[REPUBLIC ACT NO.

11032]

“AN ACT PROMOTING EASE OF DOING BUSINESS AND EFFICIENT DELIVERY OF

GOVERNMENT SERVICES, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9485,
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE ANTI-RED TAPE ACT OF 2007, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES”
May 28, 2018

BACKGROUND:

Republic Act No. 11032, an amendment to the Anti-Red Tape Act of 2007 (Republic Act
No. 9485), is about streamlining and improving the current systems and procedures of government
services. It aims to cut excessive red tape and make it easier to start and operate a business in the country.
Chief among its reforms is the automation of business registration processes — where all business
registration certificates, renewals, and permits are consolidated in a single, readily accessible online
platform.

The Ease of Doing Business (EODB) Law also addresses corruption and accountability
within the government. A zero-contact policy has been mandated, along with strict deadlines for
government services and penalties for officials and employees who do not comply.

PROHIBITED ACTS AND POSSIBLE OFFENDERS:

Section 21. Violations and Persons Liable— Any person who performs or cause the
performance of the following acts shall be liable:

(a) Refusal to accept application or request with complete requirements being submitted by an
applicant or requesting party without due cause;
(b) Imposition of additional requirements other than those listed in the Citizen’s Charter;
(c) Imposition of additional costs not reflected in the Citizen’s Charter;
(d) Failure to give the applicant or requesting party a written notice on the disapproval of an
application or request;
(e) Failure to render government services within the prescribed processing time on any application
or request without due cause;
(f) Failure to attend to applicants or requesting parties who are within the premises of the office or
agency concerned prior to the end of official working hours and during lunch break;
(g) Failure or refusal to issue official receipts; and
(h) Fixing and/or collusion with fixers in consideration of economic and/or other gain or advantage.

PENALTIES AND LIABILITIES:

Section 22. Penalties and Liabilities—Any violations of the preceding actions will warrant
the following penalties and liabilities.

(a) First Offense: Administrative liability with six (6) months suspension: Provided, however, That
in the case of fixing and/or collusion with fixers under Section 21(h), the penalty and liability
under Section 22(b) of this Act shall apply.
(b) Second Offense: Administrative liability and criminal liability of dismissal from the service,
perpetual disqualification from holding public office and forfeiture of retirement benefits and
imprisonment of one (1) year to six (6) years with a fine of not less than Five hundred thousand
pesos (P500,000.00) but not more than Two million pesos (P2,000,000.00).

Criminal liability shall also be incurred through the commission of bribery, extortion, or when the
violation was done deliberately and maliciously to solicit favor in cash or in kind. In such cases, the
pertinent provisions of the Revised Penal Code and other special laws shall apply.

VENUE/JURISDICTION:

Section 24. Administrative Jurisdiction— The administrative jurisdiction on any violation

of the provisions of this Act shall be vested in either the CSC, or the Office of the Ombudsman as
determined by appropriate laws and issuances.

[REPUBLIC ACT No. 11053]

“AN ACT AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8049 TO STRENGTHEN THE LAW ON HAZING AND
REGULATE OTHER FORMS OF INITIATION RITES OF FRATERNITIES, SORORITIES, AND
OTHER ORGANIZATIONS, PROVIDING PENALTIES THEREFOR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES”
June 29, 2018

BACKGROUND:

Republic Act 11053 (Anti-Hazing Act of 2018) gives teeth to the previous 1995 version of
the law as it now outrightly prohibits and makes hazing a criminal act while providing more substantial
penalties for those who will be proven guilty.

Specifically, the definition of hazing has been expanded to include “physical or psychological
suffering, harm or injury inflicted on a recruit, member, neophyte, or applicant” as a prerequisite for
admission or for continued membership in an organization. Further, banned under the law are “all forms
of hazing” not only in fraternities, sororities or organizations in schools, but also those in communities
and even businesses and uniformed service learning institutions.

PROHIBITED ACT:

Section 3. Prohibition on Hazing - All forms of hazing shall be prohibited in fraternities,

sororities, and organizations in schools, including citizens' military training and citizens' army training.
This prohibition shall likewise apply to all other fraternities, sororities, and organizations that are not
school-based, such as community-based and other similar fraternities, sororities and organizations:
Provided, That the physical, mental, and practices to determine and enhance the physical, mental, and
psychological fitness of prospective regular members of the AFP and the PNP as approved by the
Secretary of National Defense and National Police Commission, duly recommended by the Chief of Staff
of the AFP and Director General of the PNP, shall not be considered as hazing purposes of this Act:
Provided, further, That the exemption provided herein shall likewise apply to similar procedures and
practices approved by the respective heads of other uniformed learning institutions as to their prospective
members, nor shall this provision apply to any customary athletic events or other similar contests or
competitions or any activity or conduct that furthers a legal and legitimate objective, subject to prior
submission of a medical clearance or certificate.

