PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO.

749 GRANTING IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION TO GIVERS OF BRIBES AND OTHER GIFTS AND TO THEIR
ACCOMPLICES IN BRIBERY AND OTHER GRAFT CASES AGAINST PUBLIC OFFICERS
Persons Granted Immunity
Any person who voluntarily gives information and willingly testifies against public official or employee for any violation of :
1. Articles 210, 211 and 212 of RPC;
2. R.A. No. 3019, as amended;
3. Section 345 of the Internal Revenue Code and other provisions of the said Codes penalizing abuse or dishonesty on the part
of the public officials concerned;
4. Other laws, rules and regulations punishing acts of grafts, corruption, and other forms of official abuse (Sec 1).

This immunity may be enjoyed by such informant or witness notwithstanding that he offered or gave the bribe or gift to the public
official or is an accomplice for such gift or bribe-giving. Provided, the following conditions concur:
1. The information must refer to consummated violations of any of the above-mentioned provisions of law, rules and regulations;
2. The information and testimony are necessary for the conviction of the accused public officer;
3. Such information and testimony are not yet in the possession of the State;
4. Such information and testimony can be corroborated on its material points; and 5. The informant or witness has not been
previously convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude (Sec1).
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 3019 As amended by RA 3047, PD 77, & BP 195 Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
Definition of Terms
Government
The national government, the local government, the GOCCs and all other instrumentalities or agencies of the government.
Public officer
Includes elective and appointive officials and employees, permanent or temporary, whether in the classified or unclassified or
exempt service receiving compensation, even nominal from the government.
Receiving any gift
Includes the act of accepting directly or indirectly a gift from a person other than a member of the public officer's immediate
family, in behalf of himself or of any member of his family or relative within the fourth civil degree, either by consanguinity or
affinity, even on the occasion of a family celebration or national festivity like Christmas, if the value of the gift is under the
circumstances manifestly excessive.

In the case of Pecho vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 111399, November 14, 1994, the SC held that violation of Section 3(e) thereof is
punishable only in its consummated stage. In said case, the SC said that in case of special laws such as RA 3019, the application of
Article 6 in relation to Article 10 of the Revised Penal Code will depend on how such laws define the offenses therein.

Corrupt Practices of Public Officials:

The corrupt practices herein enumerated are in addition to acts or omissions of public officers already penalized by existing law.
1. Persuading, inducing or influencing another public officer to perform an act constituting a violation of rules 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 offense.
Persons Liable:
a. Public officer who persuades, induces, or influences another public officer.
b. Public officer who is persuaded, induced or influenced.

*Requesting or receiving any gift, present, or benefit is not required in this provision (Reyes, p.399).

2. 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 other party, wherein the public officer in
his official capacity has to intervene under the law.
*The lack of demand is immaterial. After all, Sec. 3(b) of RA 3019 uses the word or between requesting and receiving.
*There must be a clear intention on the part of the public officer to take the gift so offered and consider it as his or her own
property from then on. Mere physical receipt unaccompanied by any other sign, circumstance or act to show acceptance is not
sufficient to lead the court to conclude that the crime has been committed (Peligrino v. People, G.R. No. 136266, August 31,
2001).
*This section refers to a public officer whose official intervention is required by law in a contract or transaction (Jaravata v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. L- 56170, January 31, 1984).
*A transaction, like a contract, is one which involves some consideration as in credit transactions (Soriano v. Sandiganbayan,
G.R. No. L-65952, July 31, 1984).
3. Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift, present or other pecuniary or material benefit, for himself 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 Sec. 13 of this Act.

4. 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 1 year after its termination.

5. 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 shall apply to officers and employees of offices or Government
corporations charged with the grant of licenses or permits or other concessions.
*To be held liable under said section, the act of the accused which caused undue injury must have been done with manifest
partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence.
*The undue injury must be specified, quantified and proven to the point of moral certainty
*If the act was committed with malice, the crime committed may be that under Art. 207 (malicious delay in the administration
of justice) of the RPC.

