Tapat Na Paglilingkod Act

TWENTIETH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES First Regular Session ) 25 JUL 14 A11:50 SENATE RECEIVED BY S. No. 523 Introduced by Senator Loren Legarda AN ACT INSTITUTIONALIZING A NATIONAL ANTI-CORRUPTION MAINSTREAMING AGENDA, STRENGTHENING INTEGRITY SYSTEMS AND ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISMS ACROSS ALL BRANCHES AND LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT, PROMOTING A CULTURE OF TAPAT NA PAGLILINGKOD IN PUBLIC SERVICE, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR EXPLANATORY NOTE Corruption in the Philippines is woven into the fabric of everyday life. For many citizens, it has ceased to shock—as when small entrepreneurs bribe for permits, students pay off school officials, or everyday public services demand a cut. Surveys reflect this resignation: when asked, many people say they will vote for the "least evil" candidate, while others shrug, "di naman naiwasan magnakaw" ("stealing is unavoidable"). This normalization is heartbreak born of generations of inefficiency, weak deterrents, and impunity. Surveys and field reports reflect this public resignation. Reports have shown that 40% believed most companies engaged in bribery to win public contracts. 1 Globally, the Philippines scored only 33 out of 100 in Transparency International's 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI)- significantly below the Asia-Pacific regional average of 44, and ranking 114th out of 180 countries. More than a governance 1 https://www.ganintegrity.com/country- profiles/philippines/ #:~:text=Public%20procurement%20Two%20in%20five%20companies%20indic ate, public%20officials%2C%20is%20very%20common%20(GCR%202017%2D2018). - retrieved on July 10, 2025 2 https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2024/index/phl - retrieved on July 10, 2025

failure, these numbers signal lost development potential, diminished investor confidence, and deepening public distrust. The cost is staggering. The World Bank previously estimated that corruption may cost the Philippines as much as 20% of its national budget. According to the Office of the Ombudsman, the country loses up to P700 billion every year due to corruption. That amount is close to the entire 2024 budget of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), which funds roads, bridges, and vital public infrastructure. It is also more than triple the annual budget of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD). These losses could have funded thousands of classrooms, modernized government hospitals, delivered clean drinking water to rural barangays, or completely digitized government frontline services. Every peso lost to corruption is a peso stolen from a child's future, a worker's dignity, or a community's growth. Yet for all the losses caused by corruption, only a small fraction of wrongdoers are ever investigated, and with much less having been punished. This imbalance between the scale of wrongdoing and the rarity of accountability creates a dangerous norm: that corruption is low-risk and high-reward. It emboldens those in power to bend the rules with confidence and convinces ordinary citizens that speaking up is futile. Worse, it discourages honest officials and public servants from resisting corrupt practices, knowing that the system rarely protects the righteous or rewards integrity. For all the country's national development plans across sectors such as infrastructure, social protection, agriculture, and local governance, corruption is rarely, if ever, meaningfully addressed. The language of planning is often clean, technical, and optimistic. This is in stark contrast to what is actually happening behind closed doors and in hushed meeting rooms. If you ask those on the ground-contractors, suppliers, engineers, frontline workers-the reality is far more complex. But no one 3 https://business.inquirer.net/390650/a-look-at-how-corruption-works-in-the- philippines#:~:text=According%20to%20the%202007%20study,percent)%20of%20the%20national %20budget. — retrieved on July 10, 2025 4 https://www.abs-cbn.com/news/08/15/19/p700-billion-lost-yearly-due-to-corruption-says-official - retrieved on July 10, 2025 5 Philippine Institute for Development Studies. (2001). Corruption in the Philippines. Development Research News, Vol. 5 No. 1 (January-June 2001). Retrieved from https://pids.gov.ph/publication/news/2819 on July 10, 2025.

dares to ask more meaningful questions as to why this is the case. In sectors like infrastructure, which handle massive budgets and long procurement chains, corruption risks are not hypothetical; they are endemic. Yet these risks are invisible in the very plans that are meant to drive reform. This bill recognizes that we cannot keep designing policies and programs as if corruption were not a central barrier to development. It is time we redirected our technocratic capacity not to bypass corruption, but to confront it strategically, structurally, and systemically. To confront this challenge, we must break the culture of corruption. We must be able to name it, talk about it, and dismantle it. But we cannot do this solely through punishment, especially when corruption is embedded in entrenched systems upheld by powerful actors. A purely punitive approach suppresses honest discourse and discourages brave public officials and whistleblowers. In the current system, an impervious invisible wall persists-unspoken yet deeply felt. It divides ordinary civil servants from those perceived as beyond reproach. This wall is built by fear, hierarchy, and resignation. It shields the powerful while exposing the rank-and-file to scrutiny and risk, creating a dangerous norm where accountability is selective and integrity becomes burdensome. This bill confronts that imbalance by replacing silence with structure, fear with safeguards, and selective outrage with systemic reform. It creates space for truth and restores the moral foundation of public service without sowing division or condemnation. This approach affirms, once more, that honesty and integrity are not lofty ideals, but the necessary ground on which the true work of government must stand. This measure proposes a developmental, strategic, and systems-based approach where corruption is seen as a development challenge and a fundamental obstacle to national progress. It shifts the paradigm: • From punishment to prevention, from vindictiveness to pragmatism-by embedding anti-corruption safeguards into planning, budgeting, HR, and service delivery systems; • From siloed enforcement to whole-of-government coordination, through the creation of the Anti-Corruption Mainstreaming Council (ACMC);

• From secrecy to openness— by institutionalizing internal integrity checks, public dashboards, protected discourse, and active partnerships with journalists, civil society, and citizens. The Tapat na Paglilingkod Act is both a legal mandate and our cultural reset button: 1. All agencies must map corruption vulnerabilities, report them under oath, and design internal systems for prevention; 2. Whistleblowers are given real protection, access to assistance, and recognition for good faith disclosures; 3. Government employees are encouraged to speak about corruption, learn from each other's failures and reforms, and be assured that honest discourse-when conducted professionally-is not disloyalty but integrity; 4. The role of media and public information outlets is recognized as essential. Communication becomes part of the integrity architecture: dashboards, bulletins, public forums, and transparency protocols are no longer optional— they are embedded into performance and governance. Ultimately, this bill reimagines anti-corruption reform not anymore as a punitive campaign that had been attempted for so long and which had failed systematically, but as a pillar of sustainable development, civic dignity, and democratic accountability. It is time to break the silence that corruption relies on. The Tapat na Paglilingkod Act is not a campaign slogan. It is a commitment to reshape the lived experience of governance in the Philippines. It honors the public servants whose integrity endured amid indifference, fear, or helplessness and who chose honesty even when the system offered no reward for it. This law is for them. It is also for the future we must now build where tapat na paglilingkod is the expectation and not the exception. In view of the foregoing, the urgent passage of this bill is sought. LOREN LEGARDA

fror of t. TWENTIETH CONGRESS OF THE ) REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES 25 JUL 14 A11:50 First Regular Session SENATE RECEIVED EY: S. No._ Introduced by Senator Loren Legarda AN ACT INSTITUTIONALIZING A NATIONAL ANTI-CORRUPTION MAINSTREAMING AGENDA, STRENGTHENING INTEGRITY SYSTEMS AND ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISMS ACROSS ALL BRANCHES AND LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT, PROMOTING A CULTURE OF TAPAT NA PAGLILINGKOD IN PUBLIC SERVICE, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled:

Section 1. Short Title. - This Act shall be known as the "Tapat na Paglilingkod

2 Act. "

Sec. 2. Declaration of Policy. - It is the policy of the State to regard corruption

4 not solely as a criminal offense but as a fundamental barrier to national development, 5 social equity, and institutional trust. In pursuit of sustainable development and responsive governance, the State shall adopt a preventive, strategic, and systems- 7 based approach to combat corruption through risk identification, internal control, 8 cross-institutional coordination, citizen engagement, and cultural transformation. Corruption shall be addressed as a developmental issue, one that erodes the effectiveness of public investment, distorts resource allocation, undermines service delivery, and deepens poverty and inequality. It shall be treated not only as a matter of individual misconduct but as a structural weakness that requires integrated solutions across institutions, policies, and cultural norms. Anti-corruption efforts shall therefore be mainstreamed into governance planning, budgeting systems, and performance evaluation frameworks as a core pillar of inclusive and sustainable development.

