ANTI-PLUDER ACT QUESTION

The JNL Corporation is a registered Non-Government Organization (NGO).

Jenny Capoles, the president of the said NGO got involved in a Pork
Scam where it was alleged that the Poor People Development Fund or
PPDF of certain public officials with alias Baboy, Bata, and Chaka
was not delivered to the rightful beneficiaries of the fund. The system
developed in the scam was the alleged approval of bogus project for the
usage of PPDF but the said fund was not really delivered to poor people,
instead it was divided between Capoles and the public officials involved in
the scam. On the other hand, the gay son of Capoles was shown to be
flaunting its wealth to the detriment of the Filipino People. Is there a
crime committed? Who among them will be liable?
Suggested Answer:
Yes. Jenny Capoles and the three public officials can be charged of a crime under
Republic Act 7080 or the Anti-Plunder Act.
Under Section 1 of Anti-Plunder Act, the prohibited acts includes the
misappropriation, conversion, misuse or malversation of public funds, as well as the
taking undue advantage of official position, relationship, connection or influence to
unjustly enrich himself or themselves at the expense and damage and prejudice of
the Filipino people. The crime is committed by a combination or through a series of
acts.
The act of converting the PPDF into bogus project and divided the proceeds thereof
into their personal interest already constitute the crime of plunder. The pattern of
using the influence of the three (3) public officials over the funds to convert the
same in connivance with the NGO, through Capoles is already a series of acts which
is covered by the prohibited acts under the plunder law. Hence, Capoles, and the
public officials with alias Baboy, Bata and Chaka should be charge of the
crime of plunder.
Anti-graft and corrupt practices question
Mayor H granted SNDC Development Corp a permit to construct
commercial space in a residential area. Under the Zoning Ordinance of the
City, construction of commercial building is prohibited in residential area.
Residents from the affected area sued Mayor H for violation of R.A. 3019
or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices. Mayor H denied such allegation
and argued that he is in good faith in approving such commercial space to
spark development in the said residential area. Can the case prosper?
Suggested Answer:

The case will prosper.

Under Section 3 paragraph (j) of R.A. 3019, a public officer who knowingly approves
or grants any license, permit, privilege or benefit in favor of any person not qualified
or legally entitled to such license may be prosecuted under the said law.
SNDC Corps application to construct a commercial space in a residential area is not
legally entitled to such title as they clearly violated the zoning ordinance of City.
Although Mayor H alleged that he is in good faith, it is a well-settled rule that
violation under special laws which are not covered by the RPC is malum prohibitum,
hence defense of good faith has not application. The act of granting the permit to
construct gives rise to the prosecution of such offense.
Therefore, the case against Mayor H filed by the affected residents will prosper.