THIRTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC) 
5 JUN 15 All 59 
OF THE PHILIPPINES 
1 
First Regular Session 
J 
. I. 
S. B. No. - 
2054 
Introduced by Senator Francis N. Pangilinan 
EXPLANATORY NOTE 
The United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) stresses two 
veritable facts. First, corruption is a principal obstacle to nation building. Second, 
seriously addressing corruption according to international standards is 
determinant of a state’s place in the community of progressive nations. Indeed, 
corruption defines in large part the political and economic hazards that spell the 
viability of a nation as an investment destination. 
A conventional strategy in dealing with corruption, upon which the 
various measures proposed in the UNCAC are built, it to make corrupt practices 
more risky and less profitable. In this jurisdiction, this principle of deterrence can 
be seen in, among others, R.A. No. 1379 and Section 8, R.A. No. 3019, which 
prescribe forfeiture by the state of properties unlawfully acquired by public 
officials and employees from government service. It can be further seen in R.A. 
No. 7080, as amended, likewise prescribes forfeiture of the fruits of Plunder in 
favor of the State. 
However, the present laws leave unpunished in the real sense the very 
acquisition and enjoyment by public officials and employees of wealth that 
cannot be explained through their legitimate incomes and funds. This means 
that those involved in unlawful enrichment in public service will simply have to 
conceal the very contracts and transactions that served as vehicles for the said 
acquisitions to avoid any real danger. They would then be merely faced with the 
possibility of forfeiture of wealth and dismissal from the service if caught, in what 
amounts o a slap on the wrist for losing in the profitable hide-and-seek game of 
unlawful enrichment. 
In this regard, the international standard does not stop at the level of 
simply forfeiting substantial wealth unlawfully acquired, and punishing unlawful 
acquisition of wealth only if done at a grand level accompanied by a showing of 
each and every specific contract and transaction rhrough which the unlawful 
acquisition took place. 
As provided in Section 20, Chapter 111 of the UNCAC: 
Article 20 
Illicit Enrichment 
Subject to its constitution and the fundamental principles of its legal 
system, each State Party shall consider adopting such legislative and 
other measures as may be necessary to establish as a criminal 


offense, when committed intentionally, illicit enrichment, that is, a 
significant increase in the assets of a public official that he or she 
cannot reasonably explain in relation to his or her lawful income. 
There is compelling wisdom to criminalizing intentional illicit acquisition of 
wealth per se. As adverted to, a contrary situation - the one obtaining in this 
jurisdiction - makes illicit acquisition of wealth in public office a profitable and 
low-risk venture. For as long as the actual illegal source is concealed, a corrupt 
public official or employee can enjoy his unlawfully acquired wealth and assumes 
no danger for it greater than forfeiture of such wealth and dismissal from the 
service, if caught. Criminalizing intentional illicit acquisition of wealth hopefully 
would dramatically tip this risk-profitability balance in favor of the campaign 
against corruption. 
Hence, the passage of this measure is earnestly sought. 


.:,. 
THIRTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC J 
OF THE PHILIPPINES 
1 
5 JUN 15 At159 
First Regular Session 
1 
S E N A T E  
2054 
S. B. No. - 
introduced by Senator Francis N. Pangilinan 
AN ACT AMENDING R.A. NO. 1379, PROVIDING CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR 
VIOLATION THEREOF, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in 
Congress assembled: 
Section 1. Section 2 of R.A. No. 1379 is hereby amended as follows: 
"Section 2. Enrichment Through Unlawful Means. - Anv public officer or 
employee who intentionallv acquires wealth throuah unlawful means while in 
office shall suffer the followina penalties: 
[a) Immisonment for two vears and one dav UD to four vears if the 
unlawful enrichment amounts to at least One Million Pesos 
&P1.000,000.001 but not more than Two Million Five Hundred 
Thousand Pesos lP2.500.000.001; 
(b] Imprisonment for four vears and one dav up to six vears if the unlawful 
enrichment amounts to more than Two Million Five Hundred 
Thousand Pesos fP2.500.000.00l but not more than Five Million Pesos 
&P5,000.000.00l: 
(c) Imprisonment for six vears and one dav UD to ten vears if the unlawful 
enrichment amounts to more than Five Million Pesos fP5.000.000.00~ 
5ut not more than Ten Million Pesos fP10.000.000.001; 
(d) Imprisonment for ten years and one dav UD to eleven vears if the 
unlawful enrichment amounts to more than Ten Million Pesos 
~P10.000.000.001 but not 
more than 
Fifteen 
Million 
Pesos 
1P 15,000,000.001; 
(e] ImDrisonment for eleven vears and one dav UD to twelve vears if the 
unlawful enrichment amounts to more than Fifteen Million Pesos 
~P15.000.000.001 but not more than Tw entv 
M illion 
Pesos 
p20.000.000.001; 
(f) Imprisonment for twelve vears and one dav up to thirteen years if the 
unlawful enrichment amounts to more than Twenty Million Pesos 
~P20.000.000.001 
2
s
b 
illi n Pe 
~P25.000.000.001; 