Gross negligence
Negligence characterized by the want of even slight care, acting or omitting to act in a situation where there is a duty to act,
not inadvertently but willfully and intentionally with a conscious indifference to consequences in so far as other persons may
be affected. It is the omission of that care which even inattentive and thoughtless men never fail to take on their property
(Alejandro v. People, G.R. No. 81031, February 20, 1989). In case of public officials, there is gross negligence when a breach of
duty is flagrant and palpable (Quibal v. Sandiganbayan, G. R. No. 109991, May 22, 1995).

*The last sentence of this paragraph is intended to make clear the inclusion of officers and employees of offices or government
corporations which, under the ordinary concept of public officer may not come within the term. It is a strained construction of
the provision to read it as applying exclusively to public officers charged with the duty of granting license or permits or other
concessions (Mejorada v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. L-51065-72 June 30, 1987).

6. Neglecting or refusing, after due demand or request, without sufficient justification, to act within reasonable time on any
matter pending before him for the purpose of obtaining, directly or indirectly, from any person interested in the matter some
pecuniary or material benefit or advantage, or for the purpose of favoring his own interest or giving undue advantage in favor of
or discriminating against any other interested party.

7. 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.
*It is not necessary that the public officer profited or will profit from the contract or transaction. It is the commission of the act
as defined by law and not the character thereof that determines whether the provision has been violated (Marcos v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 126995, October 6, 1998).
 8. Directly or indirectly having financial or pecuniary interest in any business, contract or transaction in connection with which he
intervenes or takes part in his official capacity, or in which he is prohibited by the Constitution or by law from having any interest.
What is contemplated in this section is the actual intervention in the transaction in which one has financial or pecuniary interest
in order that liability may attach (Trieste v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. L-70332- 43, November 13, 1986).

9. or indirectly becoming interested, for personal gain, or having material interest in any transaction or 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 transactions or acts by the board, panel or group to which they belong.

10. 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 qualified or
entitled.
*Requesting or receiving any gift, present or benefit is not required in this provision.

11. Divulging valuable information of a confidential character, acquired by his office or by him on account of his official position
to unauthorized persons, or releasing such information in advance of its authorized release date.
If damage was caused, Article 229 (revelation of secrets by an officer) under the RPC is committed.

Prohibition on Private Individuals

1. Taking advantage of family or close personal relation with public official who has to intervene in some business, transaction,
application, request or contract of the government with any other person, by directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any
present, gift, or material or pecuniary advantage from such public official.
Family relation
Includes the spouse or relatives by consanguinity or affinity in the third civil degree.
Close personal relation
Includes close personal friendship, social and fraternal connections, and professional employment all giving rise to intimacy
which assures free access to such public officer.

2. Knowingly inducing or causing any public official to commit any of the offenses defined in Section 3.
Prohibition on certain relatives
The spouse or any relative, by consanguinity or affinity, within the 3RD CIVIL DEGREE, of the President, the VicePresident, Senate
President, or the Speaker of the House of Representatives is prohibited to intervene directly or indirectly, in any business,
transaction, contract or application with the government.

Exceptions to the provisions:

a. Any person who, prior to the assumption of office of any of those officials to whom he is related, has been already dealing
with the government along the same line of business, nor to any transaction, contract or application already existing or
pending at the time of such assumption of public office.
b. Any application filed by him, the approval of which is not discretionary on the part of the official or officials concerned but
depends upon compliance with the requisites provided by law, or rules or regulations issued pursuant to law.
c. Any act lawfully performed in an official capacity or in the exercise of a profession.

Prohibition on Members of Congress

Members of Congress during their term are prohibited to acquire or receive any personal pecuniary interest in any specific
business enterprise which will be directly and particularly favored or benefited by any law or resolution authored by them.
The prohibition shall also apply to any public officer who recommended the initiation in Congress of the enactment or adoption of
any law or resolution and acquires or receives any such interest during his incumbency.
The member of Congress or other public officer, who, having such interest prior to the approval of a law or resolution authored or
recommended by him, continues for thirty days after such approval to retain his interest also violates this section.

