You are on page 1of 40


RA 7080
Explained to you in plain English.
Seen as a deterrent to
prevent public officials
from stealing money
from the government.
The Plunder Law was
passed in 1991 with the
most significant
signatory being one
Senator Joseph Estrada.
(d) Ill-gotten wealth
Ill-gotten wealth means any asset, property,
business enterprise or material possession of
any person within the purview of Section Two
(2) hereof, acquired by him directly or
indirectly through dummies, nominees,
agents, subordinates and/or business
associates by any combination or series of
the following means or similar schemes:
1 Through

misuse, or
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 or project or by reason of
the office or position of the public officer
3 By the
illegal fraudulent
conveyanceor or
disposition of
belonging to the National Government or any
of its subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities or
government-owned or -controlled corporations and
their subsidiaries;
By obtaining,receiving, or
shares of stock,equity
or any other form , of
interest or
including the promise of future employment
in any business enterprise or undertaking;
5 By
industrial, or
or other combinations and/or
implementation of decrees and orders
intended to benefit particular persons
or special interests; or
6 By UNDUE of
official position,
connection, or
to unjustly enrich himself or themselves at
the expense and to the damage and prejudice of
the Filipino people and the Republic of the
Differentiated from
There is unexplained wealth when a public
official has been found to have acquired
during his incumbency, an amount of property
and/or money manifestly out of proportion to
his salary and to his other lawful income.
WHAT IS It is a crime committed
PLUNDER? any public
who, by himself or
in connivance with
members of hisfamily
relatives by affinity or ,
or other
,accumulates, ILL-
through a combination or series of overt or
criminal acts as described in Section 1(d)
WHAT IS It is a crime committed
PLUNDER? any public who
in the aggregate amount or
total value of at least Fifty
million pesos
WHAT IS It is punished by death.

PLUNDER? with the said public officer in

Any person who participated

the commission of an offense

contributing to the crime of
plunder shall likewise be
punished for such offense.
In the imposition of penalties, the
WHAT IS degree of participation and the
attendance of mitigating and
PLUNDER?extenuating circumstances, as
provided by the Revised Penal
Code, shall be considered by the
The court shall declare any and
all ill-gotten wealth and their
interests and other incomes and
assets including the properties
and shares of stocks derived from
the deposit or investment thereof
forfeited in favor of the
In the original version of RA 7080, the offender
was liable only if the aggregate amount
amassed is at least Seventy-five million pesos
(P75,000,000.00) with the corresponding
penalty of life imprisonment with perpetual
absolute disqualification from holding any
public office. However,
RA 7659 (The Death Penalty Law)amended
Section 2 of RA 7080, and lowered the amount
to Fifty million pesos and increased the
imposable penalty to death.
Committed when a person performs two or
more acts under different categories or
classifications in Sec. 1(d) of RA 7080.

the heart of
the plunder SERIES
Committed when a person performs two or
more acts under the same categories or
classifications in Sec. 1(d) of RA 7080.
x x x x under Sec. 1 (d) of the law, a'pattern'consists of at least a
combination or series of overt or criminal acts enumerated in
subsections (1) to (6) of Sec. 1 (d).Secondly, pursuant to Sec. 2 of
the law, the pattern of overt or criminal acts is directed towards a
common purpose or goal which is to enable thepublic officer to
amass, accumulate or acquire ill-gotten wealth.And thirdly, there must
either be an 'overall unlawful scheme'or'conspiracy'to achieve said
common goal.As commonly understood, the term 'overall unlawful
scheme' indicates a 'general plan of action or method' which the
principal accused and public officer and others conniving with him
follow to achieve the aforesaid common goal. In the alternative, if
there is no such overall scheme or where the schemes or methods
used by multiple accused vary, the overt or criminal acts must form
part of a conspiracy to attain a common goal.