Sec. 3. Institutional Principles for Implementation. - To enable a culture of

prevention, transparency, and reform, the following principles shall govern the implementation of this Act and all agency-level initiatives to combat corruption: a) Openness to Discourse. - Public officials and government employees shall not be discouraged or penalized for engaging in good faith discussions, critiques, or analyses concerning systemic corruption vulnerabilities within and across government agencies, provided that such discourse is conducted professionally and without malice; b) Non-Retaliation for Transparency. - No person shall be subject to administrative or disciplinary action, including harassment, transfer, denial of promotion, or baseless complaints, solely for having spoken, written, or shared in a forthright and respectful manner about corruption risks or control weaknesses in any public agency or institution; c) Anti-Censorship Clause. - Statements made by public officials or government employees in connection with internal audits, compliance reporting, integrity workshops, or participatory forums under this Act shall be presumed as protected discourse. Such statements shall not be construed as libelous, defamatory, or disloyalty to the service if made in the context of performance improvement or transparency; d) Cross-Agency Learning. - Government agencies are encouraged to learn from each other's experiences, including by sharing case studies of past lapses or successful reforms. No stigma shall attach to the open acknowledgment of corruption incidents that have been addressed with institutional remedies; e) Professional Courtesy and Evidence Standards. - All discussions concerning corruption vulnerabilities shall observe professional language and shall not name individuals unless supported by formal findings, internal documentation, or legal proceedings. Discussions must focus on systems, processes, and improvement, not personal attacks; f) Intergenerational Responsibility. - Public service must be anchored not only in present-day accountability but in the duty to protect future generations from institutional decay and systemic corruption.

Government institutions shall adopt forward-looking approaches that strengthen integrity systems, preserve public trust, and ensure that today's governance choices do not burden tomorrow's citizens with the consequences of unaddressed corruption.

Sec. 4. Definition of Terms. - For purposes of this Act:

a) Anti-Corruption Mainstreaming Agenda (NACMA) refers to the six-year national strategic framework that integrates corruption prevention, institutional integrity, and risk management into the development agenda, fiscal governance, public investment planning, and service delivery. It shall be forward-looking, participatory, and regularly updated to reflect changing governance contexts, innovations, and long-term national goals; b) Anti-Corruption Mainstreaming Council (ACMC) refers to the inter-agency coordinating body created under this Act, mandated to oversee the development, implementation, monitoring, and cross-sector alignment of NACMA; c) Corruption refers to any act or omission by a public employee, public official, or private individual that involves the abuse of entrusted power, position, or resources for personal or political gain. This includes, but is not limited to, bribery, fraud, embezzlement, favoritism, rent-seeking, conflict of interest, and collusion, whether these are committed directly or indirectly, and whether in violation of existing laws or internal rules, when such conduct undermines public trust, impairs service delivery, or distorts institutional integrity; d) Corruption Vulnerability List refers to a documented and annually updated inventory of historical, current, and potential corruption risks in an agency, categorized by process, actor, transaction type, enabling environment, and institutional impact; e) Internal Anti-Corruption Plan refers to an agency-specific strategic response outlining preventive, monitoring, and remedial measures against identified corruption risks, with clear accountability, timelines, and control points;

f) Corruption Risk Mapping refers to the process of identifying, analyzing, prioritizing, and visualizing areas, actors, and functions vulnerable to corrupt conduct across agency workflows, programs, and resource use; 9) Whistleblower refers to any individual, whether from within or outside the agency, who discloses in good faith any corrupt conduct, systemic weakness, or risk-related irregularity in the public sector, and who may be eligible for protection or reward under this Act; and h) Public Disclosure Dashboard refers to an integrated online platform managed by the ACMC Secretariat that consolidates validated information on corruption risks, compliance reports, internal controls, and agency performance.

