Direct Bribery and Public Official Offenses

 
CRIMES UNDER THE
REVISED PENAL CODE
 
 
PUBLIC
OFFICERS
 
Any person who, by direct provision
of the law, popular election or
appointment by competent authority,
shall take part in the performance of
public functions in the Government
of the Philippine islands, or shall
perform in said Government or in
any of its branches public duties as
an employee, agent, or subordinate
official, of any rank or class.
 
BRIBERY
 
Bribery of public officials is
penalized under Articles 210 to
212 of the Revised Penal Code
 
The Revised Penal Code
penalizes 3 kinds of bribery:
A. direct bribery;
B. indirect bribery; and
C. qualified bribery.
 
ACTS
PUNISHABLE IN
DIRECT BRIBERY
 
A public officer commits direct bribery –
1.
By agreeing to perform, or by performing, in
consideration of any offer, promise, gift or
present – an act constituting a crime, in
connection with the performance of his official
duties.
2.
By accepting a gift in consideration of the
execution of an act which does not constitute a
crime, in connection with the performance of his
official duty.
3.
By agreeing to refrain, or by refraining, from
doing something which it is his official duty to do,
in consideration of gift or promise.
 
ELEMENTS
OF DIRECT
BRIBERY
 
a)
That the offender be a public officer within the
scope of Article 203.
b)
That the offender accepts an offer or a promise or
receives a gift or present by himself or through
another.
c)
That such offer or promise be accepted, or gift or
present received by the public officer –
1.
with the view to committing some crime; or
2.
in consideration of the execution of an act which
does not constitute a crime, but the act must be
unjust; or
3.
To refrain from doing something which it is his
official duty to do.
d)
That the act which the offender agrees to perform
or which he executes be connected with the
performance of his official duties.
 
GIFT IS EITHER
(1) VOLUNTARILY
OFFERED BY A
PRIVATE PERSON,
OR (2) SOLICITED BY
A PUBLIC OFFICER
 
Bribery exists, not only (1) when the gift is offered
voluntarily by a private person, or (2) when the
gift is solicited by a public officer and the private
person voluntarily delivers it to the public officer,
but also (3) when the gift is solicited by a public
officer, as the consideration for his refraining from
the performance of an official duty and the private
person gives the gift for fear of the consequences
which would result if the officer performs his
functions. (December of November 3, 1879,
Supreme Court of Spain, cited in People v. Sope,
75 Phil. 810)
 
THE OFFER OF GIFT
OR PROMISE MUST
BE ACCEPTED BY
THE PUBLIC OFFICER
 
In case there is only an offer of gift or a
promise to give something, the offer or
the promise must be accepted by the
public officer.
 
If the offer is not accepted by the public
officer, only the person offering the gift or
present is criminally liable for attempted
corruption of public officer under Article
212 in relation to Article 6.  The public
officer is not liable.
 
A PROMISE TO GIVE GIFT TO,
AND A PROMISE TO
COMMIT AN UNLAWFUL
ACT BY A PUBLIC OFFICER
WILL BE SUFFICIENT IN
DIRECT BRIBERY UNDER THE
FIRST PAR. OF ART. 210
 
It is sufficient that a promise or offer
was made to the public officer to
give him money if he would commit
an unlawful act in connection with
the performance of his official
duties and that he agreed to commit
the unlawful act in consideration of
the promise or offer.
 
PENALTIES FOR
THE FIRST FORM
OF DIRECT
BRIBERY
 
MANNER OF COMMISSION
 
With a view to committing a crime
 
PENALTIES
 
Prision mayor in its medium and maximum
periods (8 years and 1 day to 12 years’
imprisonment); and
Fine of not less than three (3) times the value of
the gift; and
The penalty corresponding to the crime agreed
upon, if the crime shall have been committed
Special temporary disqualification
 
A PROMISE TO GIVE GIFT TO,
AND A PROMISE TO
COMMIT AN UNLAWFUL
ACT BY A PUBLIC OFFICER
WILL BE SUFFICIENT IN
DIRECT BRIBERY UNDER THE
FIRST PAR. OF ART. 210
 
EXAMPLE:
 
The stenographer of the court
accepted a promise of P1000 from
an individual and promised to alter
the notes taken by him during the
trial of a case. The act which the
stenographer promised to do would
constitute the crime of falsification
under Article 171 of the Code.
 
