An entrapment operation conducted by the San Andres Municipal Police Station the other Monday led to the arrest of a 46-year-old laborer for human trafficking.
According to the belated report, police personnel led by Chief of Police PMaj. Francis T. Tabo I, together with the Catanduanes Police Intelligence Unit, Municipal Social Welfare and Development Office (MSWDO) headed by Mrs. Elsa S. Besoña, and Barangay Captain Allan A. Solo apprehended a certain “Jepoy”, also a resident of the town, at Amenia Beach Resort in Palawig, at 3:19 PM of June 29, 2026.
In the company of the suspect was a 20-year-old female college student from the Catanduanes State University and also from San Andres.
Confiscated from “Jepoy” was a while Honda Beat motorcycle, a Samsung cellphone, a genuine P500 bill and five pieces of counterfeit P500 bills used in the entrapment.
Presumably, the suspect was arrested as soon as he received the “budol” money paid in advance for the services of the trafficking victim.
He will be charged for violation of Section 4-A of Republic Act 10364 or the Expanded Anti-Human Trafficking in Persons Act of 2012.
Said provision of the law makes it unlawful for any person to “to recruit, obtain, hire, provide, offer, transport, transfer, maintain, harbor, 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, or sexual exploitation.”
If found guilty, the unidentified suspect could suffer the penalty of imprisonment of 15 years and a fine of not less than P500,000.00 but not more than a million pesos (P1,000,000.00).
*****
A reading of the spot report shows that the police did not identify the suspect, the same treatment it accorded the victim.
Section 10 of RA 10364 states that “(A)t any stage of the investigation, rescue, prosecution and trial of an offense under this Act, law enforcement officers, prosecutors, judges, court personnel, social workers and medical practitioners, as well as parties to the case, shall protect the right to privacy of the trafficked person.”
To this end, law enforcement officers, prosecutors and judges may order a closed-door investigation, prosecution or trial whenever necessary to ensure a fair and impartial proceeding and after considering all circumstances for the best interest of the parties, it adds.
The provision limits the confidentiality to the trafficked person, whose name and personal circumstances as well as “any other information tending to establish the identity of the trafficked person and his or her family.”
It makes it “unlawful for any editor, publisher, and reporter or columnist in case of printed materials, announcer or producer in case of television and radio, producer and director of a film in case of the movie industry, or any person utilizing tri-media facilities or electronic information technology to cause publicity of the name, personal circumstances, or any information tending to establish the identity of the trafficked person except when the trafficked person in a written statement duly notarized knowingly, voluntarily and willingly waives said confidentiality.”
This makes you wonder why the PNP continues to stick to its policy of hiding the name of suspects arrested in violation of law, considering that the name and other personal information of the alleged malefactor are outside the purview of this particular confidentiality provision.
*****
THE BURGLAR KNOWS. A man goes to the police station wanting to speak to the burglar who broke into his house the night before.
“You’ll get your chance in court,” says the desk sergeant.
“No, no, no!” says the man. “I want to know how he got into the house without waking my wife. I’ve been trying to do that for years!”