WHAT IS THE LEGAL DEFINITION OF CORRUPTION?

WHAT IS THE LEGAL DEFINITION OF CORRUPTION?

Most of us use the words graft and corruption interchangeably, but I would argue that there is an important distinction. To me, corruption is the cause, while graft is the effect. Corruption is the temptation; graft is what happens when someone gives in.

Think of it this way: when a public official demands money from a citizen in exchange for a signature, that is solicitation. When a citizen slips an envelope to an official in exchange for approval, that is bribery. Both involve the exchange of money—but notice the direction of the temptation. In solicitation, the official dangles the bait; in bribery, the citizen offers it. Either way, when money changes hands in the context of public service, the result is graft.

From a moral perspective, corruption resembles the Christian concept of temptation. Temptation itself is not sin—it becomes sin only when one gives in. Similarly, a public official could be offered a bribe but refuse it. In that case, corruption was present, but no crime was committed. The real crime occurs when the temptation results in an actual act of dishonesty.

The problem, of course, is that in real-world cases—like the infamous ghost flood-control projects—it is often unclear who acted first. Did the engineers demand bribes from contractors, as some claim? Or did the contractors themselves offer money to get ahead? In truth, it may not even matter anymore, because once graft has happened, the damage is done.

Now, what does the law say?

In Philippine law, corruption is addressed mainly under Republic Act No. 3019, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. The law doesn’t give a neat one-liner definition but instead lists concrete acts, such as:

• Influencing another public officer to break rules.

• Requesting or receiving gifts or benefits in connection with government transactions.

• Accepting employment or favors from entities with pending official business.

• Misusing public funds, entering into disadvantageous contracts, or using one’s office for personal benefit.

Other related laws expand on this. RA 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards) requires public officials to file Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALNs) and to live by the values of integrity and transparency. The Revised Penal Code penalizes bribery, malversation, and other dishonest acts. The Ombudsman Act (RA 6770) gives the Ombudsman the mandate to investigate and prosecute corruption cases.

If corruption is the umbrella term, graft is a specific manifestation. Corruption can include nepotism, favoritism, embezzlement, or political patronage. But graft, in our context, often means the dishonest acquisition of public funds—kickbacks, ghost projects, overpriced contracts, or undue advantage. That is why when we hear of a new scandal, we usually hear of cases being filed before the Sandiganbayan for graft, not for corruption.

To put it simply: corruption is the disease, graft is one of its symptoms.

But here is where I want to challenge both the government and citizens. We can endlessly debate definitions, but the bigger problem is our tolerance for these practices. Too often, bribery is excused as “lubricating the system.” Too often, solicitation is tolerated because “that’s how things get done.”

If we view corruption as mere temptation, then resisting it becomes a matter of moral discipline. But can we realistically expect individuals—especially poor applicants at city hall—to resist paying grease money when their livelihoods are on the line? This is why systemic reform is needed. Laws alone are not enough; what we need is a culture where solicitation is punished swiftly and bribery becomes socially unacceptable.

The Philippines has had moments of global recognition. In 2019, we ranked among the top countries in the Open Budget Survey when it came to public participation. We also pioneered mechanisms like the Citizens’ Participatory Audit and Bottom-up Budgeting. These show that transparency and accountability can work here. But all too often, reforms remain ad hoc, reversible, or captured by political elites.

So perhaps the real question is not just, “What is the legal definition of corruption?” but rather: How do we make the definition matter? How do we translate those words in RA 3019 into everyday practice where bribery and solicitation are the exception, not the norm?

Until we answer that, corruption will remain not just a legal problem, but a cultural one—an environment of temptation where graft inevitably thrives. And the tragedy is this: in a country where every peso could build a classroom, a health center, or a farm-to-market road, every peso lost to graft is not just stolen money. It is a stolen opportunity.

Ramon Ike V. Seneres, www.facebook.com/ike.seneres

iseneres@yahoo.com, senseneres.blogspot.com 

01-22-2026