EFFECTIVE INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION FOR
COMBATING CORRUPTION IN THE PHILIPPINES: HANDSACROSS THE SEA
Ryan P. Medrano *I. INTRODUCTION
Corruption is indeed a crime against humanity. It is considered as a crime against thepoor, the rich, the powerful and the weak. It adversely affects every person living in the
country. It brings nothing but chaos, discomfort, bad governance, poor public service,unstable security and a sluggish economy. It persists and subsists in most areas of the world
particularly in developing countries. It bleeds the country’s public coffers to the detrimentof the welfare and common good of the people.
Experience will tell that through the employment of fraud, anomalous schemes andirregular activities, the billions of public funds allotted and spent by the government for aparticular project sometimes end up in the hands of those who are called to implement thesame. Worse, there are occasions where the proceeds of these corrupt practices reach theshores of another country.
II. THE PHILIPPINE SETTING: FIGHTING CORRUPTION AND
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIONIn the Philippines, investigating graft and corruption is a complex and toughundertaking. There are literally hundreds and thousands of civil servants in the country,
while there are only a small number of investigative and legal staff members performing
the said difficult task. There are also numerous factors to consider when investigating
corruption cases and these may include the scope of the government project, remoteness of
the area, security conditions and so on.

Attorney Ryan P. Medrano started working in the Office of the Ombudsman as an investigator on 19 July
2004. He became a lawyer and was admitted to the Philippine Bar in 2010. He handled and conducted factfinding investigation on numerous high-profile and grand corruption cases for the past 17 years including thebillion-peso Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) cases and Malampaya fund anomalies. He rosefrom the ranks and was promoted to Director IV position at the Field Investigation Office (FIO), Office of
the Ombudsman in 2018. In the same year, he was directed to provide assistance to the requesting State in
obtaining the necessary documents and/or pieces of evidence in the Philippines.
*

For purposes of academic discussion and considering the provisions of the Treaty and the fact that there arestill pending cases before the courts of justice in the Philippines and in other countries, this Presentation Paper
will not be able to fully disclose the names or identities of the concerned individuals and the requesting State.
They will be identified in this Paper through some other names or designations. Further, the factual contents
stated herein and in the succeeding sub-sections are based on the personal experience, observation, exchangeof correspondence, electronic mails (e-mails) and messages with the concerned local and foreign counterparts
and/or recollection of the Presenter during the fact-finding investigation stage and during the time when they
were directed to provide assistance to the authorities of the requesting State.

- 129 -

- 131 -

A. The Office of the Ombudsman
Under Philippine laws, the Office of the Ombudsman, an independent 1 andconstitutional body, was created primarily to fight graft and corruption within thebureaucracy. It acts and serves as the “protector” of the people; watchdog; mobilizer;
official critic; and dispenser of justice. Among the powers, functions and duties of the
Ombudsman 2 are to investigate, on its own or on complaint by any person, any act or
Sec 5 Article XI, 1987 Philippine Constitution.
Article XI, 1987 Constitution.
Section 13. The Office of the Ombudsman shall have the following powers, functions, and duties:(1) Investigate on its own, or on complaint by any person, any act or omission of any public official, employee,
office or agency, when such act or omission appears to be illegal, unjust, improper, or inefficient.
(2) Direct, upon complaint or at its own instance, any public official or employee of the Government, or any
subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof, as well as of any government-owned or controlled corporation
with original charter, to perform and expedite any act or duty required by law, or to stop, prevent, and correct
any abuse or impropriety in the performance of duties.
(3) Direct the officer concerned to take appropriate action against a public official or employee at fault, andrecommend his removal, suspension, demotion, fine, censure, or prosecution, and ensure compliance
therewith.
(4) Direct the officer concerned, in any appropriate case, and subject to such limitations as may be provided
by law, to furnish it with copies of documents relating to contracts or transactions entered into by his office
involving the disbursement or use of public funds or properties, and report any irregularity to the Commission
on Audit for appropriate action.
(5) Request any government agency for assistance and information necessary in the discharge of its
responsibilities, and to examine, if necessary, pertinent records and documents.
(6) Publicize matters covered by its investigation when circumstances so warrant and with due prudence.
(7) Determine the causes of inefficiency, red tape, mismanagement, fraud, and corruption in the Government
and make recommendations for their elimination and the observance of high standards of ethics and efficiency.
(8) Promulgate its rules of procedure and exercise such other powers or perform such functions or duties as
may be provided by law.
1
2