In no case shall hazing be made a requirement for employment in any business or corporation.
POSSIBLE OFFENDERS:

The following are the persons who may be liable under the law:

(a) Officers and members of fraternity, sorority or organization who actually participated in the
infliction of physical harm;
(b) Officers or member who knowingly cooperated in carrying out the hazing by inducing the victim
to be present in it;
(c) Parents, if hazing is held in the home of one of the officers or members of the fraternity, group or
organization when they have actual knowledge of the hazing conducted but failed to prevent it
from happening;
(d) Officers, former officers, or alumni involved in the actual planning of the hazing even if absent
during hazing;
(e) Fraternity or sorority adviser who is present during hazing and failed to take action to prevent it
from happening;
(f) President, manager, director or other responsible officer of a corporation engaged in hazing as a
requisite for employment;
(g) School authorities and faculty member who consents to the activity, or has actual knowledge but
failed to take any action to prevent it from happening; and
(h) Owner of the place where hazing is conducted is he has actual knowledge of the hazing but failed
any action to prevent it from happening.

PENALTIES AND LIABILITIES:

Section 14. Penalties - The following penalties shall be imposed:

(a) The penalty of reclusion perpetua and a fine of Three million pesos (P3,000,000.00) shall
be imposed upon those who actually planned or participated in the hazing if, as a
consequence of the hazing, death, rape, sodomy, or mutilation results therefrom;
(b) The penalty of reclusion perpetua and a fine of Two million pesos (P2,000,000.00) shall
be imposed upon:
(1) All persons who actually planned or participated in the conduct of the hazing;
(2) All officers of the fraternity, sorority, or organization who are actually present during the
hazing;
(3) The adviser of a fraternity, sorority, or organization who is present when the acts constituting
the hazing were committed and failed to take action to prevent the same from occurring or
failed to promptly report the same to the law enforcement authorities if such adviser or adviser
or advisers can do so without peril to their person or their family;
(4) All former officers, nonresident members, or alumni of the fraternity, sorority, or organization
who are also present during the hazing: Provided, That should the former officer, nonresident
member, or alumnus be a member of the Philippine Bar, such member shall immediately be
subjected to disciplinary proceedings by the Supreme Court pursuant to its power to discipline
members of the Philippine Bar: Provided, further, That should the former officer, nonresident
member, or alumnus belong to any other profession subject to regulation by the Professional
Regulation Commission (PRC), such professional shall immediately be subjected to
disciplinary proceedings by the concerned Professional Regulatory Board, the imposable
penalty for which shall include, but is not limited to, suspension for a period of not less than
three (3) or revocation of the professional license. A suspended or revoked professional license
pursuant to this section may be reinstated upon submission of affidavits from at least three
(3) disinterested persons, good moral certifications from different unaffiliated and credible
government, religious, and socio-civic organizations and such other relevant evidence to show
 that the concerned professional has become morally fit for readmission into the profession:
Provided, That said readmission into the profession shall be subject to the approval of the
respective Professional Regulatory Board;
(5) Officers or members of a fraternity, sorority, or organization who knowingly cooperated in
carrying out the hazing by inducing the victim to be present thereat; and
(6) members of the fraternity, sorority, or organization who are present during the hazing when
they are intoxicated or under the influence of alcohol or illegal drugs;

