FOURTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC } 
OF THE PHILIPPINES 
1 
First Regular Session 
I 
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 of 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, Republic Act No. 1379 and Section 8 of Republic Act 
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 Republic Act 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 amount as 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 through 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 crinailaal offense, when committed 
intentionally, illicit enrichment, that is, a signifcant increase in the assets of a 
public oflcial that he or she cannot reasonably explain in relation to his or her 
unlawful 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 


.2- 
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. 
FRANCIS $ 


1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
FOURTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC } 
OF THE PHlLlPlPNES 
1 
First Regular Session 
1 
S E N A T E  
Introduced by Senator Francis N. Pangilinan 
AN ACT 
AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 1379, PROVIDING CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION 
THEREOF, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 
Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled: 
SECTION 1. Section 2 of Republic Act No. 1379 is hereby amended as follows: 
“SEC. 2. ENRlCHMENT THROUGH UNLAWFUL MEANS. - ANY PUBLIC 
OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE WHO INTENTIONALLY ACQUIRES WEALTH THROUGH 
UNLAWFUL MEANS WHILE IN OFFICE SHALL SUFFER THE FOLLOWING 
PENALTIES: 
(A) 
IMPRISONMENT FOR TWO (2) YEARS AND ONE DAY UP TO FOUR (4) 
YEARS IF THE UNLAWFUL ENRICHMENT AMOUNTS TO AT LEAST ONE MILLION 
PESOS (PHP 1,000,000.00) BUT NOT MORE THAN TWO MILLION FIVE HUNDRED 
THOUSAND PESOS (PHP 2,500,000.00); 
(B) 
IMPRISONMENT FOR FOUR (4) YEARS AND ONE DAY UP TO SIX (6) 
YEARS IF THE UNLAWFUL ENRICHMENT AMOUNTS TO MORE THAN TWO 
MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (PHP 2,500,000.00) BUT NOT MORE 
THAN FIVE MILLION PESOS (PHP 5,000,000.00); 
(C) 
IMPRISONMENT FOR SIX (6) YEARS AND ONE DAY UP TO TEN (IO) 
YEARS IF THE UNLAWFUL ENRICHMENT AMOUNTS TO MORE THAN FIVE 
MILLION PESOS (PHP 5,000,000.00) BUT NOT MORE THAN TEN MILLION PESOS 
(PHP 10,000,000.00); 
(D) 
IMPRISONMENT FOR TEN (IO) YEARS AND ONE DAY UP TO ELEVEN 
(11) YEARS IF THE UNLAWFUL ENRICHMENT AMOUNTS TO MORE THAN TEN 


1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
- 2 .  
MILLION PESOS (PHPH 10,000,000.00) BUT NOT MORE THAN FIFTEEN MILLION 
PESOS (PHP 15,000,000.00); 
(E) 
IMPRISONMENT FOR ELEVEN (11) YEARS AND ONE DAY UP TO 
TWELVE (12) YEARS IF THE UNLAWFUL ENRICHMENT AMOUNTS TO MORE THAN 
FIFTEEN MILLION PESOS (PHP 15,000,000.00) BUT NOT MORE THAN TWENTY 
MILLION PESOS (PHP 20,000,000.00); 
(F) 
IMPRISONMENT FOR TWELVE (12) YEARS AND ONE DAY UP TO 
THIRTEEN (13) YEARS IF THE UNLAWFUL ENRICHMENT AMOUNTS TO MORE 
THAN TWENTY MILLION PESOS (PHP 20,000,000.00) BUT NOT MORE THAN 
TWENTY-FIVE MILLION PESOS (PHP 25,000,000.00); 
(G) 
IMPRISONMENT FOR THIRTEEN (13) YEARS AND ONE DAY UP TO 
FOURTEEN (14) YEARS IF THE UNLAWFUL ENRICHMENT AMOUNTS TO MORE 
THAN TWENTY-FIVE MILLION PESOS (PHP 25,000,000.00) BUT NOT MORE THAN 
THIRTY MILLION PESOS (PHP 30,000,000.00); 
(H) 
IMPRISONMENT FOR FOURTEEN (14) YEARS AND ONE DAY UP TO 
FIFTEEN (15) YEARS IF THE UNLAWFUL ENRICHMENT AMOUNTS TO MORE THAN 
THIRTY MILLION PESOS (PHP 30,000,000.00) BUT NOT MORE THAN THIRTY-FIVE 
MILLION PESOS (PHP 35,000,000.00); 
(I) 
IMPRISONMENT FOR FIFTEEN (15) YEARS AND ONE DAY UP TO 
SIXTEEN (16) YEARS IF THE UNLAWFUL ENRICHMENT AMOUNTS TO MORE THAN 
THIRTY-FIVE MILLION PESOS (PHP 35,000,000.00) BUT NOT MORE THAN FORTY 
MILLION PESOS (PHP 40,000,000.00); 
(J) 
IMPRISONMENT FOR SIXTEEN (16) YEARS AND ONE DAY UP TO 
SEVENTEEN (17) YEARS IF THE UNLAWFUL ENRICHMENT AMOUNTS TO MORE 
THAN FORTY MILLION PESOS (PHP 40,000,000.00) BUT NOT MORE THAN FORTY- 
FIVE MILLION PESOS (PHP 45,000,000.00); 
(K) 
IMPRISONMENT FOR SEVENTEEN (17) YEARS AND ONE DAY UP TO 
EIGHTEEN (18) YEARS IF THE UNLAWFUL ENRICHMENT AMOUNTS TO MORE 