THE PUBLIC OFFICER TO
SUFFER “THE PENALTY
CORRESPONDING TO THE
CRIME AGREED UPON, IF
THE SAME SHALL HAVE
BEEN COMMITTED.”
 
Thus, if the stenographer of the
court who had accepted a promise
of P1000 from an individual altered
the notes in accordance with the
agreement, he shall suffer, in
addition to the penalty
corresponding to the crime of
bribery, the penalty for the crime of
falsification by a public officer or
employee under Article 171 of the
Code.
 
THE ACT WHICH THE
PUBLIC OFFICER
AGREES TO PERFORM
MUST BE CONNECTED
WITH THE
PERFORMANCE OF
OFFICIAL DUTIES
 
EXAMPLE:
 
A Municipal President who ordered the
release of a prisoner upon receiving from the
latter the sum of P20, instead of obeying the
orders of the provincial governor requiring
him to send the prisoner to the provincial
capital, is guilty of direct bribery, because,
“having the prisoner under his charge, it was
part of his official duty to obey the orders of
the provincial governor in this respect.” (U.S.
v. Valdehueza, 4 Phil. 470).
 
EXAMPLE OF
SECOND FORM
OF DIRECT
BRIBERY
 
In the case of U.S. v. Gacutan, 28 Phil. 100, the
bribery committed by the justice of the
peace falls under this form of bribery,
because when he decided the case in favor of
the party who gave him a female carabao
worth P80, without regard to the evidence, he
executed an act which is not criminal, for
there was no evidence that the decision was
unjust and that he knew it to be unjust. The act
he executed was unjust, for it certainly was an
act of injustice to convict a person charged
with a crime without regard to what the
evidence in the case may be.
 
PENALTIES FOR
THE SECOND
FORM OF DIRECT
BRIBERY
 
MANNER OF COMMISSION
 
In consideration of the execution of an act that
does not constitute a crime, but is unjust
 
PENALTIES
 
If the public officer executed the act:
Prision mayor in its medium and maximum periods (8
years and 1 day to 12 years’ imprisonment) and;
Fine of not less than three (3) times the value of the gift;
and
The penalty corresponding to the crime agreed upon, if
the crime shall have been committed
Special temporary disqualification
 
PENALTIES FOR
THE SECOND
FORM OF DIRECT
BRIBERY
 
MANNER OF COMMISSION
 
In consideration of the execution of an act that
does not constitute a crime, but is unjust
 
PENALTIES
 
If the act was not accomplished:
Prision correccional in its medium period (2
years, 4 months and 1 day, to 4 years and 2
months’ imprisonment) and;
Fine of not less than twice the value of the gift
Special temporary disqualification
 
PENALTIES FOR
THE THIRD FORM
OF DIRECT
BRIBERY
 
MANNER OF COMMISSION
 
To refrain from doing something that it is
his official duty to do
 
PENALTIES
 
Prision correccional in its maximum period to
prision mayor in its minimum period (4 years, 2
months and 1 day to 8 years’ imprisonment and;
Fine of not less than three times the value of the
gift
Special temporary disqualification
 
EXAMPLE OF
THIRD FORM OF
DIRECT BRIBERY
 
A sanitary inspector who accepts a
gift from the tenant of an unsanitary
building and in consideration
thereof refrains from performing his
duty to report its condition to his
superiors, is guilty under the third
paragraph of Article 210. (U.S. v.
Navarro, 3 Phil. 633)
 
