Forfeited property

Dear Atty. Angela,

I am a concerned citizen who is seriously alarmed by the brazen acts of corruption in our country. With what I know, if properties or assets are not registered/titled under the name of the person who acquired it, then the government cannot garnish or forfeit them. Is this a general rule or the state still has the power to retrieve all these properties paid using ill-gotten gains?

Cathy

θ θ θ

Dear Cathy,

The Philippine government can forfeit private property acquired through corruption money. Republic Act 1379, also known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, allows for the civil forfeiture of property that is proven to be unlawfully acquired by public officials, even if the assets are held in the names of relatives or others.

In the case of The Heirs of Lieutenant General Jacinto C. Ligot v. Republic et al., G.R. Nos. 257827, 257940, 258109, and 259593 (5 March 2025), the Sandiganbayan found several undeclared properties registered under General Ligot’s name and/or his wife. Other undeclared properties were registered under their children’s names. It also traced several condominium units to General Ligot: Units in Makati City in his sister’s name, where most amortization payments were made by General Ligot and his wife; and a unit in Taguig City registered under his brother-in-law, which was originally purchased by General Ligot’s wife.

General Ligot and his family filed a petition before the Supreme Court, arguing that the condominium units in question were not his and had been legitimately purchased by his relatives. They also claimed that their deposits and invested funds were not disproportionate to the family’s income.

The SC rejected their claims and upheld the Sandiganbayan’s ruling.

The Court noted that General Ligot’s wife and children did not have independent income sources but still owned properties and held significant bank and investment accounts under their names. Regarding the condominiums, even though they were titled in his sister’s name, the amortizations were paid by General Ligot. The condominium listed under his brother-in-law’s name was initially bought by General Ligot’s wife, who lacked her own income.

The SC held that these circumstances indicate that General Ligot was the true owner, even if the legal titles were in other people’s names.

Under Republic Act 1379, properties of public officers are presumed to be illegally acquired when they are manifestly out of proportion to their lawful income. This presumption applies not only to properties under the public officer’s name but also to those hidden or transferred to others, as long as true ownership can be traced to the public officer.

Atty. Angela Antonio