NATIONAL SERVICE

TRAINING PROGRAM
(NSTP)
Citizenship Training

STUDENT’S ACTIVITY SHEET WEEK 3-DAY 6

Integrity and Anti -Graft and Corrupt Materials

Practices (RA 3019)
Computer, Student Activity Sheet, MS
Intended Learning Outcomes Access

At the end of the unit, the pre-service teacher (PST) References

must have:
http://rubistar.4teachers.org/index.php?scr
1. Express understanding on the een=ShowRubric&rubric_id=1175361&&ski
responsibilities of a Filipino citizen n=es&lang=es&
2. Know the implementing rules and
regulations of graft and corruption. https://www.neda.gov.ph/wp-
3. Express ones idea of being content/uploads/2013/10/RA-3019-Anti-
responsible citizen of the Philippines. Graft-and-Corrupt-Practices-Act.pdf

Name: Riza Mae Bayo Course, Year and Section: BSED-MATH 1A Program: Day

Time Element: 4 hours

CaptivaTe yoUrself! (Preparation)

Corruption is very rampant in our society. It is a common denominator not only

in the different nations but also in different sectors of the society. It is a main problem
that causes the community to collapse especially economic deterioration that makes the
lives of the people difficult.

Introductory Activity: Article reading from a published research entitled

Connect To Understand (Presentation)

Section 1. Statement of policy. It is the policy of the Philippine Government, in line

with the principle that a public office is a public trust, to repress certain acts of public
officers and private persons alike which constitute graft or corrupt practices or which
may lead thereto.

CTU-DANAO CAMPUS | CITIZENSHIP TRAINING 1

Section 2. Definition of terms. As used in this Act, that term (a) "Government" includes
the national government, the local governments, the government-owned and
government-controlled corporations, and all other instrumentalities or agencies of the
Republic of the Philippines and their branches. (b) "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 as defined in the preceding subparagraph. (c) "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. (d) "Person" includes natural and
juridical persons, unless the context indicates otherwise.

Section 3. Corrupt practices of public officers. In addition to acts or omissions of public

officers already penalized 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 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. (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 other part, 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, 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 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 shall apply 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 a reasonable time on any matter

CTU-DANAO CAMPUS | CITIZENSHIP TRAINING 2

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. (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) Director or
indirectly having financing 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 any law from having any interest. (i) Directly
or indirectly becoming interested, for personal gain, or having a 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 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
account of 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 the Government.

Section 4. Prohibition on private individuals. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person
having family or close personal relation with any public official to capitalize or exploit or
take advantage of such family or close personal relation by directly or indirectly
requesting or receiving any present, gift or material or pecuniary advantage from any
other person having some business, transaction, application, request or contract with
the government, in which such public official has to intervene. Family relation shall
include the spouse or relatives by consanguinity or affinity in the third civil degree. The
word "close personal relation" shall include close personal friendship, social and
fraternal connections, and professional employment all giving rise to intimacy which

CTU-DANAO CAMPUS | CITIZENSHIP TRAINING 3

assures free access to such public officer. (b) It shall be unlawful for any person
knowingly to induce or cause any public official to commit any of the offenses defined
in Section 3 hereof.

Section 5. Prohibition on certain relatives. It shall be unlawful for the spouse or for
any relative, by consanguinity or affinity, within the third civil degree, of the President
of the Philippines, the Vice-President of the Philippines, the President of the Senate, or
the Speaker of the House of Representatives, to intervene, directly or indirectly, in any
business, transaction, contract or application with the Government: Provided, That this
section shall not apply to any person who, prior to the assumption of office of any of
the above 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,
nor to 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 requisites
provided by law, or rules or regulations issued pursuant to law, nor to any act lawfully
performed in an official capacity or in the exercise of a profession.

Section 6. Prohibition on Members of Congress. It shall be unlawful hereafter for any

Member of the Congress during the term for which he has been elected, 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 him
previously approved or adopted by the Congress during the same term. The provision
of this section shall apply to any other 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. It shall likewise be unlawful for such
member of Congress or other public officer, who, having such interest prior to the
approval of such law or resolution authored or recommended by him, continues for
thirty days after such approval to retain such interest.