DIRECT BRIBERY IS A
CRIME INVOLVING
MORAL TURPITUDE
 
Moral turpitude can be inferred from the third
element. The fact that the offender agrees to
accept a promise or gift and deliberately commits
an unjust act or refrains from performing an
official duty in exchange for some favors, denotes
a malicious intent on the part of the offender to
renege on the duties which he owes his fellowmen
and society in general. Also, the fact that the
offender takes advantage of his office and position
is a betrayal of the trust reposed on him by the
public. It is a conduct clearly contrary to the
accepted rules of right and duty, justice, honesty
and good morals. In all respects, direct bribery is
a crime involving moral turpitude. (Magno v.
Commission on Elections, et al., GR No. 147904,
October 4, 2002)
 
ELEMENTS OF
INDIRECT
BRIBERY
 
1.
That the offender is a public
officer.
2.
That he accepts gifts.
3.
That the gifts are offered to
him by reason of his office
 
PENALTIES FOR
INDIRECT
BRIBERY
 
Prision correccional in its
medium and maximum periods
(imprisonment for 2 years, 4
months and 1 day up to 6
years)
Suspension
Public censure
 
GIFT IS USUALLY GIVEN
TO THE PUBLIC OFFICER
IN ANTICIPATION OF
FUTURE FAVOR FROM
THE PUBLIC OFFICER
 
A public officer should not accept
any gift offered to him, because
such gift is offered in anticipation of
future favor from him. Such gift
received now will in the future
corrupt him or make him omit the
performance of his official duty.
 
EXAMPLE OF
INDIRECT
BRIBERY
 
A veterinarian of the Board of Health,
entrusted with the duty of examining mules
which were offered for sale to the
Government, received a certain amount of
money from the vendor of mules after the
latter had received from the Government the
purchase price of the mules sold. There was
no evidence to the effect that the money was
given for the purpose of preventing the
veterinarian from doing or inducing him to
do something pertaining to his office. (US v.
Richards, 6 Phil. 545). He accepted the gift
offered to him by reason of his office.
 
“WHO SHALL
ACCEPT GIFTS
OFFERED TO
HIM”
 
The essential ingredient of direct bribery as defined on
Article 211 of the Revised Penal Code is that the public
officer concerned must have accepted the gift or
material consideration. There must be a clear intention
on the part of the public officer to take the gift so
offered and consider the same as his own property from
then on, such as putting away the gift for safekeeping or
pocketing the same. Mere physical receipt
unaccompanied by any other sign, circumstance or act
to show such acceptance is not sufficient to lead the
court to conclude that the crime of indirect bribery has
been committed. To hold otherwise will encourage
unscrupulous individuals to frame up public officers by
simply putting within their physical custody some gift,
money or other property. (Formilleza v. Sandiganbayan,
159 SCRA 1).
 
THERE IS NO
ATTEMPTED OR
FRUSTRATED
INDIRECT BRIBERY
 
Indirect bribery has no attempted
or frustrated stage of execution,
because it is committed by
accepting gifts offered to the public
officer by reason of his office. If he
does not accept the gifts; he does
not commit the crime. If he accepts
the gifts, it is consummated.
 
DIRECT BRIBERY
DISTINGUISHED
FROM INDIRECT
BRIBERY
 
CONSIDERED INDIRECT
BRIBERY, EVEN IF THERE
WAS A SORT OF AN
AGREEMENT BETWEEN
PUBLIC OFFICER AND
GIVER OF GIFT
 
P was an employee of the Manila Health Department
assigned to prepare and follow up vouchers of the
employees who were laid off. Knowing that B was to
be laid off, P offered B to prepare his voucher for
accumulated and terminal leave pay, on condition
that the latter would give the former P50, to which B
agreed. When B received his pay, he gave P the sum
of P50.
 
Held: P was without any right whatsoever to receive
P50 for his services, because he was an employee of
the government assigned to do the work he
performed for B. (People v. Pamplona, C.A., 51 O.G.
4116) The accused was found guilty of indirect
bribery.
 
