Garcia: Non-disclosure of campaign donors no longer a criminal act | Storycon

Added: 2026-05-30

[00:00:00]Senator Rodante Marcoletta, what is the latest on that?

[00:00:03]>> Well, we indeed we dismissed the case simply because that under the Omnibus Election Code a candidate should reveal the names of the donors. But however, we were able to establish the fact that indeed But at the same time there was this law Republic Act 7166 1991 law amending the provision of the Omnibus Election Code saying that it is no longer a criminal act if you will not report the names of the contributors. So criminal decriminalized by the provision of Republic Act 7166.

[00:00:45]However, the donors are required to submit the certification of the contributions. The statement of contributions 30 days after the conduct of the election and that provision of the Omnibus Election Code was not repealed or amended by Republic Act 7166. So until today the cases against the three contributors are still undergoing preliminary investigation with the law department of the Commission on Election.

[00:01:14]>> So Republic Act 7166 decriminalized non-disclosure or inaccuracies in the SALN or misreporting in the SALN um So what is the penalty, sir? I mean for for candidates who do not declare contributions, for them to misdeclare contributions now that it's been decriminalized?

[00:01:36]>> Well, yes so it's no longer a criminal case. Administratively they can be required to file to pay administrative fine of ranging from 2,000 to 20,000 pesos depending on the position and or the depending on the amount involved. In fact, the non-filing of SALN under the Omnibus Election Code and under Republic Act 7166 is not criminal.

[00:02:00]It is actually punishable only as an administrative case and therefore I'm penalty is fine also and not imprisonment.

[00:02:09]>> 2,000 to 20,000 And 2,000 to 20,000 peso penalty. I think you will agree with me that's not really a deterrent.

[00:02:20]>> Yes, ma'am. And that's the reason That's the reason why we the committee has been pushing for the revision and or amendment of our existing law simply because you know when they decriminalize the non-filing or the non-revelation of the names of the of the contributors and donors. So far indeed when I don't have filing.

[00:02:41]>> Yeah.

[00:02:42]>> I'm I'm provision for the but it's nothing is which was actually several several years ago. The public first time filing you will be administratively fine 2 to 20,000 pesos. 2,000 to 20,000 pesos.

[00:02:56]However, if you fail to file two consecutive sources for two consecutive elections, I don't want to pass your case Joel Matura versus the Commission on Election. The Supreme Court said that it it should meet the penalty of perpetual disqualification to hold public office.

[00:03:15]>> Mhm. So technically >> I don't get the point but you failed to for two consecutive elections perpetual disqualification to hold public office for my mommy.

[00:03:28]>> So you penalty and jump up.

[00:03:30]>> Yes, ma'am. That's right. But you don't have filing and you don't have my mommy huh. Non-filing of something when I'm criminal liability but administrative that was not so say but that was my own problem. I you can be charged either an election offense or a perjury case liable for misdeclaration and or at the same time under the anti-graft and corrupt practices act but it can be my filing a case so office >> Sir, technically and legally, is that the 75 million, was that a campaign contribution or not? I ask that uh mukhang doon na gi-hinge ngayon 'yung plunder charge against Marcoleta. Uh on the on the idea that it is not a campaign contribution technically because it was before the start of the campaign period. So, as far as you're concerned, was it a campaign contribution technically or was it not?

[00:04:24]It was never resolved by the commission as regards as to whether this constitute a campaign contribution. Hindi po na doon kasi na sentro 'yung desisyon ng COMELEC. Perhaps uh Sir Ed uh uh and without prejudice to the outcome of the cases against the three contributors, perhaps that would be the defense of the contributors when they will be filing their counter-affidavits in the um uh preliminary investigation that uh that they are facing. Maari nilang i-raise nila because it was not the issue as resolved in the case as against Senator Marcoleta. Surely, ang magiging contention nila because of the case of Pineda versus the Commission on Elections, you are not yet considered a candidate until the first day of the campaign period and hence uh election laws will not be applicable sa'yo uh from the date of the filing of the candidacy until the very first day of the uh campaign period.

[00:05:20]Pero Sir, as a COMELEC what is your legal opinion on that? Kasi uh we we have this strange situation where uh a contribution was made supposedly to help in the campaign, but it is not a campaign contribution because it is not within the campaign period. Uh and so government is saying and the Ombudsman is saying na uh kung 'di 'yan campaign contribution, eh 'di ano 'yan donation 'yan na illegal.

