SYNDICATED ESTAFA
“Section 1 of P.D. No. 1689 defines syndicated estafa in the following manner”
SECTION 1. Any person or persons who shall commit estafa or other forms of swindling as defined in Article 315 and 316 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, shall be punished by life imprisonment to death if the swindling (estafa) is committed by a syndicate consisting of five or more persons formed with the intention of carrying out the unlawful or illegal act, transaction, enterprise or scheme, and the defraudation result in the misappropriation of money contributed by stockholders or members of rural banks, cooperative, “samahan nayon(s)”, or farmer’s associations, or of funds solicited by corporations/associations from the general public.
P.D. No. 1689 seeks to impose a harsher penalty on certain forms of swindling, more particularly, syndicated estafa. The preamble of the decree recites:
WHEREAS, there is an upsurge in the commission of swindling and other forms of frauds in rural banks, cooperatives, “samahang nayon(s), and farmers associations or corporations/association operating on funds solicited from the general public:
WHEREAS, such defraudation or misappropriation of funds contributed by stockholders or members of such rule banks, cooperatives, “samahang nayon(s), or farmers associations, or of funds solicited by corporations/associations from the general public, erodes the confidence of the public in the banking and cooperative system, contravenes the public interest, and constitutes economic sabotage that threatens the stability of the nation;
WHEREAS, it is imperative that the resurgence of said crimes be checks, or at least minimized, by imposing capital punishment on certain forms of swindling and other frauds involving rule banks, cooperatives, samahang nayon(s), farmers’ associations or corporations/associations operating on funds solicited from the public.
P.D. No. 1689 condemns the taking by fraud or deceit of funds contributed by members of rural banks, cooperatives, samahang nayon or farmers’ associations, or of funds solicited by corporations or associations from the general public as such taking poses a serious threat to the general public. The elements of syndicated estafa are: a) Estafa or Other forms of Swindling, as defined in Articles 315 and 316 of the RPC, is committed; (b) the Estafa or Swindling is committed by a syndicate of five or more persons; and (c) defraudation results in the misappropriation of moneys contributed by stockholders, or members of rural banks, cooperative, “samahan nayon[s],” or farmers’ association, or of funds solicited by corporation/associations from the general public.”[1].
“In essence, syndicated estafa is but the commission of any kind of estafa under Article 315 of the RPC (or other forms of swindling under Article 316) with two additional conditions: one, the estafa or swindling was perpetrated by a “syndicate” and two, the estafa or swindling resulted in the “misappropriation of money contributed by stockholders, or farmers’ association, or of funds solicited by corporations/associations from the general public”[2]
Elements of syndicated estafa:
“Thus, the elements of Syndicated Estafa are as follows: (a) Estafa or Other forms of Swindling, as defined in Articles 315 and 316 of the RPC, is committed; (b) the Estafa or Swindling is committed by a syndicate of five or more persons; and (c) defraudation results in the misappropriation of moneys contributed by stockholders, or members of rural banks, cooperative, “samahan nayon[s],” or farmers’ association, or of funds solicited by corporation/associations from the general public.[3]
What constitutes a syndicate?
“The case of Remo v. Devanadera[4] clarifies the standards on what constitutes a syndicate under PD 1689, to wit”
- [The group] must be at least five (5) members.
- [The group] must have formed or managed a rural bank, cooperative, “samahan nayon.” Farmer’s association or any other corporation or association that solicits funds from the general public.
- [The group] formed or managed such accommodation with the intention of carrying out an unlawful or illegal act, transaction, enterprise or scheme i.e., they used the very association that they formed or managed as the means to defraud its own stockholders, members and depositors.” (Citations omitted)
Being incorporates and officers of a corporation does not automatically connote conspiracy.[5]
The crime of syndicated estafa can only be committed by the enumerated groups created for the sole purpose of defrauding its members through misappropriating the funds solicited from band contributed by them.[6]
[1] Home Development Mutual Fund v. Sagan. G.R. No. 205698, July 31, 2018, citing People v. Tibayan, G.R. No. 209655-60, January 24, 2015
[2] Remo, et al. Vs. Hon. Secretary of Justice DEvanadera, et al., G.R. No. 192925, December 9, 2016
[3] People v. Aquino, G.R. No. 234818, November 5, 2018, cited in Debuque v. Nilson, G.R. No. 191718, May 10, 2021
[4] 802 Phil. 860 (2016), cited in Debuque v. Nilson, G.R. No. 191718, May 10, 2021
[5] Debuque v. Nilson, G.R. No. 191718, May 10, 2021
[6] Home Development Mutual Fund v. Sagan. G.R. No. 205698, July 31, 2018,