Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
1960 to 2021.

Every enactment, amendment and Supreme Court reading on file for this law, in the order they happened.

1enactment3amendments9SC rulings

Amended by · 3

Statutes that changed this one.

  • RA 30471964RA 3047 expands coverage and penaltiesRepublic Act No. 3047 amended RA 3019 to expand its coverage and increase penalties. The amendment clarified certain provisions on prohibited acts and strengthened enforcement mechanisms.
  • PD 6771975PD 677 further amends RA 3019President Marcos issued Presidential Decree No. 677 to amend several provisions of RA 3019. The decree modified penalty structures and added procedural requirements for prosecution of graft cases.
  • BP 1951979Batas Pambansa Blg. 195 introduced further modificationsBatas Pambansa Blg. 195 amended RA 3019 by modifying certain prohibited acts and clarifying the scope of criminal liability. It addressed ambiguities identified in early jurisprudence.
  1. 1960 EnactmentAug 1960

    RA 3019

    Republic Act No. 3019 signed into law

    President Carlos P. Garcia signed the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act into law on August 17, 1960. The law penalized graft and corrupt practices by public officers and private persons, establishing criminal liability for acts such as bribery, receiving gifts, and causing undue injury to the government.

  2. 1964 AmendmentJun 1964

    RA 3047

    RA 3047 expands coverage and penalties

    Republic Act No. 3047 amended RA 3019 to expand its coverage and increase penalties. The amendment clarified certain provisions on prohibited acts and strengthened enforcement mechanisms.

  3. 1975 AmendmentMay 1975

    PD 677

    PD 677 further amends RA 3019

    President Marcos issued Presidential Decree No. 677 to amend several provisions of RA 3019. The decree modified penalty structures and added procedural requirements for prosecution of graft cases.

  4. 1979 AmendmentApr 1979

    BP 195

    Batas Pambansa Blg. 195 introduced further modifications

    Batas Pambansa Blg. 195 amended RA 3019 by modifying certain prohibited acts and clarifying the scope of criminal liability. It addressed ambiguities identified in early jurisprudence.

  5. 1988 SC rulingFeb 1988

    G.R. No. 130319

    Venus v. Desierto - Probable cause standards for graft cases

    The Supreme Court established important standards for determining probable cause in graft cases. The decision clarified the evidentiary threshold required for filing informations under RA 3019.

  6. 2001 SC rulingNov 2001

    G.R. No. 84571

    Jacinto v. Sandiganbayan - Elements of Section 3(e) violations

    The Supreme Court definitively outlined the essential elements for conviction under Section 3(e) of RA 3019, the most commonly charged provision. The ruling requires proof of manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or gross inexcusable negligence.

  7. 2003 SC rulingJul 2003

    G.R. No. 81563

    Arias v. Sandiganbayan - Doctrine of reliance on subordinates

    The Supreme Court established the 'Arias doctrine' allowing heads of offices to rely in good faith on the recommendations of subordinates. This created an important defense in graft prosecutions involving routine transactions.

  8. 2007 SC rulingDec 2007

    G.R. No. 140358

    Presidential Commission on Good Government v. Desierto - Prescription period for RA 3019 violations

    The Supreme Court clarified that the prescriptive period for violations of RA 3019 is fifteen years, settling confusion over conflicting provisions. The ruling established when prescription begins to run in graft cases.

  9. 2011 SC rulingSep 2011

    G.R. No. 185926

    Villarosa v. People - Conspiracy in graft cases

    The Supreme Court expounded on the requirements for proving conspiracy in graft cases, holding that conspiracy must be proven with the same quantum of proof as the crime itself. Mere presence or knowledge is insufficient.

  10. 2014 SC rulingJul 2014

    G.R. No. 205728

    Desertion of public officers deemed irrelevant to jurisdiction

    The Supreme Court ruled that abandonment of position by a public officer does not divest the Sandiganbayan of jurisdiction over graft cases. The status at the time of the offense controls jurisdictional determination.

  11. 2016 SC rulingApr 2016

    G.R. No. 151258

    Villareal v. People - Evident bad faith and manifest partiality defined

    The Supreme Court comprehensively defined 'evident bad faith' and 'manifest partiality' as modes of committing Section 3(e). Bad faith requires dishonest purpose or moral obliquity; partiality requires clear bias.

  12. 2019 SC rulingFeb 2019

    G.R. No. 144784

    Sistoza v. Desierto - Undue injury and unwarranted benefits clarified

    The Supreme Court clarified that 'undue injury' and 'unwarranted benefits' are alternative conditions in Section 3(e), not cumulative requirements. Proving either satisfies the third element of the offense.

  13. 2021 SC rulingNov 2021

    G.R. No. 209251

    Uriarte v. People - Strict interpretation in favor of accused

    The Supreme Court reiterated that RA 3019, as a penal statute, must be strictly construed against the State and liberally in favor of the accused. Doubts must be resolved in favor of innocence.