Prima facie evidence of and dismissal due to unexplained wealth

A public official who has been found to have acquired during his incumbency, whether in his name or the name of other persons,
an amount of property and/or money manifestly out of proportion to his salary and to his other lawful income.
Ground for forfeiture of unexplained wealth.

Prescription of offenses
15 years prescriptive period of all offenses under the Act.

Termination of office
No public officer is allowed to resign or retire:
1. Pending investigation, criminal or administrative or
2. Pending a prosecution against him
3. For any offense under the Act or under the provisions of the RPC on Bribery.
Suspension and loss of benefits
Any public officer against whom any criminal prosecution under a valid information under RA 3019 or the provisions of RPC on
bribery is pending in court, shall be suspended from office. If convicted by final judgment, he shall lose all retirement or gratuity
benefits, but if acquitted, he shall be entitled to reinstatement and salaries and benefits he failed to receive.
It is mandatory for the Court to place under preventive suspension a public officer accused before it. Imposition of suspension,
however, is not automatic or self-operative. A pre-condition is the existence of a valid information, determined at a pre-
suspension hearing. Once a proper determination of the validity of the information has been made, it becomes the ministerial
duty of the Court to issue the order of preventive suspension. (Segovia v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 124067, March 27, 1998)

Exception
Unsolicited gifts or presents of small or insignificant value offered or given as a mere ordinary token of gratitude of friendship
according to local custom or usage.
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7080 ANTI-PLUNDER ACT
Means or schemes to acquire ill-gotten wealth: (Sec.1 [d])
1. Through misappropriation, conversion, misuse or malversation of public funds or raids on the public treasury;
2. By receiving directly or indirectly, any commission, gift, share, percentage, kickbacks or any other form of pecuniary benefit
from any person and/or entity in connection with any government contract/project or by reason of his office/position;
3. By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition of assets belonging to the government;
4. By obtaining, receiving or accepting, directly or indirectly, any shares of stock, equity or any other form of interest or
participation including the promise of future employment in any business enterprise or undertaking;
5. By establishing agricultural, industrial or commercial monopolies or other combinations and/or implementing decrees and
orders intended to benefit particular persons or special interests;
6. By taking undue advantage of official position, authority, relationship, connection or influence to unjustly enrich himself or
themselves at the expense and to the damage and prejudice of the Filipino people and the Republic of the Philippines.

These should be committed by a combination or through a series of acts. There should be at least two acts otherwise the
accused should be charged with the particular crime committed and not with plunder. A COMBINATION means at least two acts of
a different category while a SERIES means at least two acts of the same category (Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560,
November 21, 2001).

Definition of the Crime of Plunder;

Plunder
A crime committed by any public officer, by himself or in connivance with his family, relatives by affinity or consanguinity,
business associates, subordinates or other persons, by amassing, accumulating or acquiring ill-gotten wealth in the aggregate
amount or total value of at least 50 million pesos.
Penalty: Reclusion Perpetua to Death

Mitigating and extenuating circumstances shall be considered by the courts in the imposition of penalty.

Rule of Evidence
It is NOT necessary to prove each and every criminal act done. A pattern of overt or criminal acts indicative of the over-all
unlawful scheme or conspiracy shall be sufficient.
PATTERN consists of at least a combination or series of overt or criminal acts enumerated in subsections (1) to (6) of Sec. 1(d)

Prescription of Crimes
The crime punishable under this Act shall prescribe in 20 years. However, the right of the State to recover properties unlawfully
acquired by public officers from them or from their nominees or transferees shall not be barred by prescription or laches or
estoppel.
Plunder is a crime malum in se because the constitutive crimes are mala in se. The elements of mens rea must be proven in a
prosecution for plunder (Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560, November 21, 2001)
ARTICLE 213 FRAUDS AGAINST THE TREASURY AND SIMILAR OF OFFENSES
Acts Punished:
1. By entering into an agreement with any interested party or speculator or making use of any other scheme, to defraud the
Government, in dealing with any person with regard to furnishing supplies, the making of contracts, or the adjustment or
settlement of accounts relating to public property or funds.
2. By demanding, directly or indirectly, the payment of sums different from or larger than those authorized by law, in the
collection of taxes, licenses, fees, and other imposts.
3. By failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided by law, for any sum of money collected by him officially, in the collection of
taxes, licenses, fees and other imposts.
4. By collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by way of payment or otherwise, things or objects of a nature different from
that provided by law, in the collection of taxes, licenses, fees and other imposts.

