Practice question
Property related to a stipulated laundering offense cannot be located despite due diligence. The State seeks forfeiture of other property of equivalent value under Section12(a). All statutory and third-party safeguards are satisfied. The owner argues that disappearance of the original property necessarily defeats every substitute-property remedy. Which answer is correct?
- Section12(a) expressly permits the equivalent-value category on the stated conditions
- The statute never permits equivalent-value forfeiture
- Due diligence is irrelevant under the stated statutory ground
- Any property of an unrelated innocent stranger may automatically be taken
- The provision itself eliminates the need for court proceedings
Legal references
- RA10365 Section9 amending AMLA Section12: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2013/ra_10365_2013.html AMLA Section12(a), equivalent-value paragraph.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.