(c) The penalty of reclusion temporal in its maximum period and a fine of One million pesos
(P1,000,000.00) shall be imposed upon all persons who are present in the conduct of the hazing;
(d) The penalty of reclusion temporal and a fine of One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) shall be
imposed upon former officers, nonresident member, alumni of the fraternity, sorority, or
organization who, after the commission of any of the prohibited acts proscribed herein, will
perform any act to hide, conceal, or otherwise hamper or obstruct any investigation that will be
conducted thereafter: Provided, That should the former officer, nonresident member, or alumnus
be a member of the Philippine Bar, such member shall immediately be subjected to disciplinary
proceedings by the Supreme Court pursuant to its power to discipline members of the Philippine
Bar: Provided, further, That should the former officer, nonresident members, or alumnus belong
to any other profession subject to regulation by the PRC, such professional shall immediately be
subjected to disciplinary proceedings by the concerned Professional Regulatory Board, the
imposable penalty for which shall include, but is not limited to, suspension for a period of not less
than three (3) years or revocation of the professional license pursuant to this section may be
reinstated upon submission of affidavits from at least three (3) disinterested persons, good moral
certifications from different unaffiliated and credible government, religious, and socio-civic
organizations, and such other relevant evidence to show that the concerned professional has
become morally fit for readmission into the profession: Provided, That said readmission into the
profession shall be subject to the approval of the respective Professional Regulatory Board.
(e) The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon any person who
shall intimidate, threaten, force, or employ, or administer any form of vexation against another
person for the purpose of recruitment in joining or promoting a particular fraternity, sorority, or
organization. The persistent and repeated proposal or invitation made to a person who had twice
refused to participate or join the proposed fraternity, sorority, or organization, shall be prima facie
evidence of vexation for purposes of this section; and
(f) A fine of One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) shall be imposed on the school if the fraternity,
sorority, or organization filed a written application to conduct an initiation which was
subsequently approved by the school and hazing occurred during the initiation rites or when no
representatives from the school were present during the initiation as provided under Section 5 of
this Act: Provided, That if hazing has been committed in circumvention of the provisions of this
Act, it is incumbent upon school officials to investigate motu propio and take an active role to
ascertain factual events and identity witnesses in order to determine the disciplinary sanctions it
may impose, as well as provide assistance to police authorities.

The owner or lessee of the place where hazing is conducted shall be liable as principal and
penalized under paragraphs (a) or (b) of this section, when such owner or lessee has actual knowledge of
the hazing conducted therein but failed to take any action to prevent the same from occurring or failed to
promptly report the same to the law enforcement authorities if they can do so without peril to their person
or their family. If the hazing is held in the home of one of the officers or members of the fraternity,
sorority, or organization, the parents shall be held liable as principals and penalized under paragraphs (a)
or (b) hereof when they have actual knowledge of the hazing conducted therein but failed to take any
action to prevent the same from occurring or failed to promptly report the same to the law enforcement
authorities if such parents can do so without peril to their person or their family.

The school authorities including faculty members as well as barangay, municipal, or city officials
shall be liable as an accomplice and likewise be held administratively accountable for hazing conducted
by the fraternities, sororities, other organizations, if it can be shown that the school or barangay,
municipal, or city officials allowed or consented to the conduct of hazing, but such officials failed to take
any action to prevent the same from occurring or failed to promptly report to the law enforcement
authorities if the same can be done without peril to their person or their family.

The presence of any person, even if such person is not a member of the fraternity, sorority, or
organization, during the hazing is prima facie evidence of participation therein as a principal unless such
person or persons prevented the commission of the acts punishable herein or promptly reported the same
to the law enforcement authorities if they can do so without peril, to their person or their family.

The incumbent officers of the fraternity, sorority, or organization concerned shall be jointly liable
with those members who actually participated in the hazing.

Any person charged under this Act shall not be entitled to the mitigating circumstances that there
was no intention to commit so grave a wrong.

This section shall apply to the president, manager, director, or other responsible officer of
businesses or corporations engaged hazing as a requirement for employment in the manner provided
herein.

Any conviction by final judgement shall be reflected on the scholastic record, personal, or
employment record of the person convicted, regardless of when the judgment conviction has become
final.

VENUE/JURISDICTION:

[REPUBLIC ACT NO. 11213]

“AN ACT ENHANCING REVENUE ADMINISTRATION AND COLLECTION BY GRANTING AN
AMNESTY ON ALL UNPAID INTERNAL REVENUE TAXES IMPOSED BY THE NATIONAL
GOVERNMENT FOR TAXABLE YEAR 2017 AND PRIOR YEARS WITH RESPECT TO ESTATE TAX,
OTHER INTERNAL REVENUE TAXES, AND TAX ON DELINQUENCIES”
February 14, 2019

BACKGROUND:

RA No. 11213 or the Tax Amnesty Act contains provisions on Estate Tax Amnesty and Tax
Amnesty on Delinquencies. The law aims to unburden taxpayers by forgiving past liabilities and with a
view of raising revenue for the government’s infrastructure and social projects.

POSSIBLE OFFENDERS:

The following persons may be penalized for any violations of the law:

(a) Any person having knowledge of the Tax Amnesty Return and appurtenant documents who
discloses any information relative thereto;
(b) Any officer or employee of the Bureau of Internal Revenue who divulges to any person or makes
known in any other manner than may be provided by law information regarding the business,
income, or estate of any taxpayer, the secrets, operation, style or work, or apparatus of any
manufacturer or producer, or confidential information regarding the business of any taxpayer;
and
 (c) Any officer or employee of the Bureau of Internal Revenue who divulges or makes known in any
other manner to any person other than the requesting foreign tax authority information
obtained from banks and financial institutions knowledge or information acquired by him in the
discharge of his official duties.

