FIFTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC} 
OF THE PHILIPPINES 
} 
First Regular Session 
} 
SENATE 
S.B.NO. 
150 
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 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 
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 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. 
NGILINAN 


FIFTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC} 
OF THE PHILIPPINES} 
First Regular Session} 
SENATE 
.0 
150 
S.B.NO. 
Introduced by Senator Francis N. Pangilinan 
!" 1 : __ 0 ~__o 
0 
8ILI_r~:";~~j_;C~;' // 
~o 
.......... --......_ .. " ...... "., ... ' 
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. ENRICHMENT 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); 
(q IMPRISONMENT FOR SIX (6) YEARS AND ONE DAY UP TO TEN (10) 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 (10) YEARS AND ONE DAY UP TO ELEVEN (11) 
YEARS IF THE UNLAWFUL ENRICHMENT AMOUNTS TO MORE THAN TEN 
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 FORTYFIVE 
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 
THAN FORTY-FIVE MILLION PESOS (PHP 45,000,000.00)B UT 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 afPetition] 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. CIVIL PROCEEDINGS 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 
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 (10) 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. INDEPENDENT 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." 
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) 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 
MAYBE; 
(e) The total amount of his government salary and other proper earnings and 
incomes from legitimately acquired property; and 
(f) 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. 
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,