[av_one_full first min_height=” vertical_alignment=” space=” custom_margin=” margin=’0px’ padding=’0px’ border=” border_color=” radius=’0px’ background_color=” src=” background_position=’top left’ background_repeat=’no-repeat’ animation=”]
[av_heading heading=’ ABOVE THE LAW ‘ tag=’h3′ style=’blockquote modern-quote’ size=’30’ subheading_active=’subheading_below’ subheading_size=’15’ padding=’10’ color=” custom_font=”]
BY AYIN DREAM D. APLASCA
[/av_heading]
[av_textblock size=” font_color=” color=”]
Friday, October 13, 2017
[/av_textblock]
[av_textblock size=’18’ font_color=” color=”]
THERE ARE hundreds of ways to obstruct justice and one of these is to subtract a thousand pesos from a P50-million threshold for plunder. Sounds funny, right? But yeah, it really exists.
Just recently, a P1,000 bill was missing from the P50 million that former Customs deputy commissioners Michael Robles and Al Argosino handed over to the Department of Justice (DOJ), which was received from casino mogul Jack Lam.
Why is this relevant? Let us examine the intricacies of the Plunder Law.
The Plunder Law, otherwise known as Republic Act (RA) 7080, was passed for the purpose of preventing public officials from stealing money from the government.
According to Section 2 of RA 7080, plunder is committed when a 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 or criminal acts as described in Section 1 (d) of RA 7080 in the aggregate amount or total value of at least P50 million.
Any person who participated with the said public officer in the commission of plunder shall likewise be punished for such offense. The court should consider the degree of participation and the attendance of mitigating and extenuating circumstances as provided by the Revised Penal Code.
Additionally, Section 4 of the Plunder Law prescribes the method for proving the offense. It states that the purpose of establishing the offense shall not be necessary to prove each and every criminal act done by the accused. It is sufficient to establish beyond reasonable doubt a pattern of overt act or criminal acts indicative of the overall unlawful scheme.
Any public officer may be suspended or lose his or her benefits. The law provides that “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.”
In the recent case, I think the office of the President or the Ombudsman should conduct an independent probe. Also, the National Bureau of Investigation should have a thorough investigation on this alleged extortion or bribery and not just settle with graft and direct bribery charges.
The Plunder Law is one of the most discussed laws in our country. We witness the seriousness of this issue. This is no laughing matter. The recent issue shows how deliberate they were to escape plunder charges because plunder is not bailable in general.
This is a mockery of justice when not given importance and urgency.
(Atty. Ayin Dream D. Aplasca practices her profession in Iloilo City. She may be reached thru ayindream.aplasca@gmail.com/PN)
[/av_textblock]
[/av_one_full]
