Public funds are not always required to prosecute a person for plunder, the Department of Justice (DOJ) clarified on Monday amid questions surrounding the plunder complaint filed against Sen. Rodante Marcoleta.

Justice Undersecretary Nicholas Felix Ty said the Anti-Plunder Law broadly defines "ill-gotten wealth" and does not limit the offense to the misuse of government funds.

The clarification came after questions were raised over why prosecutors pursued a plunder charge against Marcoleta despite allegations that the P75 million involved came from private individuals rather than public funds.

Ty said the key provision of the Anti-Plunder Law is its definition of ill-gotten wealth, which identifies several ways such wealth may be acquired, including the receipt of gifts or other financial benefits by reason of a public official's office or position.

He cited a provision of the law stating that a public official may commit plunder by "receiving directly or indirectly any commission, gift, share, percentage, kickback, or any form of pecuniary benefit from any person in connection with any government contract or project, or by reason of the office or position of the public officer."

"From a plain reading of the law, the subject funds for a prosecution on plunder do not need to be public funds," Ty said.

The DOJ issued the clarification after former presidential spokesperson Salvador Panelo questioned the filing of a plunder complaint against Marcoleta, arguing that the allegations involve private donations rather than government money.

Panelo said that if the allegations are proven, the case would be more appropriately classified as graft instead of plunder.

"In my opinion, it should fall under graft. Plunder is government money. So how can plunder be included?" Panelo said in an earlier interview.

He also argued that prosecutors would face difficulty proving the elements of plunder because the funds allegedly involved did not come from the government.

The complaint against Marcoleta stems from allegations that he received about P75 million in campaign donations from private individuals, which critics claimed were not properly declared.

The DOJ, however, maintained that under the Anti-Plunder Law, criminal liability may arise from the unlawful receipt of commissions, gifts or other pecuniary benefits connected to a public official's office, regardless of whether the funds originated from government coffers.