The Supreme Court of the Philippines has delivered a decisive ruling that government officials cannot shield illegally acquired assets by registering them under the names of family members or other individuals.
Landmark Ruling on Ill-Gotten Wealth
In a significant decision, the Supreme Court's Third Division upheld the government's right to seize properties, bank deposits, and investment accounts belonging to the late Lt. Gen. Jacinto Ligot, former comptroller of the Armed Forces of the Philippines. The ruling extends to assets registered under his widow, children, and relatives.
Ligot, who retired from his position in 2004, passed away in 2024. Following his death, his children contested the government's forfeiture of his properties, which included multiple condominium units.
Lifestyle Check Reveals Massive Discrepancy
The case originated from a lifestyle check conducted by the Office of the Ombudsman, which discovered that Ligot's assets far exceeded his legitimate income. Investigators found approximately P135 million in ill-gotten wealth, prompting the filing of forfeiture proceedings with the Sandiganbayan.
The anti-graft court initially identified P102 million as confirmed ill-gotten wealth. The investigation further revealed that numerous properties were declared under the names of Ligot's wife and children but were purchased using the general's funds.
Legal Precedent Strengthens Anti-Corruption Fight
The Supreme Court emphasized that Republic Act No. 1379 covers not only properties directly under a public officer's name but also those concealed or transferred to spouses, relatives, or any other person when true ownership can be traced back to the official.
The court stated: "It bears emphasizing that Republic Act No. 1379 covers not only properties directly under the name of the public officer or employee but also those concealed or transferred to their spouse, relative, or any other person, so long as the true ownership is traceable to the said public officer or employee."
This interpretation prevents public officials from evading accountability by placing ill-gotten wealth under other people's names. Under Section 2 of the law, there exists a presumption of ill-gotten wealth even when properties are registered under other individuals' names.