PROHIBITED ACTS AND ITS CORRESPONDING PENALTIES:

Section 25. Unlawful Divulgence of Tax Amnesty Return and Appurtenant

Documents - It shall be unlawful for any person having knowledge of the Tax Amnesty Return and
appurtenant documents, to disclose any information relative thereto, and any violation hereof shall be
penalized a fine of One hundred fifty thousand pesos (₱ 150,000) and imprisonment of not less than six
(6) years but not more than ten (10) years: Provided, That if the offender is an officer or employee of the
Bureau of Internal Revenue or any government entity, the penalties under Section 270 of the National
Internal Revenue Code of 1997, as amended, shall apply: Provided, further, That the offender shall
likewise suffer an additional penalty of perpetual disqualification to hold public office.

Section 270 (NIRC). Unlawful Divulgence of Information - Except as provided in

Sections 6(F) and 71 of this Code and Section 26 of Republic Act No. 6388, any officer or employee of
the Bureau of Internal Revenue who divulges to any person or makes known in any other manner than
may be provided by law information regarding the business, income, or estate of any taxpayer, the
secrets, operation, style or work, or apparatus of any manufacturer or producer, or confidential
information regarding the business of any taxpayer, knowledge of which was acquired by him in the
discharge of his official duties, shall, upon conviction for each act or omission, be punished by a fine of
not less than Fifty thousand pesos (₱ 50,000) but not more than One hundred thousand pesos
(₱ 100,000), or suffer imprisonment of not less than two (2) years but not more than five (5) years, or
both.

Any officer or employee of the Bureau of Internal Revenue who divulges or makes known in any
other manner to any person other than the requesting foreign tax authority information obtained from
banks and financial institutions pursuant to Section 6(F), knowledge or information acquired by him in
the discharge of his official duties, shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not less than Five
hundred thousand pesos (₱ 500,000) but not more than One million pesos (₱ 1,000,000), or suffer
imprisonment of not less than two (2) years but not more than five (5) years, or both.

VENUE/JURISDICTION:

[REPUBLIC ACT NO. 11058]

“AN ACT STRENGTHENING COMPLIANCE WITH OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH

STANDARDS AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF”
August 17, 2018

BACKGROUND:

RA 11058 requires employers to provide complete safe work procedures; inform workers of
hazards associated with their specific jobs; provide appropriate and personal protective equipment which
have passed the DOLE’s required tests; and provide access to mandatory OSH trainings as prescribed by
the DOLE.

Workers, on the other hand, are encouraged to know all they could about the risks inherent in the
tasks they perform, refuse unsafe work, report accidents and actively participate in planning and
implementing the safety and health program of the company they work for.
POSSIBLE OFFENDERS:

Below are the persons who may be held liable for any violations of this Act:

(a) Employer; and

(b) Contractor or subcontractor.

PROHIBITED ACTS:

Section 28. Prohibited Acts. - The following are considered as prohibited acts:

(a) Willful failure or refusal of an employer, contractor or subcontractor to comply with the required
OSH standards or with a compliance order issued by the Secretary of Labor and Employment or by the
Secretary’s authorized representative shall make such employer, contractor or subcontractor liable for
an administrative fine not exceeding One hundred thousand pesos (₱ 100,000.00) per day until the
violation is corrected, counted from the date the employer or contractor is notified of the violation or
the date the compliance order is duly served on the employer. The amount of fine imposed shall depend
on the frequency or gravity of the violation committed or the damage caused: Provide, however, That
the maximum amount shall be imposed only when the violation exposes the workers to a risk of death,
serious injury or serious illness.

(b) An employer, contractor or subcontractor who willfully fails or refuses to comply with the required
OSH standards or with a duly issued compliance order, and engages in any of the following acts to aid,
conceal or facilitate such noncompliance shall be liable for a maximum of One hundred thousand pesos
(₱ 100,000.00) administrative fine separate from the daily fine imposed above:

(1) Repeated obstruction, delay or refusal to provide the Secretary of Labor and Employment or
any of its authorized representatives access to the covered workplace or refusal to provide or allow
access to relevant records and documents or obstruct the conduct of investigation of any fact
necessary in determining compliance with OSH standards;
(2) Misrepresentation in relation to adherence to OSH standards, knowing such statement, report
or record submitted to the DOLE to be false in any material aspect;
(3) Making retaliatory measures such as termination of employment, refusal to pay, reducing
wages and benefits or in any manner discriminates against any workers who has given
information relative to the inspection being conducted.

VENUE/JURISDICTION: