAA who was a minor.
Moreover, the Court finds no merit in accused-appellant's plea for acquittal on the ground that the acts she allegedly committed on August 5, 2011 merely amounted to an attempt to commit the offense as it was aborted by her subsequent arrest; and that such attempt to commit the offense was not punishable under RA 9208 and became so punishable only upon the amendment introduced by RA 10364 on February 6, 2013.
As discussed, the allegations in the Information filed against accused-appellant clearly refer to the consummated acts of trafficking in persons she committed on July 10 and July 24, 2011. x x x (Emphases added)
x x x x
RA 9208 | RA 10364 |
(1) The act of "recruitment, transportation, transfer or harboring, or receipt of persons with or without the victim's consent or knowledge, within or across national borders;" | (1) The act of "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;" |
(2) 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 payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another;" and | (2) The means used include "by means of 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 payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person;" and |
(3) The purpose of trafficking is exploitation which includes "exploitation or the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery, servitude, or the removal or sale of organs." | (3) The purpose of trafficking includes "the exploitation or the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery, servitude, or the removal or sale of organs." |
Section 6. Qualified Trafficking in Persons. - The following axe considered as qualified trafficking:Here, the crime of trafficking in persons was qualified by the fact that it was committed against nine (9) victims, of which seven (7) were minors. Consequently, the courts below correctly sentenced each of petitioners to life imprisonment and pay a fine of P2,000,000.00 in accordance with Section 10(c) of RA 9208.[70](a) When the trafficked person is a child;
x x x x
(c) When the crime is committed by a syndicate, or in large scale. Trafficking is deemed committed by a syndicate if carried out by a group of three (3) or more persons conspiring or confederating with one another. It is deemed committed in large scale if committed against three (3) or more persons, individually or as a group;
x x x x
The criminal case of Trafficking in Persons as a Prostitute is an analogous case to the crimes of seduction, abduction, rape, or other lascivious acts. In fact, it is worse. To be trafficked as a prostitute without one's consent and to be sexually violated four to live times a day by different strangers is horrendous and atrocious. There is no doubt that Lolita experienced physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, and social humiliation when she was trafficked as a prostitute in Malaysia. Since the crime of Trafficking in Persons was aggravated, being committed by a syndicate, the award of exemplary damages is likewise justified. (Emphasis and underscoring added)Pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence, therefore, petitioners are correctly ordered to jointly and severally pay each of the victims the amount of P500,000.00 as moral damages and P100,000.00 as exemplary damages. These amounts should earn six percent (6%) legal interest per annum from the finality of this decision until fully paid.[72]
x x x x
(a) | When, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense; |
(b) | When an offense has just been committed and he has probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed it; and |
(c) | When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment or place where he is serving final judgment or is temporarily confined while his case is pending, or has escaped while being transferred from one confinement to another. |
(1) Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice, if the person cannot afford the services of counsel, he must be provided with one. These rights cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of counsel.[34] G.R. No. 223042, rollo, pp. 20-23.
(2) No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means which vitiate the free will shall be used against him. Secret detention places, solitary, incommunicado, or other similar forms of detention are prohibited.
(3) Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or Section 17 hereof shall be inadmissible in evidence against him.
(4) The law shall provide for penal and civil sanctions of violations of this section as well as compensation to and rehabilitation of victims of torture or similar practices, and their families.