Republic Act (RA) No. 6770, also known as “The Ombudsman Act of 1989” provides the following:
Section 15. Powers, Functions and Duties. — The Office of the Ombudsman shall have the following powers,functions and duties:(1) Investigate and prosecute on its own or on complaint by any person, any act or omission of any public
officer or employee, office or agency, when such act or omission appears to be illegal, unjust, improper orinefficient. It has primary jurisdiction over cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan and, in the exercise ofthis primary jurisdiction, it may take over, at any stage, from any investigatory agency of Government, theinvestigation of such cases;(2) Direct, upon complaint or at its own instance, any officer or employee of the Government, or of any
subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof, as well as any government-owned or controlled corporations
with original charter, to perform and expedite any act or duty required by law, or to stop, prevent, and correct
any abuse or impropriety in the performance of duties;(3) Direct the officer concerned to take appropriate action against a public officer or employee at fault or who
neglect to perform an act or discharge a duty required by law, and recommend his removal, suspension,
demotion, fine, censure, or prosecution, and ensure compliance therewith; or enforce its disciplinary authority
as provided in Section 21 of this Act: provided, that the refusal by any officer without just cause to comply
with an order of the Ombudsman to remove, suspend, demote, fine, censure, or prosecute an officer or
employee who is at fault or who neglects to perform an act or discharge a duty required by law shall be aground for disciplinary action against said officer;(4) Direct the officer concerned, in any appropriate case, and subject to such limitations as it may provide in
its rules of procedure, to furnish it with copies of documents relating to contracts or transactions entered intoby his office involving the disbursement or use of public funds or properties, and report any irregularity to
the Commission on Audit for appropriate action;(5) Request any government agency for assistance and information necessary in the discharge of its
responsibilities, and to examine, if necessary, pertinent records and documents;(6) Publicize matters covered by its investigation of the matters mentioned in paragraphs (1), (2), (3) and (4)hereof, when circumstances so warrant and with due prudence: provided, that the Ombudsman under its rules
and regulations may determine what cases may not be made public: provided, further, that any publicity
issued by the Ombudsman shall be balanced, fair and true;- 130 -- 132 -

omission of any public officer or employee, office or agency, when such act or omission
appears to be illegal, unjust, improper or inefficient 3 and to request any government agency
for assistance and information necessary in the discharge of its responsibilities, and to
examine, if necessary, pertinent records and documents. 4 In all cases of conspiracy
between a public officer and a private person, the Office of the Ombudsman has jurisdiction
to include such private person in the investigation and to proceed against such private
person as the evidence may warrant. 5
To insulate the Office from political influence or interference, Philippine laws provide
certain constitutional safeguards and guarantees. These include the following:
•

•
•
•

The appointment of the Ombudsman and his Deputies need no Congressional
confirmation and is equivalent to the rank of chairman and members, respectively,of a Constitutional Commission 6;
The Ombudsman may be removed from office only by impeachment 7;
Prescribing for a fixed term of Office during which their salaries cannot bediminished 8; andAn independent office enjoying fiscal autonomy. 9

