Practice question
A public officer deliberately grants a private firm an unwarranted preference in the discharge of official functions through proved manifest partiality. The prosecution establishes those facts but proves no measurable government loss. The officer argues that absence of such loss automatically defeats section 3(e). Which is correct?
- Correct, because undue injury is the only outcome covered by section 3(e)
- Incorrect, because giving a private party unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference is an alternative statutory outcome
- Correct, because partiality is irrelevant without personal payment to the officer
- Incorrect, because any procurement irregularity alone conclusively proves graft
- Correct, because private firms cannot receive the prohibited advantage
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1960/ra_3019_1960.html — RA 3019, section 3(b), (c), (d), (e), (g) and (i), prohibited practices.
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/bataspam/bp1982/bp_195_1982.html — sections 2 and 4, amended RA 3019 penalty and earlier prescription provision.
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2016/ra_10910_2016.html — section 1, current twenty-year statutory prescriptive period.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.