May Pogo-related assets be forfeited in favor of the government?

Land, paraphernalia, and other properties directly or indirectly used by Philippine offshore gaming operations (Pogo) to commit prohibited acts specified in Republic Act No. 12312 (“Anti-

POGO Act”) may be civilly forfeited in the government’s favor, under the Supreme Court’s Administrative Matter No. 25-11-29-SC, entitled “Rule on the Civil Forfeiture of POGO-Related Assets” (the “Rule”).

Thus, forfeiture shall only be limited to Pogo-related assets proven to be connected to the committed acts under the Anti-POGO Act.

Nevertheless, these properties may not be forfeited if this would adversely affect the interest of an innocent owner, bona fide purchaser for value, or secured creditor.

In this regard, this individual should first establish that he did not know and had no reason to know of the prohibited acts. Moreover, he did not consent to or participate in committing these acts.

Pending the resolution of the civil forfeiture proceedings, the concerned Regional Trial Court (RTC) may authorize the provisional release of a portion of the Pogo-related assets as may be sought by petitioner Republic of the Philippines (“Republic”) in the same petition or a separate motion.

The corresponding court order shall contain a detailed inventory of the Pogo-related assets to be released, as well as guidance on the use and disposition of the released assets and their maintenance or preservation.

Misuse, unauthorized disposition, or deviation from the terms of the release order shall constitute contempt of court and may result in such order revoked and provisional preservation measures reimposed.

Upon trial, the RTC may find preponderant evidence in the Republic’s favor and grant its petition. Thus, in its judgment, it may declare the subject Pogo-related assets forfeited and adjudge other necessary reliefs.

If the RTC issued a provisional release order over the Pogo-related assets, it shall include in the judgment a ruling on the use and disposition of any of these assets, such as, for instance, their continued use by any government agency, branch, or instrumentality for operational support, victim protection, or other appropriate purpose.

Such use or disposition shall be governed by applicable government accounting, disposal, and audit rules and regulations.

Meanwhile, if the RTC would find that respondent in the forfeiture proceedings lawfully owned or possessed the confiscated or seized assets, then it shall order their return or restitution, without prejudice to the rights and welfare of the identified victims.

In any case, upon finality of the RTC’s judgment, all provisional, preservation, and control measures issued under Section 10 of the Rule shall either be lifted, made permanent, or converted into appropriate and consistent implementation orders.

Furthermore, this judgment may be promulgated, let alone the forfeiture proceedings may be commenced, even when there is no prior criminal charge, pendency, or conviction for any of the prohibited acts under the Anti-POGO Act.

Consequently, any such judgment shall not prejudice or otherwise affect any criminal action involving the same Pogo-related assets that may be pursued.

Once the judgment of forfeiture is promulgated, and within 48 hours from its release, the RTC shall immediately cause it to be continuously posted for seven calendar days in three conspicuous, public places in the city or municipality where the forfeited Pogo-related assets are located. If these assets involved real property, the RTC shall cause the corresponding notice to posted on a conspicuous place in that property.

Thereafter, any person not been impleaded in the forfeiture proceedings who claims an interest over any of these assets may apply for, by verified petition, a declaration that they legitimately belong to him, and their exclusion or segregation.

The RTC which presided over the forfeiture proceedings shall then issue an order on this contested claim within 30 calendar days from the Republic’s filing of its comment on the claimant’s petition.