The Office of the Ombudsman works on five (5) specific tasks, namely: investigation;
administrative adjudication; prosecution; public assistance; and graft prevention.
Regarding investigation, the Office has its own investigative arm, 10 the Field Investigation
Office (FIO), which conducts fact-finding investigation, case build-up, field inspection,
surveillance, entrapment and other investigative activities on assigned cases.
B. “PDAF Scam”
In 2013, the Office of the Ombudsman conducted fact-finding investigations against
several members of the Legislative branch 11 of the government and other public officers in
relation to the utilization of the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF), also known(7) Determine the causes of inefficiency, red tape, mismanagement, fraud, and corruption in the Government,
and make recommendations for their elimination and the observance of high standards of ethics andefficiency;(8) Administer oaths, issue subpoena and subpoena duces tecum, and take testimony in any investigation or
inquiry, including the power to examine and have access to bank accounts and records;(9) Punish for contempt in accordance with the Rules of Court and under the same procedure and with thesame penalties provided therein;(10) Delegate to the Deputies, or its investigators or representatives such authority or duty as shall ensure theeffective exercise or performance of the powers, functions, and duties herein or hereinafter provided;(11) Investigate and initiate the proper action for the recovery of ill-gotten and/or unexplained wealth amassed
after 25 February 1986 and the prosecution of the parties involved therein.
The Ombudsman shall give priority to complaints filed against high-ranking government officials and/or
those occupying supervisory positions, complaints involving grave offences as well as complaints involving
large sums of money and/or properties.
3
Sec 13(1) Article XI, 1987 Philippine Constitution.
4
Sec 13(5) Article XI, 1987 Philippine Constitution.
5
Sec 22 Republic Act No. 6770.
6
Sec 9, 10 Article XI, 1987 Philippine Constitution; Sec 6 Republic Act No. 6770.
7
Sec 2 Article XI, 1987 Philippine Constitution.
8
Sec 11 Article XI, 1987 Philippine Constitution; Sec 7, Republic Act No. 6770.
9
Sec 14 Article XI, 1987 Philippine Constitution.
10
Sec 11 Republic Act No. 6770.
11
Sec 1 Article VI provides that the legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines
which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives.

- 131 -

- 133 -

as the “pork barrel fund,” appropriated in Calendar Years (CYs) 2007 to 2009.
In general, the PDAF is a lump sum appropriation in the annual General Appropriations
Act (GAA) intended to fund priority development programmes and projects of thegovernment. 12 It represents the annual appropriation allotted to each member of theLegislature, which is composed of the House of Representatives and the Senate of thePhilippines.
PDAF is designed to allow legislators to fund small-scale infrastructure or community
projects which fall outside the scope of the national infrastructure programme. It covers
funding for programmes and projects categorized as soft projects 13 and hard projects 14 or
Various Infrastructure including Local Projects (VILP) of the Department of Public Worksand Highways (DPWH). In other words, each member of the Senate or House ofRepresentatives has the discretion to fund particular infrastructure or community
development projects. During that time, Senators were allocated Php200 million, while
Congressman (Representatives) were allocated Php70 million per district. 15
The PDAF funds allocated were normally transferred to various government
Implementing Agencies (IA), subject to the usual accounting mechanisms, procedures andaudit requirements. The process of PDAF allocation, based on the investigation conducted,
is as follows:
•

•
•
•

The concerned Legislator will submit a project proposal to be funded by his PDAF
to the concerned Offices in Congress (Appropriations Committee) and would thenbe transmitted to the Department of Budget and Management (DBM), through the
Speaker of the House of Representatives or the Senate President.
The DBM will issue a Special Allotment Release Order (SARO) allowing theexpenditure of a particular amount of funds to the said proposed project as identified
and submitted by the Legislator.
The DBM will issue a Notice of Cash Allocation (NCA) to the National Treasurer
to credit the account of the specific IA, as stated in the proposal.
An endorsement letter will be issued by the Legislator to the IA endorsing the NonGovernmental Organization (NGO). The NGO will then submit a project proposal
and supporting documents.

DBM Website, “PDAF,” electronically published at http://pdaf.dbm.gov.ph/index.php, and last accessedon 19 September 2013.
13
COA Website, Soft and Hard Projects,” electronically published at
http://coa.gov.ph.GWSPA/2012/SAO_Report2012-03_PDAF.pdf, and last accessed on 19 September 2013.
Commission on Audit (COA) – Special Audit Office (SAO) Report No. 2012-03 provides that soft projects
cover both non-infrastructure and small infrastructure projects defined in the General Appropriation Act(GAA) to be implemented by PDAF. The non-infrastructure projects are scholarship, purchase of IT
equipment, medical equipment and medical assistance to indigent patients in government hospitals, livelihood
support, purchase of firetruck, firefighter equipment and patrol vehicle, specific pro-poor program and thosecategorized under forest management and historical, arts and culture. On the other hand, small infrastructure
are the likes of water system, irrigation facilities, barangay rural electrification and construction/repair ofpolice, jail and fire stations.
14
COA-SAO Report No. 2012-03 states that hard projects cover small infrastructure public works projectsuch as road, bridges, flood control, school buildings, hospitals, health facilities, public market, multi-purpose
building and pavement. These projects are reflected in the GAA under the DPWH locally funded nationwide
lump sum appropriation with allocation for each district.
15
COA-SAO Report No. 2012-03.
12- 132 -

