PEOPLE vs. SIONGCO ET AL.

G.R. No. 186472, July 5, 2010

FACTS: On December 27, 1998, Nikko, 11 years old was induced by Siongco to board
a bus bound for Pilar, Bataan, together with Boton and Enriquez. Nikko was told that the
two would accompany him in getting the "Gameboy" that Siongco promised. From
December 27-31, 1998, Nikko was moved to various places. On December 29, 1998,
Siongco called and asked for ₱400,000.00 from Elvira, Nikko's mother. He threatened
that Nikko would be killed if she fails to give the ransom money at 6:00 p.m. of the next
day at Genesis Bus Station (GBS) in Pasay City. Elvira reported to the Police authorities
that Nikko was kidnapped. On December 31, 1998, Siongco called Elvira. She agreed
to meet them that afternoon at the GBS. Enriquez and Siongco left to meet Elvira, while
Nikko stayed behind. Elvira requested for assistance from police operatives. After
briefing, police operatives proceeded to GBS. At around 2:30 P.M., Elvira arrived with a
brown envelope. Shortly, Enriquez approached her and took the envelope from her. As
he was walking away, the team arrested him. Thereafter, they followed Siongco, who
hurriedly hailed a taxicab and sped away. Siongco was arrested and Nikko was
rescued. The follow-up operations of the PAOCTF led to the arrest of Bonsol, Hayco
and Boton.

an Information was filed charging Siongco, Bonsol, Enriquez, Hayco, Boton, and a John
Doe, with Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention under Article 267 of the Revised
Penal Code (RPC). Enriquez declared that Nikko voluntarily went with them. The RTC
held that they conspired in committing the offense. The RTC convicted Siongco, Bonsol,
Enriquez and Hayco of the offense charged and meted upon them the penalty of death.
Boton was acquitted on the ground of reasonable doubt. The case went directly to the
Supreme Court (SC) for automatic review. The case was transferred to the Court of
Appeals (CA) for intermediate review and disposition. The CA affirmed the judgment but
imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua and increased the amount of damages. Only
Siongco and Bonsol appealed the CA's Decision.

ISSUE: Did appellants commit the crime of Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention?

RULING: Yes. The SC ruled that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that
the elements of kidnapping and serious illegal detention obtain in the case at bar.
Appellants and their cohorts, took Nikko out of his hometown and demands for ransom
were made to his mother. Appellants contend that the essential element of detention
was absent because Nikko voluntarily went with them and that he was free to move
around and play with other children. Although Nikko was free to move around, he was at
all times under the alternate watch of appellants and their cohorts. Siongco contends
that there was no force or intimidation involved in the taking. However, the carrying
away of the victim in the crime of kidnapping and serious illegal detention can either be
made forcibly or fraudulently. In kidnapping, the victim’s lack of consent is also a
fundamental element. However, where the victim is a minor, lack of consent is
presumed. Nikko was only 11 years old when he was kidnapped, thus incapable of
giving consent and incompetent to assent to his seizure and illegal detention.
The CA's decision is affirmed with the modification as to the award of damages.