Atty. Jose Maria Rosales

03/07/2026

A Dose of Jurisprudence | PLUNDER

What is plunder?

Plunder, under Republic Act No. 7080, is defined as “any public officer who, by himself or in connivance with members of his family, relatives by affinity or consanguinity, business associates, subordinates or other persons, amasses, accumulates or acquires ill-gotten wealth through a combination or series of overt or criminal acts in the aggregate amount or total value of at least Fifty million pesos (P50,000,000.00).”

Simply stated, any government official, whether he is elected, appointed, or contracted, if through his office, acting alone or in connivance with others, amasses ill-gotten wealth through multiple acts, and the total amount illegally obtained is at least P50,000,000.00, plunder is committed.

So, if a politician pocketed Php 25,000,000 through kickbacks in one occasion and another Php 20,000,000 on a different occasion, this is not plunder as the total amount did not breach the Php 50,000,000.00 ceiling. Further, if a politician misappropriated Php 55,000,000.00 in one instance, this misappropriation is not punishable under RA 7080. Under same law, there must be a “combination” or “series” of overt and/or criminal acts to constitute the crime. One act alone, notwithstanding the amount malversated, does not become plunder.

Under RA 7080, any combination or series of the following acts constitute the crime:

Section 1 (D)
(1) Through misappropriation, conversion, misuse, or malversation of public funds or raids on the public treasury;

(2) By receiving, directly or indirectly, any commission, gift, share, percentage, kickbacks or any other form of pecuniary benefit from any person and/or entity in connection with any government contract or project or by reason of the office or position of the public officer concerned;

(3) By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition of assets belonging to the National Government or any of its subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities or government-owned or -controlled corporations and their subsidiaries;

(4) By obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or indirectly any shares of stock, equity or any other form of interest or participation including the promise of future employment in any business enterprise or undertaking;

(5) By establishing agricultural, industrial or commercial monopolies or other combinations and/or implementation of decrees and orders intended to benefit particular persons or special interests; or

(6) By taking undue advantage of official position, authority, relationship, connection or influence to unjustly enrich himself or themselves at the expense and to the damage and prejudice of the Filipino people and the Republic of the Philippines.

Lastly, the only category of persons who can commit plunder are those holding public office in the government by virtue of an appointment, election or contract.

As to the plunder case filed against Rodante Marcoleta, although the case filed against him was not made public, we can surmise that the charge against him is relative to Section 1 (D) (2) of RA 7080. Under said section, the crucial element is that the money was given to a politician for the reason of his office. Meaning, the politician, through the powers of his office, will favor who ever gave him the money by preferring him in government contracts and other lucrative engagements. In the case of Marcoleta, the Ombudsman alleged that the campaign contribution he received was plunder. However, it must be recalled that at the time he allegedly received the contribution, he was still a candidate for senator. Hence, the contribution was not for the reason of his office as a senator of the republic.

Moreover, campaign contribution of this magnitude is not something uncommon. In fact, one of the largest campaign contribution ever recorded was provided by a PBBM ally, who was eventually appointed as Special Assistant to the president.

12/06/2026

By virtue of Republic Act No. 4166, the 12th day of June was proclaimed to be the Philippine Independence Day; and pursuant to this proclamation, all citizens of the Philippines are enjoined to observe such day with rites befitting Independence Day.

To aid in the observance, this day is made a legal holiday, and all employees are excused from work with pay. Any worker who engages in work, are by law, entitled to double their compensation for the day's work.

01/06/2026

"SOCIAL JUSTICE and LABOR RIGHTS in the WORKPLACE: Dignity at work is not a privilege –IT IS YOUR RIGHT" a lecture forum on Labor Laws and Jurisprudence affecting employment held at BCC Activity Center, Bacolod City.

During this lecture a copy of Atty. Rosales' book entitled LABOR RELATIONS was raffled to one luckily winner.