- 134 -

••••

The Legislator, the head of the IA and the NGO President will enter into a
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) through which the NGO will agree to receiveand disburse the fund and perform the intended project.
The IA will issue Checks to the NGO and the NGO will, in turn, issue Official
Receipts (OR).
The NGO will implement the project.
The NGO will submit Liquidation Reports and Accomplishment Reports stating thereceipt of the funds and the completion of the project in accordance with the terms
and conditions of the MOA.

Through misappropriation, falsification of documents, use of falsified documents andemployment of anomalous and unlawful schemes and machinations, the billion-peso PDAF
funds allotted by Legislators to the intended livelihood, developmental or farm related
projects were converted or diverted for the personal benefits of the concerned Legislators,
IA and NGO Officers.
C. PDAF Investigation
The Office of the Ombudsman conducted fact-finding investigation on the said PDAF
anomalies in 2013. All Disbursement vouchers and liquidation documents supporting therelease of PDAF Funds were obtained and analysed, including the Commission on Audit(COA) – Special Audit Office (SAO) Report. Field verifications were likewise conductedin several parts of the country where the alleged projects were implemented. Several
personalities, witnesses and/or whistle-blowers from different parts of the country were
subpoenaed and interviewed and their sworn statements were eventually taken. The
concerned Municipal Mayors, agricultural officers and the intended farmer-beneficiaries,
whose signatures were deliberately forged, were also interviewed and were made to execute
sworn statements. Investigation likewise disclosed that the NGOs utilized in thetransactions were purposely created upon the instruction of AAA as fund conduits for the
project, and that no project was actually implemented in the intended or proposed areas.
In sum, owing to the vital pieces of evidence gathered, coupled with the sworn
statements given by the concerned public officials, whistle-blowers, recipient farmers andother private individuals, the Ombudsman investigators recommended the filing of criminal
complaints against the concerned Legislator, DBM officials, IA officers and NGO
personnel including private individual AAA. Administrative charges were also levelledagainst those involved who are in still in the government service.
After the conduct of the requisite preliminary investigation, the Office of the
Ombudsman resolved the cases and filed several criminal informations before the
Sandiganbayan (Anti-Graft Court) for the non-bailable crime of plunder, 16 violation of the
Republic Act No. 7080, as amended, states that any public officer who, by himself or in connivance withmembers of his family, relatives by affinity or consanguinity, business associates, subordinates or otherpersons, amasses, accumulates or acquires ill-gotten wealth through a combination or series of overt or
criminal acts as described in Section 1(d) hereof in the aggregate amount or total value of at least Fifty million
pesos (P50,000,000.00) shall be guilty of the crime of plunder and shall be punished by reclusion perpetua
to death. Any person who participated with the said public officer in the commission of an offence
contributing to the crime of plunder shall likewise be punished for such offence. In the imposition of penalties,
the degree of participation and the attendance of mitigating and extenuating circumstances, as provided by
the Revised Penal Code, shall be considered by the court. The court shall declare any and all ill-gotten wealthand their interests and other incomes and assets including the properties and shares of stocks derived fromthe deposit of investment thereof forfeited in favor of the State.
16- 133 -