On April 4, 2001, nearly 3 months after his
removal from office, former President Joseph
Ejercito-Estrada, his son Jinggoy Estrada and 6
Assail its others, were charged with plunder.
The Estradas were the first elected officials to be
1. Vague so charged. Jinggoy Estrada was the first
incumbent elected official to be sued. He was the
2. Dispenses mayor of San Juan City at the time the plunder
reasonable doubt case was filed.
President Estrada was accused of amassing a
3. Abolishes the combined P4 billion (or around $80 million in
element of mens rea 2001), mainly from juetengpayola(pay-offs) and
misappropriation of tobacco excise tax funds.
Six years later, on September 12, 2007, Estrada
was found guilty of plunder, and sentenced to life
Joseph Estrada v.
in prison. His son Jinggoy and lawyer Edward
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
148560. November 19, 2001 Serapio were acquitted.

NO. RA 7080 is

Separate graft cases were filed
against them and 45 more
Janet Lim Napoles individuals. All in all, 54 have been
Jinggoy Estrada P183 M charged before the
Juan Ponce Enrile P172
M They are all accused of pocketing
Ramon Revilla, Jr. P242
kickbacks through an elaborate
M scheme to divert lawmakers' pork
barrel to either non-existent or
incomplete government projects.
PLUNDER CASE Focused on the senators
GRAFT CASE illegal
diversion of their development
funds to fake non-
governmental organizations.
Looked at the senators One of the grounds for
commissions from impeachment. It is also
questionable projects bailable.
financed via their
development assistance Public officer cannot retire or
funds. resign during the pendency of
any criminal or administrative
Non-bailable offense. case with relation to graft.
On March 5, 2004, an P82-million (or around $1.5-million)
plunder case was filed against 20 public works officials and 10
private individuals over alleged "ghost repairs" of Department
of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) vehicles.
Their plunder case was dismissed in January 2005, but
separate estafa charges have been filed against most of
On March 19, 2009, a P74-million plunder case (or approx.
$1.55 million on that year) was filed against former finance
undersecretary Antonio Belicena, 3 members of the Chingkoe
family, and 3 other finance officials over a tax credit scam
that took place from 1995 to 1997.
The case was dismissed in March 2011 by the Sandiganbayan
for lack of probable cause. The Office of the Ombudsman has
filed an appeal before the Supreme Court. In addition, the
accused are still facing separate graft, estafa, and falsification
April 6, 2005 - A P303-million ($5.5-million) plunder case was
filed against Armed Forces of the Philippines comptroller Maj.
General Carlos Garcia and 4 family members over alleged ill-
gotten wealth. Months later, a court martial found him guilty
of misdeclaration of his assets.
In 2010, Garcia posted bail and was released after securing a
plea bargain agreement with the Office of the Ombudsman,
allowing Garcia to plead guilty to lesser offenses.
July 4, 2011 - A P266-million ($6.1-million) plunder case was
filed against agriculture secretary Luis Lorenzo,
undersecretary Jocelyn "Jocjoc" Bolante, assistant secretary
Ibarra Poliquit, and 6 others over the fertilizer fund scam,
which allegedly diverted P728 million of funds for fertilizers to
the 2004 presidential campaign of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.
July 16, 2012 - Arroyo became the second former president to
be charged with plunder. The Office of the Ombudsman filed
a P366-million ($8.7-million) plunder case against Arroyo, 7
Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) officials, and two
Commission on Audit officials over alleged misuse of PCSO
intelligence funds.
In October 2013, another plunder complaint was filed against
Arroyo, this timeover the misuse of the discretionary
Malampaya fund. Included in the charge sheet are alleged pork
barrel scam mastermind Janet Lim Napoles, political liaison
Ruby Tuason, and many others. The accused have yet to be
indicted in connection with Malampaya.
Is there a prescriptive period
in prosecuting someone with
Yes. The crime punishable under R.A. 7080 prescribes
in twenty (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,
laches, or estoppel.
Rule of Jurisdiction
Until otherwise provided by law, all prosecutions under this
Act shall be within the original jurisdiction of the