RECEIVING OF GIFTS BY
PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND
EMPLOYEES, AND GIVING
OF GIFTS BY PRIVATE
PERSONS, ON ANY
OCCASION, INCLUDING
CHRISTMAS IS PUNISHABLE
 
Presidential Decree No. 46 which took effect on
November 10, 1972
The President of the Philippines has made it punishable
for any public official or employee, whether of the
national or local governments, to receive, directly or
indirectly, and for private persons to give, or offer to
give, any gift, present or other valuable thing on any
occasion, including Christmas, when such gift, present
or other valuable thing is given by reason of his official
position, regardless of whether or not the same is for
past favor or favors or the giver hopes or expects to
receive a favor or better treatment in the future from the
public official or employee concerned in the discharge
of his official functions. Included within the prohibition
is the throwing of parties or entertainments in honor of
the official or employee or of his immediate relatives.
 
PENALTY  FOR
VIOLATION OF
PRESIDENTIAL
DECREE NO. 46
 
Imprisonment for not less than one (1)
year nor more than five (5) years; and
Perpetual disqualification from public
office
The official or employee concerned shall
likewise be subject to administrative
disciplinary action and, if found guilty,
shall be meted out the penalty of
suspension or removal, depending on the
seriousness of the offense
 
CRIMINAL PENALTY OF
IMPRISONMENT IS
DISTINCT FROM THE
ADMINISTRATIVE
PENALTY OF
SEPARATION FROM THE
JUDICIAL SERVICE
 
The court is constrained to disapprove the
recommendation as to the first charge of indirect
bribery which is fully supported by the evidence
that respondent Judge “be suspended from office
for 2 years and 4 months, taking into
consideration the penalty prescribed in the
Revised Penal Code.” The penalty of 2 years and 4
months imprisonment provided for the criminal
offense of indirect bribery may not be equated
with the penalty of separation from the judicial
service which is the proper applicable
administrative penalty by virtue of respondent
Judge’s serious misconduct prejudicial to the
judiciary and the public interest. (Cabrera v.
Pajares, 142 SCRA 127)
 
ELEMENTS OF
QUALIFIED
BRIBERY
 
1)
That the offender is a public officer
entrusted with law enforcement;
2)
That the offender refrains from
arresting or prosecuting an offender
who has committed a crime
punishable by reclusion perpetua
and/or death;
3)
That the offender refrains from
arresting or prosecuting the
offender in consideration of any
offer, promise, gift or present.
 
PENALTY FOR
QUALIFIED
BRIBERY
 
The penalty for qualified
bribery is the penalty for the
offense which was not
prosecuted.
If it is the public officer who
asks or demands such gift or
present, he shall suffer the
penalty of death. ( as added by
R.A. No. 7659)
 
ELEMENTS OF
CORRUPTION OF
PUBLIC OFFICIALS
 
1)
That the offender makes offers
or promises or gives gifts or
presents to a public officer.
2)
That the offer or promises are
made or the gifts or presents
given to a public officer, under
circumstances that will make the
public officer liable for direct
bribery or indirect bribery.
 
THE OFFENDER IN
CORRUPTION OF
PUBLIC OFFICER IS THE
GIVER OF GIFT OR
OFFEROR OF PROMISE
 
The offender is the giver of the gifts or
offeror of promise.
The public officer sought to be bribed is
not criminally liable, unless he accepts
the gift or consents to the offer of the
offender.
Article 212 punishes the person who
made the offer or promise or gave the
gift, even if the gift was demanded by the
public officer and the offer was not made
voluntarily prior to the said demand by
the public officer.
 
BRIBERY IS USUALLY
PROVED BY
EVIDENCE
ACQUIRED IN
ENTRAPMENT
 
In view of the fact that it is hard to prove bribery,
for the briber himself is punished by law and he is
usually the only one who could give direct
evidence ways and means are resorted to, to catch
the public officer while he is in the act of
obtaining bribes. This is known as 
entrapment.
Thus, an NBI agent who, posing as one interested
in expediting the approval of license for firearm,
gave P50 to the public officer who had hinted that
he was not averse to receiving some money for
expediting the approval of licenses, merely
resorted to ways and means to catch the public
officer, it appearing that there was a ground of
suspicion or belief of the existence of official graft
in that office. (People v. Vinzol, C.A., 47 O.G. 294)
 
PRESIDENTIAL
DECREE NO.
749
 
It was approved on July 18, 1975
Grants immunity from prosecution to
givers of bribes and other gifts and to
their accomplices in bribery and other
graft cases against public officers
Slide Note
Embed
Share

Bribery of public officials under the Revised Penal Code, specifically Articles 210 to 212, involves direct, indirect, and qualified bribery. Direct bribery encompasses acts where a public officer agrees to perform or abstain from acts in exchange for gifts, promises, or considerations. Offenses involve public officers accepting gifts with intent to commit a crime or unjust acts related to their duties. The elements and instances of bribery are detailed, emphasizing the involvement of public officials and private individuals.

  • Bribery
  • Revised Penal Code
  • Public Officials
  • Direct Bribery
  • Government

Uploaded on Sep 22, 2024 | 1 Views


Download Presentation

Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. CRIMES UNDER THE REVISED PENAL CODE

  2. Any person who, by direct provision of the law, popular appointment by competent authority, shall take part in the performance of public functions in the Government of the Philippine islands, or shall perform in said Government or in any of its branches public duties as an employee, agent, or subordinate official,of any rank or class. election or PUBLIC OFFICERS

  3. Bribery of public officials is penalized under Articles 210 to 212 of the Revised Penal Code The penalizes 3 kinds of bribery: A.direct bribery; B.indirect bribery;and C.qualified bribery. Revised Penal Code BRIBERY

  4. A public officer commits direct bribery 1. By agreeing to perform, or by performing, in consideration of any offer, promise, gift or present an act constituting connection with the performance of his official duties. a crime, in ACTS PUNISHABLE IN DIRECT BRIBERY 2. By accepting a gift in consideration of the execution of an act which does not constitute a crime, in connection with the performance of his official duty. 3. By agreeing to refrain, or by refraining, from doing something which it is his official duty to do, in consideration of gift or promise.

  5. a) That the offender be a public officer within the scope of Article 203. b) That the offender accepts an offer or a promise or receives a gift or present by himself or through another. c) That such offer or promise be accepted, or gift or present received by the public officer 1. with the view to committing some crime;or 2. in consideration of the execution of an act which does not constitute a crime, but the act must be unjust;or 3. To refrain from doing something which it is his official duty to do. d) That the act which the offender agrees to perform or which he executes be connected with the performance of his official duties. ELEMENTS OF DIRECT BRIBERY

  6. Bribery exists,not only (1) when the gift is offered voluntarily by a private person, or (2) when the gift is solicited by a public officer and the private person voluntarily delivers it to the public officer, but also (3) when the gift is solicited by a public officer, as the consideration for his refraining from the performance of an official duty and the private person gives the gift for fear of the consequences which would result if the officer performs his functions. (December Supreme Court of Spain, cited in People v. Sope, 75 Phil.810) GIFT IS EITHER (1) VOLUNTARILY OFFERED BY A PRIVATE PERSON, OR (2) SOLICITED BY A PUBLIC OFFICER of November 3, 1879,

  7. In case there is only an offer of gift or a promise to give something, the offer or the promise must be accepted by the public officer. THE OFFER OF GIFT OR PROMISE MUST BE ACCEPTED BY THE PUBLIC OFFICER If the offer is not accepted by the public officer,only the person offering the gift or present is criminally liable for attempted corruption of public officer under Article 212 in relation to Article 6. The public officer is not liable.

