Government officials who fail to accurately declare their assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN) may face administrative and criminal liability, particularly when they omit assets or make false statements in their sworn filings, a legal expert said.

Constitutional law professor Paolo Tamase of the University of the Philippines, speaking in a discussion on SALN scrutiny and the legal implications of unexplained wealth, said public officials must ensure that their declarations are accurate and complete because they are required to swear to the truthfulness of their submissions.

Tamase said inaccuracies in SALNs could have administrative consequences under Republic Act 6713, or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees.

SALN requirements are also covered by Republic Act 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, he said.

“Hindi accurate yung filing ng SALN, mayroon pong administratibong consequence,” Tamase said.

He added that omissions or false declarations could expose a public officer to criminal liability, depending on the circumstances and the applicable law.

Corrections to SALNs

Tamase said officials may correct errors in their SALNs, but the opportunity to do so is not unlimited.

He explained that errors may be flagged during the review of SALNs, and officials are generally given 30 days to correct their filings under the applicable rules.

However, if an official discovers an error only after the correction period has lapsed, the matter may have to be addressed in the next filing, he said.

The problem becomes more serious when a SALN remains inaccurate for several years, as this could indicate that assets or other information were not properly identified or declared.

“As much as possible, may paalala naman po talaga sa amin na gawing accurate yung aming SALN filing,” Tamase said.

He stressed that officials should not assume that they could indefinitely correct inaccurate declarations.

Omitted assets raise greater concerns

Tamase said authorities must distinguish between an honest mistake, an incorrect valuation and the deliberate omission of an asset.

An inaccurate valuation, particularly involving real property, may be explained depending on the facts and circumstances, he said.

But an asset that was not declared at all presents a different issue.

He cited the impeachment case of former Chief Justice Renato Corona, whose SALN declarations became a central issue in the proceedings.

Corona was impeached and convicted by the Senate in 2012 after questions were raised over his failure to declare foreign currency deposits.

Tamase said the case illustrated the difficulty of explaining an asset that had not been declared, particularly when the amount involved was substantial.

Hidden, unexplained and ill-gotten wealth

Tamase distinguished among hidden wealth, unexplained wealth and ill-gotten wealth.

Hidden wealth, he said, refers to assets that are concealed or not properly declared, including assets that may not be directly registered in an official’s name or may be held through arrangements such as trusts.

Unexplained wealth, meanwhile, refers to assets that have been declared but cannot be adequately explained in relation to an official’s salary and lawful income.

He said public officials may legally engage in businesses or receive passive income, provided they comply with restrictions on conflicts of interest and other applicable laws.

A disparity between an official’s declared wealth and lawful income, however, may raise questions that the official must explain in the appropriate proceedings.

“If yung unexplained wealth po ay hindi pa rin maipaliwanag, doon po nagkakaroon ng presumption na ill-gotten siya,” Tamase said.

He emphasized that the law does not prohibit officials from being wealthy, including those who come from affluent families or have legitimate business interests.

The issue is whether their wealth was acquired through lawful means, rather than through public funds or illegal activities.

Lifestyle and tax returns

Tamase said lifestyle checks and comparisons with tax declarations could help identify potential discrepancies in an official’s SALN.

The government has limited resources to review the SALNs of more than a million public officials and employees, he said.

As a result, discrepancies are often uncovered after complaints are filed or when an official becomes the subject of a case.

He said investigators could compare an official’s declared income in tax returns with the wealth reflected in the SALN and the person’s apparent lifestyle.

For example, an official who declares only a modest salary but owns several houses may be asked to explain how the properties were acquired.

Tamase stressed, however, that a discrepancy does not automatically establish wrongdoing, as the official must be given an opportunity to explain the source of the assets.

Retired justices to weigh in on impeachment

Tamase also discussed the participation of retired Supreme Court justices and former members of the Constitutional Commission as amici curiae in the impeachment proceedings.

He said the invited legal experts included three retired chief justices and two former members of the Constitutional Commission, which helped draft the 1987 Constitution.

Their views could provide an objective legal perspective on the constitutional issues involved in the impeachment proceedings, he said.

Tamase acknowledged that senators have the authority to interpret the Constitution themselves, but said the opinions of retired justices and former constitutional framers could help inform their deliberations.

He said the legal experts, having retired from public office, could offer their views without the same career considerations that may affect sitting officials.

He urged the public and lawmakers to consider the legal arguments presented by the amici curiae before drawing conclusions on the impeachment issues.