Section 7. Statement of assets and liabilities. Every public officer, within thirty days
after the approval of this Act or after assuming office, and within the month of January
of every other year thereafter, as well as upon the expiration of his term of office, or
upon his resignation or separation from office, shall prepare and file with the office of
the corresponding Department Head, or in the case of a Head of Department or chief of
an independent office, with the Office of the President, or in the case of members of
the Congress and the officials and employees thereof, with the Office of the Secretary
of the corresponding House, a true detailed and sworn statement of assets and

CTU-DANAO CAMPUS | CITIZENSHIP TRAINING 4

liabilities, including a statement of the amounts and sources of his income, the amounts
of his personal and family expenses and the amount of income taxes paid for the next
preceding calendar year: Provided, That public officers assuming office less than two
months before the end of the calendar year, may file their statements in the following
months of January.

Section 8. Dismissal due to unexplained wealth. If in accordance with the provisions of

Republic Act Numbered One thousand three hundred seventy-nine, a public official has
been found to have acquired during his incumbency, whether in his name or in 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, that fact shall be a ground for
dismissal or removal. Properties in the name of the spouse and unmarried children of
such public official may be taken into consideration, when their acquisition through
legitimate means cannot be satisfactorily shown. Bank deposits shall be taken into
consideration in the enforcement of this section, notwithstanding any provision of law
to the contrary.

Section 9. Penalties for violations. (a) Any public officer or private person committing
any of the unlawful acts or omissions enumerated in Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of this Act
shall be punished with imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than ten
years, perpetual disqualification from public office, and confiscation or forfeiture in favor
of the Government of any prohibited interest and unexplained wealth manifestly out of
proportion to his salary and other lawful income. Any complaining party at whose
complaint the criminal prosecution was initiated shall, in case of conviction of the
accused, be entitled to recover in the criminal action with priority over the forfeiture in
favor of the Government, the amount of money or the thing he may have given to the
accused, or the value of such thing. (b) Any public officer violation any of the provisions
of Section 7 of this Act shall be punished by a fine of not less than one hundred pesos
nor more than one thousand pesos, or by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by
both such fine and imprisonment, at the discretion of the Court. The violation of said
section proven in a proper administrative proceeding shall be sufficient cause for
removal or dismissal of a public officer, even if no criminal prosecution is instituted
against him.

Section 10. Competent court. Until otherwise provided by law, all prosecutions under
this Act shall be within the original jurisdiction of the proper Court of First Instance.

CTU-DANAO CAMPUS | CITIZENSHIP TRAINING 5

Section 11. Prescription of offenses. All offenses punishable under this Act shall
prescribe in ten years.

Section 12. Termination of office. No public officer shall be allowed to resign or retire
pending an investigation, criminal or administrative, or pending a prosecution against
him, for any offense under this Act or under the provisions of the Revised Penal Code
on bribery.

Section 13. Suspension and loss of benefits. Any public officer against whom any
criminal prosecution under a valid information under this Act or under the provisions of
the Revised Penal Code on bribery is pending in court, shall be suspended from office.
Should he be convicted by final judgment, he shall lose all retirement or gratuity
benefits under any law, but if he is acquitted, he shall be entitled to reinstatement and
to the salaries and benefits which he failed to receive during suspension, unless in the
meantime administrative proceedings have been filed against him.

Section 14. Exception. Unsolicited gifts or presents of small or insignificant value

offered or given as a mere ordinary token of gratitude or friendship according to local
customs or usage, shall be excepted from the provisions of this Act.

Nothing in this Act shall be interpreted to prejudice or prohibit the practice of any
profession, lawful trade or occupation by any private person or by any public officer
who under the law may legitimately practice his profession, trade or occupation, during
his incumbency, except where the practice of such profession, trade or occupation
involves conspiracy with any other person or public official to commit any of the
violations penalized in this Act.

Section 15. Separability clause. If any provision of this Act or the application of such
provision to any person or circumstances is declared invalid, the remainder of the Act or
the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected
by such declaration.

Section 16. Effectivity. This Act shall take effect on its approval, but for the purpose of
determining unexplained wealth, all property acquired by a public officer since he
assumed office shall be taken into consideration.

CaptivaTe yoUrself!