Sec. 5. National Anti-Corruption Mainstreaming Agenda (NACMA). -

a) There is hereby established a National Anti-Corruption Mainstreaming Agenda (NACMA), to be issued every six (6) years by the ACMC in consultation with relevant stakeholders. The NACMA shall be aligned with the government's current medium- and long-term development strategies and investment priorities, and shall be updated within one (1) year from the assumption of each new administration; b) The NACMA shall serve as a blueprint for the mainstreaming of anti- corruption systems into national and local governance. It shall define: 1. National anti-corruption outcomes and developmental targets; 2. Sectoral and agency-level deliverables and key results areas (KRAS); 3. Cross-cutting strategies on corruption risk prevention, enforcement coordination, institutional capacity building, and cultural reform; 4. Alignment with international standards, SDGs, and data openness initiatives; and 5. Priority reforms in high-risk sectors such as public procurement, permits and licensing, infrastructure, taxation, social protection, and public service delivery. c) The NACMA shall integrate preventive, curative, and punitive strategies, and shall apply to all branches, instrumentalities, agencies, and subdivisions of government. It shall also provide for intergenerational

safeguards that address corruption risks with long-term developmental impact, including but not limited to environmental misuse, interagency capture, and public investment inefficiencies; d) The NACMA shall include a Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) Framework that tracks progress through integrity indicators, corruption perception surveys, public feedback, and verified implementation reports, with results used to refine subsequent agenda cycles; and e) A Long-Term Integrity Outlook section shall be appended to every NACMA cycle, projecting emerging corruption risks, governance vulnerabilities, and system reforms needed over a 10- to 15-year horizon, based on foresight tools, institutional audits, and participatory scenario planning.

Sec. 6. Creation of the Anti-Corruption Mainstreaming Council (ACMC). -

a) There is hereby created a body to be known as the Anti-Corruption Mainstreaming Council (ACMC), which shall serve as the primary inter- agency coordinating body for the development, implementation, oversight, and evaluation of the National Anti-Corruption Mainstreaming Agenda (NACMA). The ACMC shall ensure the integration of corruption prevention systems, risk mapping, and institutional reform across all branches and levels of government; b) The ACMC shall be composed of the following members: 1. The Secretary of the Department of Economy, Planning, and Development (DEPDev) - Chairperson; 2. The Ombudsman - Co-Chairperson; 3. The Solicitor General; 4. The Secretary of Justice; 5. The Chairperson of the Civil Service Commission; 6. The Chairperson of the Commission on Audit; 7. The Executive Director of the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC); 8. The Director General of the Anti-Red Tape Authority (ARTA);

9. The Secretary of the Department of the Interior and Local Government; 10. The Secretary of the Department of Budget and Management; 11.One (1) representative from a duly accredited civil society organization, to be appointed by the President upon the recommendation of the Council; 12. One (1) media representative appointed by the President upon the recommendation of the Kapisanan ng mga Broadcasters ng Pilipinas, and 13. One (1) representative from the academic or research community with demonstrated expertise in governance, anti-corruption, or development policy, likewise to be appointed by the President upon the recommendation of the Council. The President may designate alternate representatives for each member in case of incapacity or vacancy. c) The Anti-Red Tape Authority (ARTA) shall serve as the Secretariat of the ACMC, unless otherwise designated by the Council; and d) The ACMC shall exercise the following powers and functions: 1. Formulate, adopt, and periodically update the National Anti- Corruption Mainstreaming Agenda (NACMA), including the long- term integrity outlook and monitoring framework; 2. Issue policy directives, implementing rules, and performance benchmarks to guide national agencies and local government units in the mainstreaming of anti-corruption and integrity systems; 3. Provide technical assistance and capacity development support to agencies and institutions in the preparation of corruption risk maps, internal anti-corruption plans, and reporting mechanisms; 4. Conduct independent and random field validations, spot audits, and process reviews in coordination with oversight agencies, and issue recommendations for remedial or legal action as necessary;