  8. It is sufficient that a promise or offer was made to the public officer to give him money if he would commit an unlawful act in connection with the performance duties and that he agreed to commit the unlawful act in consideration of the promise or offer. A PROMISE TO GIVE GIFT TO, AND A PROMISE TO COMMIT AN UNLAWFUL ACT BY A PUBLIC OFFICER WILL BE SUFFICIENT IN DIRECT BRIBERY UNDER THE FIRST PAR. OF ART. 210 of his official

  9. MANNER OF COMMISSION With a view to committing a crime PENALTIES PENALTIES FOR THE FIRST FORM OF DIRECT BRIBERY Prision mayor in its medium and maximum periods (8 years and imprisonment);and 1 day to 12 years Fine of not less than three (3) times the value of the gift;and The penalty corresponding to the crime agreed upon,if the crime shall have been committed Special temporary disqualification

  10. EXAMPLE: The accepted a promise of P1000 from an individual and promised to alter the notes taken by him during the trial of a case. The act which the stenographer promised to do would constitute the crime of falsification under Article 171 of the Code. stenographer of the court A PROMISE TO GIVE GIFT TO, AND A PROMISE TO COMMIT AN UNLAWFUL ACT BY A PUBLIC OFFICER WILL BE SUFFICIENT IN DIRECT BRIBERY UNDER THE FIRST PAR. OF ART. 210

  11. Thus, if the stenographer of the court who had accepted a promise of P1000 from an individual altered the notes in accordance with the agreement, he addition to corresponding to bribery,the penalty for the crime of falsification by a public officer or employee under Article 171 of the Code. THE PUBLIC OFFICER TO SUFFER THE PENALTY CORRESPONDING TO THE CRIME AGREED UPON, IF THE SAME SHALL HAVE BEEN COMMITTED. shall the the suffer, penalty crime in of

  12. EXAMPLE: A Municipal President who ordered the release of a prisoner upon receiving from the latter the sum of P20, instead of obeying the orders of the provincial governor requiring him to send the prisoner to the provincial capital, is guilty of direct bribery, because, having the prisoner under his charge, it was part of his official duty to obey the orders of the provincial governor in this respect. (U.S. v.Valdehueza,4 Phil.470). THE ACT WHICH THE PUBLIC OFFICER AGREES TO PERFORM MUST BE CONNECTED WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF OFFICIAL DUTIES

  13. In the case of U.S. v. Gacutan, 28 Phil. 100, the bribery committed by the justice of the peace falls under this form of bribery, because when he decided the case in favor of the party who gave him a female carabao worth P80, without regard to the evidence, he executed an act which is not criminal, for there was no evidence that the decision was unjust and that he knew it to be unjust.The act he executed was unjust,for it certainly was an act of injustice to convict a person charged with a crime without regard to what the evidence in the case may be. EXAMPLE OF SECOND FORM OF DIRECT BRIBERY

  14. MANNER OF COMMISSION In consideration of the execution of an act that does not constitute a crime,but is unjust PENALTIES FOR THE SECOND FORM OF DIRECT BRIBERY PENALTIES If the public officer executed the act: Prision mayor in its medium and maximum periods (8 years and 1 day to 12 years imprisonment) and; Fine of not less than three (3) times the value of the gift; and The penalty corresponding to the crime agreed upon, if the crime shall have been committed Special temporary disqualification

  15. MANNER OF COMMISSION In consideration of the execution of an act that does not constitute a crime,but is unjust PENALTIES FOR THE SECOND FORM OF DIRECT BRIBERY PENALTIES If the act was not accomplished: Prision correccional in its medium period (2 years, 4 months and 1 day, to 4 years and 2 months imprisonment) and; Fine of not less than twice the value of the gift Special temporary disqualification

  16. MANNER OF COMMISSION To refrain from doing something that it is his official duty to do PENALTIES FOR THE THIRD FORM OF DIRECT BRIBERY PENALTIES Prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its minimum period (4 years, 2 months and 1 day to 8 years imprisonment and; Fine of not less than three times the value of the gift Special temporary disqualification

  17. A sanitary inspector who accepts a gift from the tenant of an unsanitary building and thereof refrains from performing his duty to report its condition to his superiors, is guilty under the third paragraph of Article 210. (U.S. v. Navarro,3 Phil.633) in consideration EXAMPLE OF THIRD FORM OF DIRECT BRIBERY