CTU-DANAO CAMPUS | CITIZENSHIP TRAINING 6

Introductory Activity

Direction: Read the Article about Eight Questions about Corruption by Jacob
Svensson and make your own reflection.

Eight Questions about Corruption Jakob Svensson Some years ago I interviewed the
chief executive officer of a successful Thai manufacturing firm as part of a pilot survey
project. While trying to figure out a good way to quantify the firm’s experience with
government regulations and corruption in the foreign trade sector, the CEO exclaimed:
―I hope to be reborn as a custom official.‖ When a well-paid CEO wishes for a job with
low official pay in the government sector, corruption is almost surely a problem! The
most devastating forms of corruption include the diversion and outright theft of funds
for public programs and the damage caused by firms and individuals that pay bribes to
avoid health and safety regulations intended to benefit the public. Examples abound. A
conservative estimate is that the former President of Zaire, Mobutu Sese Seko, looted
the treasury of some $5 billion—an amount equal to the country’s entire external debt
at the time he was ousted in 1997. The funds allegedly embezzled by the former
presidents of Indonesia and Philippines, Mohamed Suharto and Ferdinand Marcos, are
estimated to be two and seven times higher (Transparency International, 2004). In the
Goldenberg scam in Kenya in the early 1990s, the Goldenberg firm received as much as
$1 billion from the government as part of an export compensation scheme for fictitious
exports of commodities of which Kenya either produced little (gold) or nothing at all
(diamonds) (―Public Inquiry into Kenya Gold Scam,‖ 2003). An internal IMF report found
that nearly $1 billion of oil revenues, or $77 per capita, vanished from Angolan state
coffers in 2001 alone (Pearce, 2002). This amount was about three times the value of
the humanitarian aid received by Angola in 2001—in a country where three-quarters of
the population survives on less than $1 a day and where one y Jakob Svensson is
Assistant Professor, Institute for International Economic Studies, Stockholm University,
Stockholm, Sweden. He is also Senior Economist, Development Research Group, World
Bank, Washington, D.C.; and Research Fellow, Center for Economic Policy Research,
London, United Kingdom. His e-mail address is jakob.svensson@iies.su.se. Journal of
Economic Perspectives—Volume 19, Number 3—Summer 2005—Pages 19–42 in three
children dies before the age of five. In Turkey, the effect of the earthquake that took
thousands of lives in 2004 would have been much less severe, according to the
government of Turkey, if contractors had not been able to pay bribes to build homes
with substandard materials (Kinzer, 1999). Extrapolating from firm and household
survey data, the World Bank Institute estimates that total bribes in a year are about $1

CTU-DANAO CAMPUS | CITIZENSHIP TRAINING 7

trillion (Rose-Ackerman, 2004). While the margin of error in this estimate is large,
anything even in that general magnitude ($1 trillion is about 3 percent of world GDP)
would qualify as an enormous issue. This paper will discuss eight frequently asked
questions about public corruption: 1) What is corruption? 2) Which countries are the
most corrupt? 3) What are the common characteristics of countries with high
corruption? 4) What is the magnitude of corruption? 5) Do higher wages for
bureaucrats reduce corruption? 6) Can competition reduce corruption? 7) Why have
there been so few (recent) successful attempts to fight corruption? 8) Does corruption
adversely affect growth? These questions are not meant to be exhaustive, and readers
interested in additional discussion might begin by turning to the reviews by Bardhan
(1997) and Rose-Ackerman (1999). What is Corruption? A common definition of public
corruption is the misuse of public office for private gain. Misuse, of course, typically
involves applying a legal standard. Corruption defined this way would capture, for
example, the sale of government property by government officials, kickbacks in public
procurement, bribery and embezzlement of government funds. Corruption is an
outcome—a reflection of a country’s legal, economic, cultural and political institutions.
Corruption can be a response to either beneficial or harmful rules. For example,
corruption appears in response to benevolent rules when individuals pay bribes to avoid
penalties for harmful conduct or when monitoring of rules is incomplete—as in the case
of theft. Conversely, corruption can also arise because bad policies or inefficient
institutions are put in place to collect bribes from individuals seeking to get around
them (Djankov, LaPorta, Lopez-de-Silanes and Shleifer, 2003). A number of parallels
have been proposed for thinking about corruption. Although each of these parallels can
be illuminating in certain ways, none of them capture the phenomena perfectly. As one
parallel, corruption is often thought of as like a tax or a fee. Bribes, like taxes, create a
wedge between the actual and privately appropriated marginal product of capital.
However, along with the obvious point that bribes bring no money to government
coffers, bribes differ from taxes in other ways. Bribes involve higher transaction costs
than taxes, because of the uncertainty and secrecy that necessarily accompany bribe
payments (Shleifer and Vishny, 1993). Corrupt contracts are not enforceable in courts.
An official may renege on an agreement with 20 Journal of Economic Perspectives the
bribe-payer or demand another bribe for the same service (Boycko, Shleifer and Vishny,
1995). Bribing also has parallels to lobbying in the form of campaign contributions or
influence buying through other means, but again, they are not perfect substitutes
(Harstad and Svensson, 2004). Consider a situation in which a country has enacted
tariffs or licence requirements for imports that affect all firms in a sector. A firm can
avoid paying the tariff or buying a licence by bribing a custom official. Alternatively,
firms in the sector may collectively lobby the government to provide the license for free

