Atty Angelito R Orozco

This June, the Philippines marks Judiciary Month, celebrating the 125th anniversary of the Supreme Court.

Declared under Presidential Proclamation No. 1265, s. 2026, the observance calls on government agencies, local government units, the private sector, and civil society to support and partake in the commemoration.

Established on June 11, 1901 through Act No. 136 of the Philippine Commission, the Supreme Court has stood as a pillar of justice—first led by Chief Justice Cayetano Arellano.

In line with this milestone year, the Court unveils a series of activities under the theme: “SC: 125 Years of Tradition and Innovation.”

Stay tuned for updates through the official social media channels of the Supreme Court.

Goodbye, muggy May. Hello, rainy June. Through every season, we strive to give our clients what they need most: trusted legal counsel, genuine care, and peace of mind. 📸 Atty Gina Buenconsejo Orozco

Early mornings, strong coffee, and quiet work — a simple rhythm I’ll always be thankful for. Rise & shine! ☕️🌅

NBI EXPLAINS

Understanding the AFASA Law

(Anti-Financial Account Scamming Act)

PASAY CITY, Philippines — Sa paglaganap ng online banking, digital wallets, at electronic money transfers, mas naging moderno at mas sopistikado rin ang mga pinansyal na scam at panloloko. Upang higit na mapalakas ang proteksyon ng publiko laban sa mga cyber-enabled financial fraud, ipinasa ng Pilipinas ang Republic Act No. 12010 o mas kilala bilang Anti-Financial Account Scamming Act (AFASA).

In simple terms, AFASA is a law designed to protect the public from scams involving bank accounts, e-wallets, online banking, and other financial accounts used in fraudulent activities.

What does AFASA punish?

AFASA penalizes individuals who use financial accounts to commit scams, fraud, or illegal transactions. These include:

1. Using another person’s bank or e-wallet account for fraudulent activities;
2. Selling or allowing others to use your account for scams;
3. Opening “dummy accounts” or “mule accounts” for criminal syndicates;
4. Phishing, social engineering, or tricking victims into giving OTPs or passwords;
5. Using stolen identities to create financial accounts;
6. Possessing or using devices or software intended for financial fraud.

Ano ang “money mule”?

Isa sa mga karaniwang modus na ginagamit ngayon ng mga scammer ay ang paggamit ng tinatawag na “money mule.”

Ang “money mule” ay isang tao na nagpapagamit ng kaniyang bank account, e-wallet, ATM account, o iba pang digital account upang tumanggap at maglipat ng perang nagmumula sa ilegal na gawain o panloloko.

Some people are deceived into becoming money mules by offers of easy money or online jobs. Others knowingly allow their accounts to be used in exchange for commissions.

Under AFASA, even allowing your account to be used for fraudulent transactions may result in criminal liability.

Common scams covered by AFASA:

1' Online banking fraud;
2. Fake investment scams;
3. OTP scams;
4. Phishing links;
5. Fake online selling;
6. E-wallet fraud;
7. Account takeovers;
8. Online lending harassment involving illegal fund transfers;
9. Social engineering scams.

Important reminder to the public:
Never give your:

1. OTP;
2. PIN;
3. Password;
4. Online banking credentials; and
5. E-wallet verification codes to anyone.

Ang mga bangko, e-wallet companies, at mga lehitimong institusyon ay hindi kailanman nanghihingi ng mga sensitibong inpormasyon through text messages, phone calls, or social media chats.

Pinapaalalahanan ng NBI ang publiko na huwag kailanman ibenta, ipahiram, o ipagamit sa iba ang kanilang bank account o e-wallet account. Ang maaaring magmukhang simpleng pabor o madaling pagkakakitaan ay maaaring magresulta sa pananagutang kriminal at pagsasampa ng kaso laban sa inyo sa ilalim ng AFASA law.

The NBI continues to strengthen its cybercrime, anti-fraud, and digital forensic capabilities in addressing emerging financial and cyber-enabled crimes in the country.

The has acquitted a man charged with violence against women and their children, or VAWC, for allegedly refusing to provide financial support to a child not proven to be his, emphasizing that a legal duty to provide financial support arises only after filiation or paternity has been established.

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Japar B. Dimaampao, the SC’s Third Division reversed the rulings of the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals, which found the accused guilty of economic abuse under Republic Act No. 9262, or the 𝘈𝘯𝘵𝘪-𝘝𝘪𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘈𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘵 𝘞𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘊𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘥𝘳𝘦𝘯 𝘈𝘤𝘵 𝘰𝘧 2004 (𝘈𝘯𝘵𝘪-𝘝𝘈𝘞𝘊 𝘈𝘤𝘵).

The case arose from a complaint filed by a woman against her former boyfriend, accusing him of refusing to provide financial support for her child.

The accused consistently denied he was the father, claiming that the child was born only eight months after they last had sexual relations.

During trial, the woman presented the child’s birth certificate as evidence. However, the portion indicating the father’s name, was marked "𝘕/𝘈" and left unsigned.

The woman also admitted in court that the accused refused to give financial support because he doubted that he was the child’s father.

In reversing the accused’s conviction, the SC explained that to convict a person for economic abuse under Section 5(i) of the 𝘈𝘯𝘵𝘪-𝘝𝘈𝘞𝘊 𝘈𝘤𝘵, the prosecution must show the following: (1) the victim is a woman and/or her child; (2) the woman is the offender’s wife or partner, or someone with whom the offender has a common child; (3) the offender refused to give financial support due; and (4) the refusal was intended to cause mental or emotional suffering.

In this case, the SC ruled that the prosecution failed to prove two essential elements: that the accused and the woman share a common child, and that the refusal to provide support was done to inflict psychological harm.

As the accused’s paternity was not proven in this case, no legal obligation to provide support could be imposed.

Read the full text of the Press Release at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=164663.

Read the full text of the Decision at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=164655.

Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution.

Mabunying araw ng uring manggagawa!

SBMA Reviews 5.31B Proposal To Upgrade Subic Airport

The Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority is reviewing a 5.31 billion peso unsolicited proposal from US based Cerberus Asia Pacific Investments to manage, operate, and upgrade Subic Bay International Airport. The proposal has received a go signal from the Public Private Partnership Center.

If approved, the project will follow an operate add transfer scheme, with Cerberus set to gain Original Proponent Status and undergo a Swiss Challenge. Plans include rehabilitating airport assets and building new facilities like hangars and storage areas to boost its role as a cargo and logistics hub.