The Supreme Courtclarifiedthat the Sandiganbayan has no

jurisdiction over the crime of plunder unless committed by
public officials and employees occupying the positions with
Salary Grade 27 or higher, under the Compensation and
Position Classification Act of 1989 (Republic Act No. 6758) in
relation to their office.
Rule of Evidence
For purposes of establishing the crime of plunder, it shall not
be necessary to prove each and every criminal act done by
the accused in furtherance of the scheme or conspiracy to
amass, accumulate or acquire ill-gotten wealth, it being
sufficient to establish beyond reasonable doubt a pattern of
overt or criminal acts indicative of the overall unlawful
scheme or conspiracy.
Suspension and Loss of
Any public officer against whom any criminal prosecution
under a valid information under this Act whatever stage of
execution and mode of participation, 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 other benefits which he
failed to receive during suspension, unless in the meantime,
administrative proceedings have been filed against him.
Bar Questions
City Engr. A, is the city engineer and the Chairman of the Bids and Awards
Committee (BAC) of the City of Kawawa. In 2009, the City of Kawawa, through an
ordinance,allotted the amount ofP100 million for the construction of a road
leading to the poblacion. City Engr. A instead, diverted the construction of the
road leading to his farm. Investigation further showed that he accepted money in
the amount ofP10 million each from three (3) contending bidders, who eventually
lost in the bidding.

Audit report likewise showed that service vehicles valued atP2 million could not
be accounted for although reports showed that these were lent to City Engr. As
authorized drivers but the same were never returned. Further, there were funds
under City Engr. As custody amounting toP10 million which were found to be
missing and could not be accounted for. In another project, he was instrumentalin
awarding a contract for the construction of a city school building costingP10
million to a close relative, although the lowest bid wasP8 million. Investigation
also revealed that City Engr. A has a net worth of more thanP50 million, which
was way beyond his legitimate income. (8%)
(A) If you are the Ombudsman, what charge or
charges will you file against City Engr. A?

(B) Suppose the discovered net worth of City

Engr. A is less thanP50 million, will your answer
still be the same?
(A) The following charges should be filed against City Engr. A:

1) Technical Malversation for the use of the P100 million for another
public purpose which is the construction of a road leading to to his
farm which is not the intended public purpose for which the said
amount was allotted for;
2) Indirect bribery for the acceptance of the amount of P10 million from
the 3 contending bidders by reason of office as there was no condition
imposed in the acceptance of City Engr. A of the said amount;
3) Malversation committed by allowing his drivers to use the service
vehicles. The fact that the said service vehicles cannot be accounted
for /returned upon demand prima facie shows that the same were
misappropriated/converted for the drivers' personal use;
4) Malversation for the unaccounted P10 million which is
deemed to have been misappropriatedby City Engr. A;
5) Violation of RA 3019 for the award of contract to a close
relative and for the P50 million unlawfully acquired wealth;
6) Plunder for amassing, acquiring, and accumulating
ill-gotten wealth provided that as per investigation it
was proven that he acquired the same through the
combination or series of overt/criminal acts provided
under the Plunder law.
) (B.)RA 3019
Which of the following crimes is an
2011 exception to the Territoriality Rule in
Criminal law?
(A) Violation of the Trademark Law committed by an alien in
the Philippines.

(B) Forgery of US bank notes committed in the Philippines.

(C) Crime committed by a Filipino in the disputed Spratly's


(D)Plunder committed at his place of assignment abroad by

a Philippine public officer.
Congressman Z was charged with violation of RA 7080 or the
Anti-Plunder Law. In the imposition of penalties, will the
attendance of mitigating and extenuating circumstances
under the RPC be considered?

Yes. Crime of plunder is malum in se; hence, mens rea is an

element of plunder. Therefore, the degree of responsibility of
the offender for the crime of plunder is determined by his
criminal intent.