QUESTION AND ANSWER

(PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. JOSEPH E. ESTRADA, et al. for PLUNDER)

(SANDIGANBAYAN SPECIAL DIVISION)

Promulgated on September 12, 2007

By: Atty. MARK P. PIAD*

UNIVERSITY OF ILOILO
College of Law

-o0o-

1. What is the rationale behind the Anti-Plunder Law?

ANS. –It is especially designed to disentangle those ghastly tissues of grand-

scale corruption which, if left unchecked, will spread like a malignant tumor and
ultimately consume the moral and institutional fiber of our nation. The Plunder
Law, indeed, is a living testament to the will of the legislature to ultimately
eradicate this scourge and thus secure society against the avarice and other
venalities in public office.

Only by responding to the clarion call for patriotism, to rise

above factionalism and prejudices, shall we emerge triumphant in the
midst of ferment. (emphasis supplied) (PEOPLE vs. ESTRADA (Sandiganbayan
Special Division Decision), Sept. 12, 2007, citing Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, G.R.
No. 148965, February 26, 2002 [Bellosillo])

2. How does the law define the crime of Plunder?

ANS.—Section 2. Definition of the Crime of Plunder; x x x - Any

public officer who, by himself or in connivance with members of his family,
relatives by affinity or consanguinity, business associates, subordinates or other
persons, amasses, accumulates or acquires ill gotten-wealth through a
combination or series of overt criminal acts as described in Section 1 (d) hereof
in the aggregate amount or total value of at least Fifty Million Pesos
(P50,000,000.00) shall be guilty of the crime of plunder x x x. Any person who
participated with the said public officer in the commission of an offense
contributing to the crime of plunder shall likewise be punished for such offense.

3. What is the effect of the law to ill-gotten wealth and their interests and
other incomes or assets subject of the crime?

ANS. –The Court shall declare any and ill-gotten wealth and their interests and
other incomes and assets including the properties and share of stocks derived
from the deposit or investment thereof forfeited in the favor of the State.
(Section 2, Republic Act No. 7080, as amended)

4. What is the penalty for the crime of Plunder?

*
LlB (UNIVERSITY OF ILOILO); Law Professor (Legal Profession, UI College of Law); ALOBBA PORRAS & ASSOCIATES (Associate).
 Vox Legis-Filiae

ANS. –As to the penalty, this section is amended by Republic Act No. 9346
prohibiting the imposition of the death penalty in the Philippines. RA 9346 was
signed into law on June 24, 2006. In view of its provisions, the penalty for the
crime of plunder is now reclusion perpetua pursuant to Section 2 (a) of RA
9346.

5. Does the attending circumstances of Aggravating and Mitigating

circumstances under the Revised Penal Code apply in the imposition of
penalty under the Anti-Plunder Law, being a Special Penal Law?

ANS. –In the imposition of penalties, the degree of participation and the
attendance of mitigating and extenuating circumstances, as provided by the
Revised Penal Code, shall be considered by the court. (Section 2, Republic Act
No. 7080, as amended)

6. Does the Indeterminate Sentence Law likewise apply to convictions of

the crime of Plunder, being a Special Penal Law?

ANS. –The convicted person shall be eligible for parole under Act. No. 4103,
otherwise known as the Indeterminate Sentence Law, as amended. (Section 2,
Republic Act No. 7080, as amended)

7. What are the elements of the crime of Plunder?

ANS. –The elements of the crime of plunder, as follows:

(1) That the offender is a public officer who acts by himself or in

connivance with members of his family, relatives by affinity or consanguinity,
business associates, subordinates or other persons;

(2) That he amassed, accumulated or acquired ill-gotten wealth

through a combination or series of the following overt or criminal acts described
in Section 1 (d) of R.A. No. 7080 as amended; and

(3) That the aggregate amount or total value of the ill-gotten wealth
amassed, accumulated or acquired is at least P50,000,000.00.

(PEOPLE vs. ESTRADA (Sandiganbayan Special Division Decision), Sept. 12,

2007, citing Joseph Ejercito Estrada v. Sandiganbayan; G.R. No. 148560,
promulgated November 19, 2001)

8. What acts constitute the crime of Plunder?

ANS. –Section 1 (d) of the same statute cited in Section 2 above reads:

d) 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 in directly through

Page | 2
 Vox Legis-Filiae

dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates and/or business associates by

any combination or series of the following means or similar schemes:

1) Through misappropriation, conversation, mis-use, 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 or
project or by reason of the office or position of the public officer
concerned;

3) By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition of asset

belonging to the National Government or any of its subdivision, agencies
or instrumentalities or government-owned or –controlled corporations
and their subsidiaries;

4) By obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or indirectly any

shares of stock, equity or any other form of interest or participation
including promises of future employment in any business enterprise or
undertaking;

5) By establishing agricultural, industrial or commercial

monopolies or other combinations and/or implementation of decrees and
orders intended to benefit particular persons or special interests; or

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.

9. What rule of evidence is required to convict a person of the crime of

Plunder?

ANS. –Section 4. Rule of Evidence. – For purpose 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. (emphasis supplied)

10. What does the term “Combination” mean?

ANS. -- Thus when the Plunder Law speaks of “combination,” it is referring to

at least two (2) acts falling under different categories of enumeration provided in
Sec. 1, par. (d), e.g., raids on the public treasury in Sec.1, par. (d), subpar. (1),
and fraudulent conveyance of assets belongings to the National Government
under Sec.1, par. (d), subpar. (3). (emphasis supplied) (PEOPLE vs. ESTRADA
(Sandiganbayan Special Division Decision), Sept. 12, 2007, citing Joseph Ejercito
Estrada v. Sandiganbayan (G.R. No. 148560, promulgated November 19, 2001)

Page | 3
 Vox Legis-Filiae

11. What does the term “Series” mean?

ANS. -- To constitute a “series”, there must be two (2) or more overt or

criminal acts falling under the same category of enumeration found in Sec. 1,
par. (d), say, misappropriation , malversation and raids on the public treasury, all
of which fall under Sec. 1, par. (d), subpar. (1). Verily, had the legislature
intended a technical or distinctive meaning for “combination” and “series,” it
would have taken greater pains in specifically providing for it in the law.
(emphasis supplied) (PEOPLE vs. ESTRADA (Sandiganbayan Special Division
Decision), Sept. 12, 2007, citing Joseph Ejercito Estrada v. Sandiganbayan (G.R.
No. 148560, promulgated November 19, 2001)

12. What is the gravamen of the conspiracy to commit Plunder?

ANS. -- The gravamen of the conspiracy charge, therefore, is not that each
accused agreed to receive protection money from illegal gambling, that each
misappropriated a portion of the tobacco excise tax, that each accused ordered
the GSIS and SSS to purchase shares of Belle Corporation and receive
commissions from such sale, nor that each unjustly enriched himself from
commissions, gifts and kickbacks; rather, it is that each of them, by their
individual acts, agreed to participate, directly or indirectly, in the
amassing, accumulation and acquisition of ill-gotten wealth of and/or
for former President Estrada. (emphasis supplied) (PEOPLE vs. ESTRADA
(Sandiganbayan Special Division Decision), Sept. 12, 2007, citing Jose “Jinggoy”
Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan [G.R. No. 148965, February 26, 2003 [C.J. Puno]).

13. What are the two (2) structures in multiple conspiracy? Explain
each. What structure applies to the case of Joseph Estrada?

ANS. –In the American jurisdiction, the presence of several accused in

multiple conspiracies commonly involves two structures:

(1) the so-called “wheel” or “circle” conspiracy, in which there is a single

person or group (the “hub”) dealing individually with two or more other persons
or groups (the “spokes”); and

(2) the “chain” conspiracy, usually involving the distribution of narcotics

or other contraband, in which there is successive communication and
cooperation in much the same way as with legitimate business operations
between manufacturer and wholesaler, then wholesaler and retailer, and then
retailer and consumer.

From a reading of the Amended Information, the case at bar appears

similar to a “wheel” conspiracy. The hub is former President Estrada while the
spokes are all the accused, and the rim that encloses the spokes is the common
goal in the overall conspiracy, i.e., the amassing, accumulation and acquisition of
ill-gotten wealth. (emphasis supplied) (PEOPLE vs. ESTRADA (Sandiganbayan
Special Division Decision), Sept. 12, 2007, citing Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada vs.
Sandiganbayan [G.R. No. 148965, February 26, 2003 [C.J. Puno]).

Page | 4
 Vox Legis-Filiae

14. Is the term “on several instances” synonymous or similar to the

term “series”, punishable under the Anti-Plunder Law?

ANS. –Contrary to petitioner’s posture, the allegation is that he received or

collected money from illegal gambling "on several instances.” The phrase “on
several instances” means the petitioner committed the predicate act in series. To
insist that the Amended Information charged the petitioner with the commission
of only one act or offense despite the phrase “several instances” is to indulge in
a twisted, nay, “pretzel” interpretation. (PEOPLE vs. ESTRADA (Sandiganbayan
Special Division Decision), Sept. 12, 2007, citing Jose “Jinggoy” E. Estrada v.
Sandiganbayan (G.R. No. 148965, February 26, 2002)

15. What is required to secure a conviction of Plunder?

ANS. –As Senate President Salonga explained, of there are 150 constitutive
crimes charged, it is not necessary to prove beyond reasonable doubt all of
them. If a “pattern” can be shown by proving for example, 10 criminal acts, then
that would be sufficient to secure conviction.

The State is thereby enabled by this device to deal with several acts
constituting separate crimes as just one crime of plunder by allowing their
prosecution by means of a single information because there is a common
purpose for committing them, namely, that of “amassing, accumulating or
acquiring wealth through such overt or criminal acts.” The pattern is the
organizing principle that defines what otherwise would be discreet criminal acts
into the single crime of plunder. (emphasis supplied) (PEOPLE vs. ESTRADA
(Sandiganbayan Special Division Decision), Sept. 12, 2007, citing Estrada v.
Sandiganbayan (G.R. No. 148560, November 19, 2001)

-END-

“Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not on thy own understanding.
In all thy ways acknowledge Him and He shall direct thy paths”

Proverbs 3:5-6

God Bless us all!!!

Page | 5