[00:05:46]Kung napansin niyo Sir Ed, ganun ang exacto wordings ng >> because of the amendment of the law, but surely there will be a violation of the anti-graft and corruption So, part of the committee at this point for sure Ed, I will be I will be I will be one of those who will be deciding the case the cases as against the three uh contributors. And in fact, this is the best opportunity. Again, we would like to reiterate to our legislators, please try to we're hoping that they amend the provision of the public of 9369, which is the automated election law of which none of the same provision of Pinera and it says something there will be candidates only on the first day of the campaign period. The reason why we should remedy the situation is because we must not put next year you filing of my candidates is nothing by October in limbo. And they will be spending this left and right. They will be in on television, radio, and newspapers. And the question is can we require them to submit the the statement of expenditures during those periods when in fact that's the campaign period which start by February second week or more >> 27 >> for the local position for 2028 for >> 28 >> the government will be blamed by our people. We will be in in a deal. That's what happened in 2025. And so suddenly I put in fact there is a case before the Supreme Court. We already had decided.

[00:07:11]We were hoping that the the honorable Supreme Court would enhance or abandon this doctrine. We're hoping that it will be clarified. Now you in decision in 2000 and 2009 in case of Pinera versus Comelec uh is abandoned and therefore this time when they file their candidacies, they are now considered candidates. You put in and SK. Once they file their candidacies by uh September 28 to October 5, they are now considered candidates.

[00:07:41]>> Mhm.

[00:07:41]>> immediately.

[00:07:42]>> Why?

[00:07:43]>> Because the SK elections for my I Mr. Ed and Mr. Renz is a manual election and therefore we do not apply the provision of the >> And I mean common common sense logic tells us that they are candidates after they file their certificates of candidacy. That's the whole point, right? They're declaring to the to the citizens, to the voters that I am running. So so that the plan but can I did I hear that right? You have a case pending before the Supreme Court hoping to uh discard that Pinera doctrine?

[00:08:13]>> Yes, ma'am Renz. In fact, personally my opinion is they should be considered candidates already. Why ma'am ma'am Renz? Simply because uh when you file your candidacy, how can you be a substitute in case of your death or disqualification? We are allowing substitution. So if you are not yet a candidate from October, November, December or even January up to the second week of February, so you can be disqualified by the commission. There can be no substitution because that person a candidate. It is that there can be substitution in case of death or disqualification.

[00:08:52]From the running for a public office as a basis or ground for substitution.

[00:09:06]Actually, that will allow the donor's tax. And for the internal revenue code nothing, but in the case that you have mentioned the buyer and donor's So I think you didn't use the burial.

[00:09:21]I think it's some of the evidence of the office of the ombudsman later on. You can classify [clears throat] circumstances. So at least certain facts were we were able to settle in the case that we handled and these facts were now were the ones being used by the office of the Ombudsman right now Uh uh for purposes of prosecution.

[00:09:41]>> Mhm.

[00:09:42]>> Sir, one more Excuse me.

[00:09:48]>> In the case of Mike Defensor, um does doesn't his case run against uh section of section 95 of the Omnibus Election Code barring or banning mining companies and their officials from making contributions for campaigns? Kasi I mean I keep checking in at least in publicly sourced information, he still seems to be the CEO and chairman of Pax Libera Mining. Although the yesterday or the other day he was saying that he has already divested.

[00:10:22]>> Before pa he joined Congress.

[00:10:24]>> Mhm. Pero as late as last year I saw references to him being Pax Libera Mining uh by John No, by by uh Ombudsman Remulla. So, I don't know which is true.

[00:10:35]But anyway, I I wonder lang if that's also going to be part of the any investigation by the Comelec considering uh it's a mining company.

[00:10:46]>> That may be a part uh Sir Ed of the preliminary investigation being conducted now by the law department of the commission. Remember po, only the case as against the incumbent senator was dismissed but not the cases as against the uh contributor or the donor. So, that may also be included. In fact, we were we are so fully aware about section B of uh sub-section B of uh of section 95 of the Omnibus Election Code as regards the prohibition of for those who are engaged in mining or its officers from making donations or contributions.