1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
- 3 .  
THAN FORTY-FIVE MILLION PESOS (PHP 45,000,000.00) 
BUT NOT MORE THAN 
FIFTY MILLION PESOS (PHP 50,000,000.00). 
ANY PUBLIC OFFICER FOUND GUILTY OF THE ACT DEFINED AND 
PUNISHED HEREIN SHALL BE PERPETUALLY DISQUALIFIED FROM HOLDING 
PUBLIC OFFICE. 
ANY PROPERTY FOUND TO HAVE BEEN UNLAWFULLY ACQUIRED 
SHALL, IN THE SAME CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS, OR IN SEPARATE CIVIL 
PROCEEDINGS FILED FOR THE PURPOSE, BE FORFEITED IN FAVOR OF THE 
GOVERNMENT. 
SEC. 2-A. [Filing of Petition] PRIMA FACIE UNLAWFUL ACQUISITION OF 
WEALTH. - 
[Whenever any public officer or employee has acquired during his 
incumbency] FOR PURPOSES OF ESTABLISHING CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LIABILITIES 
AS DEFINED IN THIS ACT, THE FAILURE OF A PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE 
TO EXPLAIN THE LEGITIMATE SOURCE OF an amount of property ACQUIRED BY 
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, [said property] SHALL [be presumed] CONSTITUTE 
prima facie [to have been unlawfully acquired] EVIDENCE OF INTENTIONAL 
ACQUISITION OF WEALTH IN OFFICE THROUGH UNLAWFUL MEANS. 
ANY 
ACQUISITION IN EXCESS OF A PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE’S GROSS 
INCOME AND OTHER FUNDS FROM LEGITIMATE SOURCES, INCLUDING LAWFUL 
LOANS AND DONATIONS, WITHIN A GIVEN YEAR, SHALL BE DEEMED AN 
INCREASE IN WEALTH WHICH IS MANIFESTLY OUT OF PROPORTION TO SAID 
LEGITIMATE INCOME AND FUNDS. 
SEC. 2-8. ClVlL PROCEEDlNGS FOR FORFEITURE. - The Solicitor General, 
[upon] IN complaint [by any taxpayer] FILED WITH the city or provincial [fiscal who shall 
conduct a previous inquiry] PROSECUTOR WHERE THE PROPERTIES INVOLVED 
WERE ACQUIRED ON OR BEFORE FEBRUARY 25,1986, OR THE OFFICE OF THE 


1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
- 4 -  
OMBUDSMAN WHERE THE PROPERTIES INVOLVED WERE ACQUIRED AFTER 
FEBRUARY 25, 1986, AFTER THE CONDUCT OF INQUIRY similar to preliminary 
investigations in criminal cases [and shall certify to the Solicitor General that there is] 
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, [in the Court of First Instance] IN THE 
SANDIGANBAYAN OR THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT of the city of 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 (3) 
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. [: Provided, however, That the right to file 
such petition shall prescribe after four (4) years from the date of the resignation, dismissal 
or separation or expiration of the term of the officer or employee concerned, except as 
those who have ceased to hold office within ten (IO) years prior to the approval of this Act, 
in which case the proceedings shall prescribe after four (4) years from the approval 
hereof] 
SEC. 2-C. lNDEPENDENT PROCEEDINGS. - NOTWITHSTANDING ANY 
LAW OR RULE PROVIDING THE CONTRARY, FORFEITURE PROCEEDINGS AT THE 
SANDIGANBAYAN AND THE REGULAR TRIAL COURTS MAY PROCEED 
INDEPENDENTLY OF, AND SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH, ANY CRIMINAL ACTION 
ARISING FROM, OR RELATED, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, TO THE UNLAWFUL 
ACQUISITION OF WEALTH.” 


1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
-5- 
SEC. 2. Section 3 of the same Act is hereby amended as follows: 
"SEC. 3. The Petition FOR FORFEITURE. - The petition shall contain the 
following information: 
(a) 
(b) 
The name and address of the respondent; 
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 MAY BE; 
(e) 
The total amount of his government salary and other proper earnings and 
incomes from legitimately acquired property; and 
(9 
Such other information as may enable the court to determine whether or 
not the respondent has unlawfully acquired property during his incumbency." 
SEC. 3. Section 9 of the same Act is hereby amended as follows: 
"SEC. 9. Immunity. - The Solicitor General IN COMPLAINTS FILED WITH THE 
CITY OR PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR WHERE THE PROPERTIES INVOLVED WERE 
ACQUIRED ON OR BEFORE FEBRUARY 25, 1986, OR THE OFFICE OF THE 
OMBUDSMAN WHERE THE PROPERTIES INVOLVED WERE ACQUIRED AFTER 
FEBRUARY 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." 
SEC. 4. Section 11 of the same Act is hereby amended as follows: 
"SEC. 11, [Laws on] Prescription. - 
[The laws concerning acquisitive 
prescription and limitation of actions cannot be invoked by, nor shall they benefit the 
respondent, in respect of any property unlawfully acquired by him.] THE CRIME 
PUNISHABLE UNDER THIS ACT SHALL PRESCRIBE IN TWENTY (20) YEARS. 


1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
- 6 -  
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." 
SEC. 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. 
SEC. 6. Repealing Clause. - All acts, decrees, general orders and circulars, or parts thereof 
inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly. 
SEC. 7. Efecfivity. - This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its complete publication in at 
least two (2) newspapers of general circulation. 
Approved,