Senate to approve longer prescriptive period for graft cases

MANILA, Philippines - The Senate is looking to extend the prescriptive period for the prosecution of graft cases from the current 15 years to 20 years.

Senate Bill 2422 has been taken up in plenary for approval on second reading after the committee report was sponsored by Sen. Aquilino Pimentel III last Wednesday.

The bill amends Section 11 of Republic Act 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, so that offenses punishable under this law could now be prosecuted 20 years instead of the current 15 years after they were committed.

In the amendment introduced by the House of Representatives under House Bill 4146, the prescriptive period was increased to 30 years.

Senate President Franklin Drilon said the measure would add more teeth to the administration’s campaign against corruption.

“Our justice system can only be a strong deterrent against possible malfeasance if we demonstrate that no matter the passing of years, a crime remains a crime and those who committed them must answer for them,” Drilon said.

Under the current system, a 15-year prescription is observed in the filing of graft cases. After this period, the government may no longer prosecute these cases.

“We must not let time hinder our quest for justice. It is imperative, then, that we legislate the necessary reforms that will strengthen our justice and legal system,” Drilon said.

Drilon said the bill, along with other anti-corruption measures, was “a manifestation of the determination of Congress to stamp out corruption in the country, especially in light of the recent controversy regarding the pork barrel funds.”

Senate Bill 2422 was prepared by the Senate committee on justice and human rights in lieu of Senate Bills 1086 filed by Sen. Teofisto Guingona III and 2033 by Sen. Jinggoy Estrada.

As well as extending the prescription by five years, it also added that “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.”

Estrada’s version recommended a 30-year prescriptive period, just like that of the House version.