- 135 -

anti-Graft and Corrupt practices law, 17 malversation of public funds 18 and other criminal
charges against the concerned legislators (Senators or Congressman), IA officials, otherpublic officers and private individuals in conspiracy with them.
Republic Act 3019 provides the following:
Section 3. Corrupt practices of public officers. In addition to acts or omissions of public officers alreadypenalized by existing law, the following shall constitute corrupt practices of any public officer and are hereby
declared to be unlawful:(a) Persuading, inducing or influencing another public officer to perform an act constituting a violation ofrules and regulations duly promulgated by competent authority or an offense in connection with the official
duties of the latter, or allowing himself to be persuaded, induced, or influenced to commit such violation or
offence;(b) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift, present, share, percentage, or benefit, for himself
or for any other person, in connection with any contract or transaction between the Government and any otherparty, wherein the public officer in his official capacity has to intervene under the law;(c) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift, present or other pecuniary or material benefit, forhimself or for another, from any person for whom the public officer, in any manner or capacity, has secured
or obtained, or will secure or obtain, any Government permit or license, in consideration for the help given
or to be given, without prejudice to Section thirteen of this Act;(d) Accepting or having any member of his family accept employment in a private enterprise which has
pending official business with him during the pendency thereof or within one year after its termination;(e) Causing any undue injury to any party, including the Government, or giving any private party any
unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the discharge of his official administrative or judicial
functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence. This provision shallapply to officers and employees of offices or government corporations charged with the grant of licenses or
permits or other concessions;(f) Neglecting or refusing, after due demand or request, without sufficient justification, to act within areasonable time on any matter pending before him for the purpose of obtaining, directly or indirectly, fromany person interested in the matter some pecuniary or material benefit or advantage, or for the purpose offavoring his own interest or giving undue advantage in favor of or discriminating against any other interested
party.
(g) Entering, on behalf of the Government, into any contract or transaction manifestly and grossly
disadvantageous to the same, whether or not the public officer profited or will profit thereby;(h) Directly or indirectly having financial or pecuniary interest in any business, contract or transaction inconnection with which he intervenes or takes part in his official capacity, or in which he is prohibited by theConstitution or by any law from having any interest;(i) Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for personal gain, or having a material interest in any transactionor act requiring the approval of a board, panel or group of which he is a member, and which exercises
discretion in such approval, even if he votes against the same or does not participate in the action of the board,committee, panel or group. Interest for personal gain shall be presumed against those public officers
responsible for the approval of manifestly unlawful, inequitable, or irregular transaction or acts by the board,panel or group to which they belong;(j) Knowingly approving or granting any license, permit, privilege or benefit in favor of any person not
qualified for or not legally entitled to such license, permit, privilege or advantage, or of a mere representative
or dummy of one who is not so qualified or entitled;(k) Divulging valuable information of a confidential character, acquired by his office or by him on accountof his official position to unauthorized persons, or releasing such information in advance of its authorized
release date.
The person giving the gift, present, share, percentage or benefit referred to in subparagraphs (b) and (c); or
offering or giving to the public officer the employment mentioned in subparagraph (d); or urging the divulging
or untimely release of the confidential information referred to in subparagraph (k) of this section shall,
together with the offending public officer, be punished under Section nine of this Act and shall be permanently
or temporarily disqualified in the discretion of the Court, from transacting business in any form with thegovernment.
18
Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code states that any public officer who, by reason of the duties of his
office, is accountable for public funds or property, and shall appropriate the same or shall take ormisappropriate or shall consent, through abandonment or negligence, shall permit any other person to takesuch public funds, or property, wholly or partially, or shall otherwise be guilty of the misappropriation or
malversation of such funds or property.
17- 134 -