  18. Moral turpitude can be inferred from the third element. The fact that the offender agrees to accept a promise or gift and deliberately commits an unjust act or refrains from performing an official duty in exchange for some favors, denotes a malicious intent on the part of the offender to renege on the duties which he owes his fellowmen and society in general. Also, the fact that the offender takes advantage of his office and position is a betrayal of the trust reposed on him by the public. It is a conduct clearly contrary to the accepted rules of right and duty, justice, honesty and good morals. In all respects, direct bribery is a crime involving moral turpitude. (Magno v. Commission on Elections, et al., GR No. 147904, October 4,2002) DIRECT BRIBERY IS A CRIME INVOLVING MORAL TURPITUDE

  19. 1. That the offender is a public officer. ELEMENTS OF INDIRECT BRIBERY 2. 3. That he accepts gifts. That the gifts are offered to him by reason of his office

  20. Prision medium and maximum periods (imprisonment for 2 years, 4 months and 1 day up to 6 years) Suspension Public censure correccional in its PENALTIES FOR INDIRECT BRIBERY

  21. A public officer should not accept any gift offered to him, because such gift is offered in anticipation of future favor from him. Such gift received now will in the future corrupt him or make him omit the performance of his official duty. GIFT IS USUALLY GIVEN TO THE PUBLIC OFFICER IN ANTICIPATION OF FUTURE FAVOR FROM THE PUBLIC OFFICER

  22. A veterinarian entrusted with the duty of examining mules which were offered Government, received a certain amount of money from the vendor of mules after the latter had received from the Government the purchase price of the mules sold. There was no evidence to the effect that the money was given for the purpose of preventing the veterinarian from doing or inducing him to do something pertaining to his office. (US v. Richards, 6 Phil. 545). He accepted the gift offered to him by reason of his office. of the Board of Health, for sale to the EXAMPLE OF INDIRECT BRIBERY

  23. The essential ingredient of direct bribery as defined on Article 211 of the Revised Penal Code is that the public officer concerned must have accepted the gift or material consideration. There must be a clear intention on the part of the public officer to take the gift so offered and consider the same as his own property from then on,such as putting away the gift for safekeeping or pocketing the same. unaccompanied by any other sign, circumstance or act to show such acceptance is not sufficient to lead the court to conclude that the crime of indirect bribery has been committed. To hold otherwise will encourage unscrupulous individuals to frame up public officers by simply putting within their physical custody some gift, money or other property. (Formilleza v. Sandiganbayan, 159 SCRA 1). WHO SHALL ACCEPT GIFTS OFFERED TO HIM Mere physical receipt

  24. Indirect bribery has no attempted or frustrated stage of execution, because it is accepting gifts offered to the public officer by reason of his office. If he does not accept the gifts; he does not commit the crime. If he accepts the gifts,it is consummated. committed by THERE IS NO ATTEMPTED OR FRUSTRATED INDIRECT BRIBERY

  25. DIRECT BRIBERY INDIRECT BRIBERY the receives gift public officer the receives gift public officer there is an agreement between the officer and the giver of the gift or present the offender agrees to perform or performs an act or refrains doing because of the gift or promise usually, agreement exists no such DIRECT BRIBERY DISTINGUISHED FROM INDIRECT BRIBERY public it is not necessary that the officer should do any particular even promise to do an act, as it is enough that he accepts gifts offered to him by reason of his office from act or something,

  26. P was an employee of the Manila Health Department assigned to prepare and follow up vouchers of the employees who were laid off. Knowing that B was to be laid off, P offered B to prepare his voucher for accumulated and terminal leave pay, on condition that the latter would give the former P50, to which B agreed. When B received his pay, he gave P the sum of P50. CONSIDERED INDIRECT BRIBERY, EVEN IF THERE WAS A SORT OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN PUBLIC OFFICER AND GIVER OF GIFT Held: P was without any right whatsoever to receive P50 for his services, because he was an employee of the government assigned performed for B. (People v. Pamplona, C.A., 51 O.G. 4116) The accused was found guilty of indirect bribery. to do the work he