(gj fmm-isonment for thirteen vears and one dav UD to fourteen vears if the 
unlawful enrichment amounts to more than Twenw-Five Million Pesos 
~P25.000.000.001 but 
not 
more 
than 
Thirty 
Million 
Pesos 
1P30.000.000.001; 
(h) Imm-isonment for fourteen vears and one dav UD to fifteen years if the 
unlawful enrichment amounts to more than Thirtv Million Pesos 
~P30.000.000.001 but not more than Thirtv-Five Million Pesos 
[P35,000.000.00l; 
(i) Immisonment for fifteen vears and one day up to sixteen years if the 
unlawful enrichment amounts to more than Thirtv-Five Million Pesos 
~P35.000.000.001 but 
not 
more 
than 
Fortv 
Million 
Pesos 
[P40.000.000.001: 
(j) Immisonment for sixteen vears and one day up to seventeen vears if 
the unlawful enrichment amounts to more than Fortv Million Pesos 
[P40,000,000.001 
but not more than Fortv-Five Million Pesos 
~P45.000.000.00l; 
(k) ImDrisonment for seventeen vears and one dav up to eighteen vears if 
the unlawful enrichment amounts to more than Fortv-Five Million 
Pesos IP45.000.000.00l but not more than Fiftv Million Pesos 
[P50.000,000.00L; 
Anv public officer found auilty of the act defined and wnished herein 
shall be peroetuallv disaualified from holding Dublic office. 
Anv proDertv found to have been unlawfully acauired shall, in the same 
criminal proceedinas, or in separate civil proceedings filed for the purpose. be 
forfeited in favor of the aovernment. 
"Section 2-a. Prima Facie Unlawful Acauisition of Wealth. - For purposes 
of establishina criminal and civil liabilities as defined in this Act, the failure of a 
public officer of emplovee to exrJlain the legitimate source of an amount of 
property acauired bv him during his incumbency which is manifestly out of 
proportion to his salary as such public officer or employee and to his other lawful 
income and the income from legitimately acquired property, shall constitute 
prima facie evidence of intentional acquisition of wealth in office throuah 
unlawful means. Anv acquisition in excess of a public officer or employee's aross 
income and other funds from leaitimate sources. includina lawful loans and 
manifestlv out of aroDortion to said leaitimate income and funds. 
"Section 2-b. Civil Proceedings for Forfeiture. - The Solicitor General, 
complaints filed with the city or provincial prosecutor where the proaerties 
involved were acquired on or before Februarv 25. 1986. or the Office of the 
Ombudsman where the properties involved were acquired after February 25. 
1986, after the conduct of inquiry similar to preliminary investigations in criminal 
cases, and upon a finding of reasonable ground to believe that there has been 
committed a violation of this Act and the respondent is probably guilty thereof, 
shall file, in the name and on behalf of the Republic of the Philippines, 
Sandiaanbavan or the Reaional Trial Court of the city or province where said 
public officer or employee resides or holds office, m, 
a petition 
for a wrlt commandlng said offlcer or employee to show cause why the property' 


Sandiaanbavan or the Reaional Trial Court of the city or province where said 
public officer or employee resides or holds office, as the case may be, a petition 
for a writ commanding said officer or employee to show cause why the property 
aforesaid, or any part thereof, should not be declared property of the State: 
Provided, That no such petition shall be filed within one year before any general 
election or within three months before any special election. 
"The resignation, dismissal or separation of the officer or employee from 
his office or employment in the Government or in the Government-owned or 
controlled corporation shall not be a bar to the filing of the petition." 
"Section 2-c. IndeDendent Proceedinas. - Notwithstandina any law or rule 
providina the contrarv. forfeiture proceedings at the Sandiganbayan and the 
reylar trial courts may proceed independently of, and simultaneously with, any 
criminal action arisina from, or related. directlv or indirectly. to the unlawful 
acauisition of wealth." 
Section 2. Section 3 of the same Act is hereby amended as follows: 
"Section 3. 
The Petition for Forfeiture. The petition shall contain the 
following information: 
[a) The name and address of the respondent. 
(b) The public office or employment he holds and such other public offices or 
employment which he has previously held. 
(c) The approximate amount of property he has acquired during his 
incumbency in his past and present offices and employments. 
(d) A description of said property, or such thereof as has been identified by 
the Solicitor General or the Office of the Ombudsman, as the case mav be. 
(e) The total amount of his government salary and other proper earnings and 
incomes from legitimately acquired property, and 
If) Such other information as may enable the court to determine whether or 
not the respondent has unlawfully acquired property during his 
incumbency." 
Section 3. Section 9 of the same Act is hereby amended as follows: 
"Section 9. Immunity. - The Solicitor General in complaints filed with the 
before Februarv 25. 1986. or the Office of the Ombudsman where the oroperties 
involved 
were acauired after Februarv 25. 1986. or the Office of the 
Ombudsman, may grant immunity from criminal prosecution to any person who 
testifies to the unlawful manner in which the respondent has acquired any of the 
property in question in cases where such testimony is necessary to prove 
violations of this Act." 
Section 4. Section 1 1 of the same Act Is hereby amended as follows: 


"Section 11. Prescription. - The crime punishable under this act shall 
prescribe in twenty (2) years. However, the laws on prescription, laches or 
estoppel cannot be invoked by, nor shall they benefit the respondent, in respect 
to any property unlawfully acquired by him and sought to be recovered by the 
state." 
- . 
Section 5. Separability Clause. - If for any reason any provision of this Act 
is declared unconstitutional or invalid, such parts or portions not affected thereby 
shall remain in full force and effect. 
Section 6. Repealing Clause. - AB acts, decrees, general orders and 
circulars, or parts thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby 
repealed or modified accordingly. 
complete publication in at least two (2) newspaper of general circulation. 
Section. 7. Effectivity. - This Act shall take effect fifteen ( 15) days after its 
Approved, 
- 
..