CTU-DANAO CAMPUS | CITIZENSHIP TRAINING 8

or to remove the tariff. One difference between bribery and lobbying in this case is that
a change in the trade regime through lobbying affects all firms in the sector, as well as
future entrants. However, the return to bribing is typically firm specific, although
potential externalities may arise both for other firms and consumers. A second
difference is that a change in the trade regime through lobbying tends to be more
permanent, because there is some cost to re-enacting the original law, while a
bureaucrat cannot credibly commit not to ask for bribes in the future. A third difference
is that decisions about government rule making involve officials weighing the benefits of
income from lobbying against the cost to the government of a rule change, while
decisions about bribes are made by individual public officials who consider their private
costs and benefits. Finally, unlike bribing, where firms weight the private benefit and
cost of the action, lobbying involves joint actions with associated collective action
problems. The question why firms choose to lobby or bribe, and the consequences of
this choice, is analyzed in Harstad and Svensson (2004). Corruption, or more precisely
bribes, is not the same as rent-seeking, although the terms are often interchanged.
Rent seeking is the socially costly pursuit of rents, often created by governmental
interventions in the economy (Tollison, 1997), while bribes are technically a transfer. No
definition of corruption is completely clear-cut. The emphasis in this paper is on public
corruption, but corruption can also take the form of collusion between firms or misuse
of corporate assets that imposes costs on consumers and investors. Some activities will
hover on a legal borderline: for example, legal payments that involve lobbying,
campaign contributions or gifts can seem quite close to illegal payments that constitute
bribery, or legal offers of postretirement jobs in private sector firms to officials and
politicians assigned to regulate these same firms can seem quite close to illegal
kickbacks. Which Countries are the Most Corrupt? Measuring corruption across countries
is a difficult task, both due to the secretive nature of corruption and the variety of forms
it takes. However, since corruption reflects an underlying institutional framework,
different forms of corruption are likely to be correlated. The past decade has seen an
exponential growth in cross-country studies on corruption. Three types of corruption
measures have been exploited in the Jakob Svensson 21 literature. The first type, used
initially by Knack and Keefer (1995) and Mauro (1995), is based on indicators of
corruption assembled by private risk-assessment firms. Of these, the corruption
indicator published in the International Country Risk Guide has become the most
popular, due to better coverage across time and countries. According to its creators, the
International Country Risk Guide’s corruption indicator captures the likelihood that high
government officials will demand special payments and the extent to which illegal
payments are expected throughout government tiers.1 The second set of variables is
averages of ratings reported by a number of perception-based sources. Among

