Scribd
Upload
139 views14 pages

Understanding Syndicated Estafa

1) The term "syndicate" in Presidential Decree No. 1689 refers to a group of at least five people who form an entity with the intention of carrying out an unlawful act. 2) Jurisprudence has clarified that simply because five people conspire to commit estafa against members of certain associations does not automatically make it a case of syndicated estafa. 3) There are three standards for a group to be considered a syndicate under PD 1689: they must have at least 5 members, formed or managed a specified type of financial institution, and formed or managed that institution with the intent to defraud its members through illegal acts.

Uploaded by

Lovely
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
139 views14 pages

Understanding Syndicated Estafa

1) The term "syndicate" in Presidential Decree No. 1689 refers to a group of at least five people who form an entity with the intention of carrying out an unlawful act. 2) Jurisprudence has clarified that simply because five people conspire to commit estafa against members of certain associations does not automatically make it a case of syndicated estafa. 3) There are three standards for a group to be considered a syndicate under PD 1689: they must have at least 5 members, formed or managed a specified type of financial institution, and formed or managed that institution with the intent to defraud its members through illegal acts.

Uploaded by

Lovely
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
  • Criminal Law – REMO v. SEC OF JUSTICE: Discusses the criminal law case REMO v. SEC OF JUSTICE, focusing on the interpretation and application of estafa under PD No. 1689.

CRIMINAL LAW

Art. 315
REMO v. SEC OF JUSTICE, G.R. No. 192925, Dec. 9, 2016
Estafa
(syndicated PD

In PD No. 1689, the term syndicate is described as "consisting

1689)

of five or more persons formed with the intention of carrying


out the unlawful or illegal act, transaction, enterprise or
scheme xxx." By itself, however, such description can be vague
and somewhat confusing. Indeed, going by the description
alone, one can be led into the inference that an estafa
committed by five conspiring persons against any of the
stockholders or members of the associations mentioned under
PD No. 1689 would automatically give rise to the crime of
syndicated estafa. But is such inference really what the law
contemplates?
Fortunately, the true import of the term "syndicate" has
already been elucidated upon by relevant jurisprudence.
Drawing from textual clues from the statute itself, our case
law answers the foregoing query with a clear no.
xxx
Dissecting the pronouncement in Galvez v. CA (GR No 187919)
for our present purposes, however, we are able to come up
with the following standards by which a group of purported
swindlers may be considered as a syndicate under PD No.
1689:
1. They must be at least 5 members
2. They must have formed or managed a rural bank,
cooperative, samahang nayon, farmers association or any
other corporation or association that solicits funds from the
general public
3. They formed or managed such association 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.

You might also like