Republic Act 1379

An Act Declaring Forfeiture

in Favor of the State Any

Property Found to Have Been

Unlawfully Acquired by Any

Public Officer or Employee

and Providing for the

Procedure Therefor

June 18, 1955

Who is a public

officer?

One who holds any public office or employment by virtue of an appointment, election, contract.

Includes one who is employed in any State owned or controlled corporation

Other legitimately

acquired property

Any real or personal property, money or securities owned by Respondent through inheritance, or a gift intervivos

Not included in the

property “Other

legitimately acquired

property”

Unlawfully acquired property but ownership is concealed as it is recorded in the name of his spouse, ascendants, descendants or any other person

Unlawfully acquired by but transferred by the Respondent to another person’s name after effectivity of RA 1379

Donated to him during his incumbency unless such is lawful

What is Forfeiture?

“Incurring of a libility to pay a definite sum of money as a consequence of violating the provisions of some statute or refusal to comply with some requirement of law”

Civil forfeiture, known in the US as

“non-conviction based forfeiture”

In RA 1379, this was characterized as

criminal in nature—i.e., Respondents are

protected from self-incrimination

But in Republic vs. Sandiganbayan,

forfeiture proceedings were declared actions in rem and therefore civil

in nature

RA 1379 (Forfeiture of Unlawfully Acquired Property)

Whenever any public officer or employee has acquired during his incumbency an amount

of property which is manifestly out of proportion to his salary as such public officer

or employee and to his lawful income and the income from legitimately acquired

property, said property shall be presumed prima facie to have been unlawfully acquired

An indicator that a public officer may have amassed

ill-gotten wealth is his non-disclosure & concealment of vital facts in his SALN

Legitimately-acquired property is beyond the purview of the law on

forfeiture

Resignation, dismissal, or separation from the service is not a bar to the filing of a petition

for civil forfeiture

Procedure for Filing Forfeiture Under RA 1379

Investigation or inquiry

conducted

• Conducted by Solicitor General but after February 25, 1986 , by the Ombudsman

Petition is Filed

• Before Sandiganbayan/RTC

Respondent files Answer

• 15 days from receipt of notice or service of the Petition

Hearing • Opportunity for Respondent

to explain how he acquired the property in question

Judgment

Appeal

Respondent is entitled to a copy of the Ombudsman’s resolution directing the filing of forfeiture case

Respondent cannot invoke the defense of prescription

Meting out the penalty of dismissal is beyond the court’s jurisdiction

But, official found to have acquired amassed property manifestly out of proportion to his salary shall be dismissed under RA 3019

The Sol Gen, now Ombudsman, may grant immunity from criminal prosecution to a person who testifies to the unlawful manner of property acquisition