Elements of frauds against public treasury (Par. 1):

1. That the offender be a public officer;
2. That he should have taken advantage of his office, that is, he intervened in the transaction in his official capacity;
3. That he entered into an agreement with any interested party or speculator or made use of any other scheme with regard to
a. Furnishing supplies
b. The making of contracts, or
c. The adjustment or settlement of accounts relating to public property or funds
4. That the accused had intent to defraud the Government.

*The offender must have the duty as public officer to deal with any person with regard to furnishing supplies, making of contracts, or
the adjustment or settlement of accounts relating to public property or funds.
*This crime is consummated by merely entering into an agreement with any interested party or speculator or by merely making use
of a scheme to defraud the government. It is not necessary that the government is actually defrauded by reason of the transaction.
It is sufficient that the public officer who acted in his official capacity had the intent to defraud the Government.

Elements of illegal exactions (Pars. 2-4):

1. The offender is a public officer entrusted with the collection of taxes, licenses, fees and other imposts; and
2.He is guilty of any of the following acts or omissions:
a. Demanding, directly or indirectly, the payment of sums different from or larger than those authorized by law; or
b. Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided by law, for any sum of money collected by him officially; or
c. Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by way of payment or otherwise, things or objects of a nature different from
that provided by law.

*Mere demand for larger or different amount is sufficient to consummate a crime.

*When there is deceit in demanding a greater fee than that prescribed by law, the crime committed is estafa and not illegal
exaction.
*A tax collector who collected a sum larger than that authorized by law and spent the same is guilty of illegal exaction and
malversation.
*Officers or employees of the Bureau of Internal Revenue or Bureau of Customs are not covered by this article. The National Internal
Revenue Code or the Administrative Code applies.
ARTICLE 214 OTHER FRAUDS
Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer;
2. That he takes advantage of his official position; and
3. That he commits any of the frauds or deceits enumerated in Arts. 315 to 318 (estafa, other forms of swindling, swindling a
minor, and other deceits).

*The penalty (special disqualification) under this article is in addition to the penalties prescribed in the Articles violated.
*Not a crime but considered as a special aggravating circumstance.

ARTICLE 215 PROHIBITED TRANSACTIONS

Elements:
1. That the offender is an appointive public officer;
Examples: justices, judges or fiscals, employees engaged in the collection and administration of public funds
2. That he becomes interested, directly or indirectly, in any transaction of exchange or speculation;
3. That the transaction takes place within the territory subject to his jurisdiction; and
4. That he becomes interested in the transaction during his incumbency.

*The transaction must be one of exchange or speculation, such as buying and selling stocks, commodities, land, etc., hoping to take
advantage of an expected rise and fall in price.
*Purchasing of stocks or shares in a company is simply an investment and is not a violation of the article. But buying regularly
securities for resale is speculation.

ARTICLE 216 POSSESSION OF PROHIBITED INTEREST BY A PUBLIC OFFICER

Persons liable:
1. Public officer who, directly or indirectly, became interested in any contract or business in which it was his official duty to
intervene.
2. Experts, arbitrators, and private accountants who, in like manner, took part in any contract or transaction connected with the
estate or property in the appraisal, distribution or adjudication of which they had acted.
3. Guardians and executors with respect to the property belonging to their wards or the estate.

*Actual fraud is NOT necessary, the act is punished because of the possibility that fraud may be committed or that the officer or
private person (such as an expert, arbitrator, private accountant, guardian and executor) may place his own interest above that of
the government or party which he represents.
*Intervention must be by virtue of public office held. The official who intervenes in contracts which have no connection with his office
cannot commit the crime defined under this Article.