CRIMINAL LAW Q.7 : Is Plunder mala in se? - BAR 2025

Описание: BAR 2025 - CRIMINAL LAW
QUESTION NO. 7

Charged with plunder, X invoked good faith claiming that he was a mere signatory to the transactions that led to the misappropriation of public funds amounting to PHP 60 million. The prosecution countered that since plunder is defined and punished under a special law, Republic Act No. 7080, it is malum prohibitum. Hence, good faith is not a defense. Is the prosecution correct? Reason(s).

SUGGESTED ANSWER
"No, the prosecution is not correct.
While Republic Act No. 7080 defines plunder as a special law, it is not strictly malum prohibitum. Jurisprudence (e.g., Estrada v. Sandiganbayan) clarifies that plunder requires criminal intent and knowledge, making good faith a valid defense. Here, X claims he was merely a signatory without intent to misappropriate funds. Thus, good faith may be considered, and the prosecution’s assertion is inaccurate.


This video is for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The content presented may not reflect the most current legal standards, answers or interpretations. No guarantee is made regarding the accuracy or completeness of the information.
THIS IS JUST A SUGGESTED ANSWER. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK.


#BAR2025
"CriminaLawPhilippines #CriminalLawQ&A
#CriminalLaw"
#amicuscurious
#AMYzingBar
For Educational Purposes only. Aral-aral din, pag may time ;)