For booking details for this lecture, you may send our office an FB private message or you may reach us at 700 2550 and [email protected].

27/05/2026

A DOSE OF JURISPRUDENCE | Can the NBI and CIDG raid your home at will?

NO. Under Philippine law, the NBI and CIDG wield tremendous power that can alter the life of person in one action. However, no matter how great the power is, it is helpless to override the constitutional guarantee to be free from illegal searches and seizures.

The Bill of Rights grants every person the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, and this right can only be put aside upon the issuance and ex*****on of a search warrant.

Hence, the NBI and CIDG, or any other law enforcement agency, cannot search your home absent a valid search warrant. They cannot raid you at will based on a hunch. A search warrant must first be applied for, and if there is probable cause, the judge will issue the search warrant. Only then can they search your house and not before.

What liabilities does the NBI and CIDG, or any other law enforcement agency, face if they violated the above constitutional guarantee?

Jail time. Under the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, specifically Article 128 thereof, the same penalizes any public officer who, without being authorized by judicial order, shall enter any dwelling against the will of the owner thereof, search papers or other effects found therein without the previous consent of such owner.

Our fundamental law, as substantiated by our criminal law, prohibits the abuse of power of persons who are entrusted with the same to carry out public good. However, either with ignorance or abetting, the current legacy establishments seem bent on normalizing the sidestepping constitutional right for their own political purposes.

But the law is not bent. It stays. You only need to invoke it.

13/05/2026

“Dignity at work is not a privilege –IT IS YOUR RIGHT”

Inviting all Bacolod City College graduating students for a lecture entitled: Social Justice and Labor Rights in the Workplace: A Graduate's Guide to Employment. This event will take place on June 1, 2026 10 AM at Bacolod City College Activity Center.

During this event our office will raffle a copy of Atty. Jose Maria Rosales’ book on Labor Relations published by CentralBooks
See you!

A copy of this book is for sale here: https://central.com.ph/product/rosales-labor-relations-the-labor-code-of-the-philippines-volume-ii-book-v-vi-vii/

11/05/2026

Delivering ACCESS TO JUSTICE to the community.

Today our office offered FREE consultation and FREE notary to the residents of Brgy. Alijis, Bacolod City.

09/05/2026

A Dose of Jurisprudence | DUE PROCESS FOR PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT

Scenario: Jose is an administrative aide in the Local Government Unit (LGU). One day, Jose was accused of stealing a chicken siopao that belonged to his supervisor Karra. The following morning, Karra signed a notice of decision which effectively terminates Jose as an LGU aide. Is this legal?

Under the Constitution, all workers, from the private sector to public employment, are entitled to security of tenure. This entitlement protects them from unreasonable and whimsical termination of their employment. Simply stated, a worker cannot be dismissed from his job without just cause and procedural due process.

Procedural due process simply means that an employee cannot be terminated if the process for his termination did not comply with the duly established procedure for termination.

In the case for the LGU, the established procedure is the Revised Rules for Administrative Cases in the Civil Service (RACCS). Under the RACCS, before a public servant can be terminated, certain steps must be complied with:

1. There must be a written complaint against the public servant and the same must be subscribed and sworn to by the complainant;

2. A preliminary investigation (PI) must be conducted which entitles the public servant to submit a counter-affidavit or comment in response to the complaint;

3. After the PI, there must be prima facie finding that the complaint is sufficient to prove the allegation;

4. If the complaint is sufficient, a formal charge is then issued against the public servant;

5. The public servant is entitled to file an answer to the formal charge;

6. If applicable, the public servant may be put on preventive suspension;

7. A formal investigation may be conducted if the complaint and the answer of the public servant, including the supporting documents, show that the merits of the case cannot be decided judiciously without conducting such investigation, or when the public servant elects to have one;

8. The case must be decided based on the evidence on record.

All the above steps, as mandated by the RACCS, are mandatory.