- 136 -

AAA was later on convicted of the heinous crime of Plunder by the Anti-Graft Court.
In 2021, she was also convicted of graft and malversation charges.
D. Use of Informal Channels
From 2006 up to mid-2013, AAA, along with some family members and otherassociates, transferred proceeds derived from the anomalous PDAF transactions, on several
occasions through wire transfers, to the territory of the requesting State. The said proceeds
were used to acquire real property, business shares, expensive motor vehicles and pay forthe living expenses of AAA’s family members.
In 2014, in connection with the investigation of AAA and members of her extended
family, the Philippines forwarded some documents coming from various agencies to theprosecutors of the requesting State. The purpose was to trace PDAF funds plundered fromthe Philippines relative to the implementation of several anomalous livelihood,developmental or community projects in the Philippines and which funds were thentransferred to the territory of the requesting State.
In March 2016, the requesting State filed a civil complaint for forfeiture against various
properties within its territory representing the proceeds of plunder offences committed in
the Philippines. The requesting State seized the assets in question pending further litigation.
On 14 February 2018, relative to the efforts of the authorities of the requesting State torecover or seize assets of AAA within its territory, former Ombudsman Conchita Carpio
Morales issued Office Order No. 114 series of 2018 designating and directing Ombudsman
investigators to conduct investigative work to ascertain the specifics of the requested
documents and to enable the Commission on Audit to retrieve them.
The authorities of the requesting State sent a list of required documents throughelectronic mail (e-mail). The requested documents consisted of PDAF and Department ofAgrarian Reform (DAR) funded transactions involving some legislators (Senators andCongressman) as well as the NGOs owned and operated by AAA. It will be used ininstituting cases against AAA before its courts.
Considering the long list of requested documents, the Ombudsman investigators andthe COA Auditors had a hard time retrieving the same since some of them were issued
sometime between CYs 2007 to 2010 and the documents were in the custody of several
COA offices in various parts of the Philippines. Another challenging task was the need toverify and counter-check all the entries in the papers, records, disbursement vouchers andchecks vis-à-vis the requested documents so as to avoid any error in obtaining the correct
set of transactional documents to be forwarded to the requesting State.
On 27 March 2018, the initial set of voluminous PDAF transaction documents was
forwarded and received by the Embassy Attaché of the requesting State. The same wereimmediately sent abroad to the handling prosecutors, lawyers and investigators for theirinformation and guidance. The succeeding documents were sent in batches due to volume
and difficulty in retrieving the needed documents from numerous concerned government
repositories.
Clarifications and exchange of confidential information, correspondence, views andpositions were likewise made through e-mails and telephone calls between Ombudsman- 135 -

- 137 -

investigators and the foreign counterparts of the requesting State.
Sometime in April 2018, some federal agents and state attorneys of the requesting State
arrived in the Philippines. Ombudsman investigators gave a briefing as to the nature of the
PDAF and DAR transactions involved as well as the records, disbursement vouchers andliquidation documents. Arrangements were likewise made for them to meet and talk to theprincipal witnesses in various PDAF cases.
Due to the sensitivity and complexity of the task, the Ombudsman investigators
constantly communicated with their foreign counterparts and Embassy staff, and regularly
provided them with updates or progress on the status of the requested documents. They
also explained the procedures and answered queries pertaining thereto.
After collating all the pieces of evidence from various official custodians of records in
the Philippines and pending the formal and official request to be coursed through the
Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) between the Philippines and the requesting State,
one complete set of documents (most of which were mere photocopies), was forwarded by
Ombudsman investigators to the Embassy Attaché office of the requesting State. Said
documents were sent again for the information and appropriate action of the concerned
prosecutors, state attorneys and federal agents handling the case in the requesting State’s
territory.
In January 2019, criminal informations and indictments were filed before the District
Court of the requesting State for various offences such as Money-Laundering, Foreign
Transportation of Money Taken by Fraud, International Money-Laundering, etc. against
AAA and the members of her extended family.
In mid-2019, the Embassy Attaché coordinating with Ombudsman investigatorsconcluded his detail in the Philippines. They were then advised to contact and coordinate
their efforts with the incoming Attaché.
In January 2020, in anticipation of the incoming formal request of the requesting Statethrough the MLAT, the Embassy Attaché of the requesting State brought to the Office of
the Ombudsman copies of the final set of documents that needed to be certified by theofficial custodians of the records in the Philippines.
A copy of the Certification/Attestation of Authenticity of Foreign Public Documents(Treaty Form B) had been sent earlier by email. The Attestation Form states that the
Official Producing the Record attests, on penalty of criminal punishment, that he holds a
position with the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and that he is authorized
by law to attest that the documents attached and described in the submission are true andaccurate copies of the original official records which are recorded or filed in that office.
Acting on the said request, the Ombudsman referred the same to the COA for
distribution and certification of documents by different custodians in various parts of thecountry. However, with the declaration of the global pandemic in March 2020, thetransmission and receipt of the needed Attestation of Authenticity and of the required
documents to various official custodians were affected and delayed.