  27. Presidential Decree No. 46 which took effect on November 10,1972 The President of the Philippines has made it punishable for any public official or employee, whether of the national or local governments, to receive, directly or indirectly, and for private persons to give, or offer to give, any gift, present or other valuable thing on any occasion, including Christmas, when such gift, present or other valuable thing is given by reason of his official position, regardless of whether or not the same is for past favor or favors or the giver hopes or expects to receive a favor or better treatment in the future from the public official or employee concerned in the discharge of his official functions. Included within the prohibition is the throwing of parties or entertainments in honor of the official or employee or of his immediate relatives. RECEIVING OF GIFTS BY PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES, AND GIVING OF GIFTS BY PRIVATE PERSONS, ON ANY OCCASION, INCLUDING CHRISTMAS IS PUNISHABLE

  28. Imprisonment for not less than one (1) year nor more than five (5) years;and Perpetual office disqualification from public PENALTY FOR VIOLATION OF PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 46 The official or employee concerned shall likewise be subject to administrative disciplinary action and, if found guilty, shall be meted out suspension or removal, depending on the seriousness of the offense the penalty of

  29. The court is constrained to disapprove the recommendation as to the first charge of indirect bribery which is fully supported by the evidence that respondent Judge be suspended from office for 2 years and 4 consideration the penalty prescribed in the Revised Penal Code. The penalty of 2 years and 4 months imprisonment provided for the criminal offense of indirect bribery may not be equated with the penalty of separation from the judicial service which is the administrative penalty by virtue of respondent Judge s serious misconduct prejudicial to the judiciary and the public interest. (Cabrera v. Pajares,142 SCRA 127) months, taking into CRIMINAL PENALTY OF IMPRISONMENT IS DISTINCT FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTY OF SEPARATION FROM THE JUDICIAL SERVICE proper applicable

  30. 1) That the offender is a public officer entrusted with law enforcement; That the offender arresting or prosecuting an offender who has committed punishable by reclusion perpetua and/or death; That the offender arresting or prosecuting offender in consideration of any offer,promise,gift or present. 2) refrains from ELEMENTS OF QUALIFIED BRIBERY a crime 3) refrains from the

  31. The bribery is the penalty for the offense which prosecuted. If it is the public officer who asks or demands such gift or present, he shall suffer the penalty of death. ( as added by R.A.No.7659) penalty for qualified was not PENALTY FOR QUALIFIED BRIBERY

  32. 1) That the offender makes offers or promises or gives gifts or presents to a public officer. That the offer or promises are made or the gifts or presents given to a public officer, under circumstances that will make the public officer liable for direct bribery or indirect bribery. 2) ELEMENTS OF CORRUPTION OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS

  33. The offender is the giver of the gifts or offeror of promise. The public officer sought to be bribed is not criminally liable, unless he accepts the gift or consents to the offer of the offender. Article 212 punishes the person who made the offer or promise or gave the gift, even if the gift was demanded by the public officer and the offer was not made voluntarily prior to the said demand by the public officer. THE OFFENDER IN CORRUPTION OF PUBLIC OFFICER IS THE GIVER OF GIFT OR OFFEROR OF PROMISE

  34. In view of the fact that it is hard to prove bribery, for the briber himself is punished by law and he is usually the only one who could give direct evidence ways and means are resorted to,to catch the public officer while he is in the act of obtaining bribes.This is known as entrapment. BRIBERY IS USUALLY PROVED BY EVIDENCE ACQUIRED IN ENTRAPMENT Thus, an NBI agent who, posing as one interested in expediting the approval of license for firearm, gave P50 to the public officer who had hinted that he was not averse to receiving some money for expediting the approval resorted to ways and means to catch the public officer, it appearing that there was a ground of suspicion or belief of the existence of official graft in that office.(People v.Vinzol,C.A.,47 O.G.294) of licenses, merely

  35. It was approved on July 18,1975 PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 749 Grants immunity from prosecution to givers of bribes and other gifts and to their accomplices in bribery and other graft cases against public officers

More Related Content

giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#