Being a public servant does not mean you are less protected by law. To the contrary, the procedural due process right accorded to a public servant is more pronounced in favor of the public service.

In the instant case, it is clear that Jose was not afforded his procedural due process rights. Therefore, as a matter of right, Jose has the right to be reinstated to his position.

25/04/2026

"ACCESS TO JUSTICE IS A RIGHT"

Free Walk-in Legal Consultation and Notarization of Simple Affidavits. Bring Two (2) Copies of the Affidavits to be Notarized and a valid government issued ID.

May 11, 2026 (Monday) 9AM to 12PM
at Barangay Alijis Celita Gym, Celita Village, Barangay Alijis Bacolod City.

Simple affidavits include:
Non-commercial documents
Affidavit of loss
Affidavit of birth
SALN for public school teachers
and other similar simple affidavits.

04/04/2026

A Dose of Jurisprudence | CAN THE GOVERNMENT TEMPORARILY TAKE OVER OPERATIONS OF THE OIL INDUSTRY?

In the case of ES Mendoza v. Shell, sometime in 2009, after the onslaught of Ondoy and Pepeng, then President Arroyo, after declaring a state of emergency, issued EO No. 839 directing oil industry players to maintain the oil prices of their petroleum products during the emergency. This EO found basis in Section 14(e) of Republic Act No. 8479 which provides: “In times of national emergency, when the public interest so requires, the DOE may, during the emergency and under reasonable terms prescribed by it, temporarily take over or direct the operation of any person or entity engaged in the Industry.”

Shell assailed the validity of the law claiming that the same is unreasonable and oppressive. However, in the end, the Supreme Court held that the law, specifically Section 14(e), is constitutional.

Further, this law finds support in Article XII, Section 17 of the Constitution, which provides: "In times of national emergency, when the public interest so requires, the State may during the emergency and under reasonable terms prescribed by it, temporarily take over or direct the operation of any privately owned public utility or business affected with public interest."

So yes, government has the apparent authority to do so, but the question: “Can the government temporarily take over operations of the oil industry?” is not the right question.

The proper question should be: “is this administration competent to temporarily take over operations of the oil industry?”

The answer, with its recent flip flop from “no crisis announcement” to forming a “crisis committee” is somewhere between “we don’t know” and “no”.

It's not looking good but let's hope and pray that this administration rise to the occasion and succeed in mitigating this crisis. I may be a critic but I leave room to hope that this government can be successful because if it is then it is the Filipino people who will ultimately win.

02/04/2026

A Dose of Jurisprudence | CAN YOU BE ARRESTED WITHOUT KNOWING THAT A CRIMINAL CASE WAS PREVIOUSLY FILED AGAINST YOU?

For purposes of illustration let us say that you cut-off the powerlines of a beer house because they played “my way” non-stop. The owner, feeling irritated, caused the filing of a complaint-affidavit for unjust vexation against you. After a few months, while at home unsuspectingly relaxing, and at the exact moment your eyes shut for a quick nap you suddenly hear a bang at your door, and before you know it a warrant of arrest was presented to you and you got to spend the night in jail pending the perfection for posting bail. Is this allowed under the law?

Yes. Under DOJ Department Circular No. 28 s. 2024, for crimes where the penalty prescribed is one (1) day to six (6) years, the Department of Justice, through the prosecutors, can resolve immediately a complaint-affidavit without the issuance of a subpoena against the respondent, if he determines that the affidavit is sufficient in form and complete in evidence.

Once the prosecution finds cause, the case will be elevated by filing an information with the courts; the court then, after sufficient determination for the issuance of a warrant of arrest will issue the same against you.

Once the warrant of arrest is out, “the end is near”; however, this arrest is not yet your sentence, this is just a process for the court to acquire jurisdiction over you, and once this phase is completed you can always post bail for your provisional liberty while you “face the final curtain.”

Official page of Atty. Jose Maria Rosales