- 136 -

- 138 -

There were instances where it took several months before the said documents had
reached their destinations or the intended official custodian of records. Communicationand logistical problems also set in as the pandemic slowed down every aspect of humanactivity. Thus, the Ombudsman investigators and COA auditors communicated from time
to time and took turns in finding ways to expedite the transmission, receipt and safe returnof said required documents and the needed Certification/Attestation form.
E. Formal Request through MLATIn March 2020, pursuant to the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters treaty, theCentral Authority of the requesting State sent its formal request to the Central Authority of
the Republic of the Philippines and incorporated by reference its earlier requests forassistance. It asked that the requesting State continue to investigate AAA and her family
members for embezzling and stealing funds from the Philippine government and thenlaundering the same in the territory of the requesting State. Further, as a formal request, it
was stated that the prosecutors of the requesting State needed the certification of documents
already provided by the Ombudsman.
The documents requested are relevant in the civil and criminal matters pending in therequesting State which require, among others, proof that (1) PDAF funds were
contractually obligated for development and poverty alleviation projects in the Philippines
which were implemented by the NGOs owned and controlled by AAA; (2) NGOs officers
falsely represented that the projects had been completed, when in truth and in fact, they had
not; (3) the money was diverted to the requesting State for the benefit of AAA and othermembers of her family, and the diverted funds were used to acquire real and personal assets
in the territory of the requesting State; (4) AAA was aware that the said assets came fromthe proceeds of some form of unlawful activity in the Philippines; (5) AAA attempted toliquidate the said assets and repatriate the said funds; and (6) AAA sought to conceal thedisposition of the liquidated assets.
In June 2020, the Office of the Ombudsman was officially informed by the Philippine
Department of Justice (PH DOJ), being the Central Authority of the treaty, of the need tocertify or authenticate the documents previously provided to the requesting State in orderfor both the civil and criminal cases to proceed therein.
In September 2020, and considering the advance information provided by therequesting State, the Office of the Ombudsman submitted to the PH DOJ the complete setof documents together with the fully accomplished Certification/Authentication Forms ofthe concerned records custodian of documents.
III. ISSUES/CHALLENGES
•
•
•
•
•

Lack of awareness on the MLAT mechanism for investigating or prosecuting acrime;
Lack of trainings or technical capability;
Difficulty in communication or in contacting concerned personnel or staff during
the pandemic;
Transportation and logistical concerns during the pandemic;
Coordination, communication and familiarity with the concerned
authorities/officials of the requesting State Party or foreign counterparts;- 137 -

- 139 -

••

Location, time zone difference and language barrier;Lack of legislative act on mutual assistance on criminal matters.
IV. CONCLUSION

Combating graft and corruption does not only rest on the shoulders of one country. It
is a responsibility that must be shared by all countries particularly in a situation where there
are transborder transactions of the proceeds of corrupt activities or when there is an attempt
to hide, conceal or launder the same beyond a country’s territorial jurisdiction. With theadvent of modern technologies coupled by the collective effort and active participation andcooperation between and among countries, investigating corruption cases is no longer an
arduous task. The invaluable assistance and collective endeavour extended by MLAT State
parties will pave the way for the fruitful and effective prosecution and recovery of theproceeds of unlawful activities.
In summary, it can be said that international cooperation is crucial in the success of theinvestigation and prosecution of corruption cases involving anomalous transbordertransactions. The mutual assistance rendered and the efforts exerted by all concerned
investigators, state lawyers and federal agents, despite the onslaught of the pandemic andthe difficulty in transportation and communication, in collating the pieces of evidence
needed in instituting the necessary civil, criminal and forfeiture cases in the requesting Stateis a clear testament to the spirit and achievements of MLAT. This is, in essence, the “Hands
Across the Sea.”
V. RECOMMENDATIONS
In view of the obtaining circumstances and considering the success despite thelimitations caused by the pandemic, it is recommended that the following courses ofaction be considered:
1. Multi-sectoral cooperation to combat graft and corruption among concerned
authorities of MLAT State parties;
2. Capacity-building measures to help graft investigators and lawyers acquire
technical expertise in investigating and prosecuting corruption cases;
3. International cooperation be strengthened and constant communication,
professional networking and/or coordination among various State agencies bemaintained;
4. The continuous use of all available informal channels between State parties ininvestigating and prosecuting transnational crimes and corruption be
institutionalized;
5. Enactment of law or strengthening of the provisions of MLATs.

- 138 -

- 140 -