The Supreme Court (SC) approved the rule on civil forfeiture of Philippine Offshore Gaming Operator (POGO)-related assets that will take effect on 24 August 2026.  

It was promulgated pursuant to Section 15 of Republic Act No. 12312, also known as the “Anti-POGO Act of 2025, which prohibits the establishment, operation, or conduct of offshore gaming in the country.  

Section 15 of R.A. 12312 provides that all POGO buildings, facilities, materials, gaming equipment and paraphernalia shall be forfeited in favor of the government.    

The SC mandates the same provision to formulate rules of procedure governing the civil forfeiture of properties and proceeds related to illegal POGO operations.    

The SC in line with Section 15, constituted a technical working group (TWG)  chaired by Associate Justice Raul Villanueva to draft the rules on the civil forfeiture of POGO-related assets.    

The Court en banc eventually approved the TWG’s draft Rule on 15 April 2026 but was released to the public only yesterday.  

It covers properties, tools, instruments, or any other assets owned or controlled by POGOs and/or their service providers, such as buildings or other structures or facilities, materials, gaming equipment and paraphernalia.  

The petition for civil forfeiture should be filed with the regional trial court (TRC) having territorial jurisdiction over the area where the POGO-related assets is located.  

If a portion of the POGO-related assets is located outside the country, the Rule provides that the petition for civil forfeiture may be filed with the RTC of Manila or with the RTC having jurisdiction over the area where the portion of such POGO-related assets is located in the country.    

The petition for civil forfeiture should also contain a detailed inventory of the POGO-related assets sought to be forfeited.

On the other hand, the Rule, prohibits the forfeiture of POGO-related assets “from an innocent owner, bona fide purchaser for value, or secured creditor, who establishes that he or she did not know and had no reason to know of the prohibited acts and did not consent to or participate therein.”