Prescriptive Period for Graft Cases

Lawmakers Ask to Double Prescriptive Period for Filing Cases of Graft

By Dionisio P. Tubianosa, MRS-PRIB

Mindanao lawmakers are urging the House of Representatives to fast track the approval of the proposed amendment to Republic Act No. 3019 or the "Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act" increasing the prescriptive period for its violations from the current 15 years to 30 years.

"Doubling the prescriptive period would help counter the lack proper training and personnel complement at the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) at the Sandiganbayan now facing heavy caseload," stressed Reps. Rufus Rodriguez and Maximo Rodriguez, Jr., authors of House Bill 588.

HB 588 has been approved and endorsed by the House Committee on Revision of Laws and has been included in the committee-approved bills listed in the "Business for the Day" status awaiting plenary consideration.

Due to heavy caseloads, the Rodriguezes said, OSP personnel are constrained by time to attend the necessary trainings to upgrade their prosecutorial skills.

The bill, the authors recalled, was originally introduced as HB 2446 by Rep. Rufus Rodriguez during the 14th Congress. It was approved by the Committee on Revision of Laws as substitute HB 5816 on January 21, 2009 and passed on 2nd reading on February 24, 2009 and on 3rd reading on March 5, 2009. It was, however, never acted upon in the Senate.

The authors cited a paper submitted by then Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo entitled "combating corruption in the Philippines" during the 4th Regional Anti-Corruption Conference of the ADB/OECD Anti-Corruption Initiative for Asia and the Pacific at Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Marcelo reported then that the conviction rate of the OSP was a dismal six (6) percent. Put differently, a high-ranking government official accused of graft and corruption has a 94% chance of walking away scot-free.

"The reason for this are practical ones, foremost of which is the disabling lack of personnel at the OSP and lack of training program for prosecutors to improve their skills, due to heavy caseload," the authors noted.

Furthermore, the authors recalled Marcelo as saying that based on available information, Hong Kong’s Independent Commission against Corruption (ICAC) has 1,326 personnel for a population of about 6.8 million and maintains eight satellite offices with 18 district offices where the public can report incidents of corruption.

"In comparison, the Philippine's Office of the Ombudsman has only 1,141 staff for a population (2009) of 82 million, with only four satellite offices situated in three major cities," Rodriguez said.

Likewise, at the ICAC, 838 field investigators are tasked exclusively with gathering evidence; this translates to a ratio of one investigator to every 8,114 citizens, the author pointed out.

"In the Philippines, the Office of the Ombudsman's 89 investigators provides a ratio of one investigator to 921,348 Filipinos," they lamented.

In view of the grave need to address graft and corruption in the country, the authors insist on the immediate passage of HB 588, increasing the prescriptive period from 15 to 30 years.

"There is therefore a need to increase the prescriptive period of filing cases against graft and corruption so as not to afford violators of the law to escape criminal liability by mere technicality - prescription of offense," they concluded.