CTU-DANAO CAMPUS | CITIZENSHIP TRAINING 9

policymakers, the Corruption Perception Index produced by Transparency International
is the most widely disseminated. The source of this index varies from year to year, but
the data released in October 2004 is based on 18 rankings from 12 institutions.2
According to Transparency International, the essential conditions for inclusion are that a
source must provide an ordinal measurement, or ranking, of nations and that the data
must measure the overall extent of corruption and not the expected impact. For this
reason, the corruption indicator published in the International Country Risk Guide is not
included because, according to Transparency International, it does not determine a
country’s level of corruption, but the political risk involved in corruption. These two
issues can differ considerably, depending on, for example, whether public tolerance
toward corruption is high or low. Kaufmann, Kraay and Mastruzzi (2003) derive a
complementary measure, Control of Corruption, drawn from a large set of data sources.
They have a broader definition of corruption and include most cross-country indices
reporting ranking of countries on some aspect of corruption. They also use a different
strategy than Transparency International to aggregate the corruption indicators. In the
end, definitions and aggregation choice seem to matter only marginally.3 The simple
correlation between Control of Corruption (from 2002) and the Corruption Perceptions
Index (from 2003) is 0.97 and the correlation between Control of Corruption or the
Corruption Perceptions and the corruption scores from the International Country Risk
Guide (from 2001) is 0.75. The main difference between the three indicators is which
countries and years are covered.4 1 The data are produced by Political Risk Services—a
private firm providing risk assess ww1.worldbank.org/publicsector/anticorrupt/Svensson
%20Eight%20Questions%20Abo ut%20Corruption%20(JEP%20Vol%2019,%20No
%203

CommiT and ConqUer! (Practice)

Direction : Watch the youtube videos about graft and corruption and make your own
reaction. Compare also the government practices from provinces, cities and barangay
and give examples about issues of corruption.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5X61tlAAihc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R82hnLdn6m4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gW8sMJJUNv0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApYlTJKZdeg

CTU-DANAO CAMPUS | CITIZENSHIP TRAINING 10

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9P9IGiox79U

As I’ve watched the videos given above about graft and corruption , I’ve learned things
I should be aware of about our government and why graft and corruption existed today. By
watching the videos, I was utterly surprised to know that graft and corruption already
existed from our ancestors and existed the same as the emergence of our republic. I was
flabbergasted to know that the president I knew such as Manuel Quezon, Fidel Ramos,
Aquino's, Marcos and others are all in alleged graft and/or corruption. Knowing that way
before the colonization of Spaniards with graft and corruption already influenced the
Filipino with these acts is such disappointing because this only prove that graft and
corruption would be difficult to erase in the Filipino people.
Listening to the answers of the Filipino about the graft and corruption in the Philippines
like what the video showed makes me sad about how Filipino badly think about our
government, though it is a reality that I cannot ignore. I think I was a bit disappointed to
them because I feel like they really hate their own country to the core and they seem like
hopeless people because they seem to never want to make their own country to become
better and they’re just contented of what our country have. Going back, most government
officials in the Philippines was connected with alleged graft and corruption and I believe
this thought was already carved in the mind of all Filipino people that’s why it’s hard to
trust the words and promises of all government officials especially during elections because
they mostly result to either committing graft or corruption.

CrediT and CUlminate! (Performance)

Role Playing Activity: The students will portray signs of corruption that are
happening in the community.
I. Role-Playing Rubric

CATEGORY 4 3 2 1
Content Great job! You Your role-play is The role-play is The role-play is
offered creative on-topic, but it is somewhat off- completely off-
new insights on missing some topic. Pay more topic, as if your
the topic! creativity and attention to the group did not
insight. directions next even read the
time! directions.
Roles Excellent work! Everyone in your For the most part, Your group failed
Every member of group stayed in your group stayed to stay in
your group stayed character, but in character. Next character,
11 and it
in character, and some members time, spend more looked like you
it was clear you didn't seem to time preparing for had not prepared
 took your roles really be "into" how the for how the
seriously. what they were characters might characters might
doing. think or act. think or act.
Preparation Your group did an Your group Your group needs It seems that
excellent job obviously spent to spend more your group used
preparing and some time time preparing for the preparation
rehearsing your preparing for the the role-play. time for
role-play, and it role-play, but Reading lines something else.
shows - some rehearsal from a script is a
everything went might have sure sign you're
very smoothly. helped things run not prepared.
more smoothly.

CTU-DANAO CAMPUS | CITIZENSHIP TRAINING

Overall Excellent! Your Good! Your Keep working! Argh! I expect
Impression presentation was presentation, Don't forget that, much better work
entertaining and while it was fun to though the from you next
informative! watch, could have process is time.
been more entertaining,
informative. you're also
supposed to learn
something from
it.

CTU-DANAO CAMPUS | CITIZENSHIP TRAINING 12