5. Coordinate with the Office of the Ombudsman, Department of Justice, Commission on Audit, Civil Service Commission, and other enforcement and disciplinary bodies in the filing of appropriate administrative, civil, or criminal cases arising from violations or findings made under this Act; 6. Compile, assess, and publish an Annual Anti-Corruption Compliance Report, containing agency performance summaries, implementation progress, institutional innovations, and verified cases of risk reduction or control failure, and submit the same to the Office of the President and the Congress of the Philippines; 7. Maintain and regularly update a National Corruption Risk Database and Monitoring Dashboard, which shall include disaggregated data on agency vulnerabilities, preventive measures adopted, whistleblower reports, and compliance levels; 8. Engage civil society, professional associations, and research institutions in evidence generation, participatory monitoring, feedback validation, and the dissemination of lessons and good practices; 9. Convene an annual Anti-Corruption Mainstreaming Forum, with public and private sector stakeholders, to assess trends, recommend strategy adjustments, and promote cross-sector collaboration in addressing systemic corruption; 10. Promote integrity education and values formation in partnership with the education and explore, in coordination with the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), Department of Education (DepEd), and relevant stakeholders, the integration of anti-corruption, civic ethics, and governance accountability into school and university curricula, leadership programs, and professional development courses, with a view to fostering long- term cultural change; and

11. Perform such other functions as may be necessary or incidental to the effective implementation of this Act and the attainment of its objectives. The DEPDev shall serve as the Secretariat of the Council, to be headed by an Executive Director appointed by the Chairperson from among senior officials or qualified professionals with expertise in governance, public administration, or anti- corruption systems. The Secretariat shall provide technical, administrative, and logistical support to 9 the ACMC, including the coordination of meetings, documentation of proceedings, management of reports, facilitation of consultations, and maintenance of the Public Disclosure Dashboard and Corruption Risk Database. To effectively carry out its mandate, the Secretariat may augment its personnel complement through new plantilla positions, secondments, or contractual arrangements, and shall be provided the necessary budget support for operations, capacity development, and information system needs. The required funding shall be charged to the appropriations of the DEPDev and included in its annual budget under 17 the General Appropriations Act.

Sec. 7. Duties of Government Agencies and Compliance Mechanisms. - To

institutionalize anti-corruption mainstreaming within public administration, all national government agencies, government-owned or -controlled corporations (GOCCS), constitutional bodies, and local government units (LGUs) shall comply with the following: a) Submission of Corruption Vulnerability List. - Each agency shall prepare and submit annually a Corruption Vulnerability List, which shall be certified under oath by the Head of Agency. The list shall include an inventory of actual, historical, and potential corruption activities and risks, organized by process area, transaction type, responsible unit or personnel category, enabling environment, and pattern of recurrence or exposure; b) Development and Implementation of an Internal Anti-Corruption Plan. - Each agency shall develop, adopt, and implement a comprehensive Internal Anti-Corruption Plan that outlines: 1. Preventive and control measures;

2. Monitoring and enforcement responsibilities; 3. Timelines and performance targets; and 4. Required system reforms or digital enhancements, where applicable. c) Institutionalization of Anti-Corruption Practices. - Agencies shall embed anti-corruption awareness and safeguards into their operations through the following measures: 1. Integration of corruption risk awareness and controls into onboarding manuals, competency standards, job descriptions, training programs, and operational handbooks; 2. Public display of simplified process flows, red flags, and integrity reminders in high-risk service areas such as procurement, licensing, permitting, and disbursement units; and 3. Establishment of an internal unit or team responsible for corruption monitoring and compliance oversight, which may be embedded in the Internal Audit Service, Legal Office, GAD Focal Point System, or equivalent. d) Promotion of Innovation and Digital Risk Tools. - Agencies are encouraged to adopt and localize technological solutions, including but not limited to: 1. Anonymous whistleblowing portals and digital grievance redress systems; and 2. Data analytics, automation, and artificial intelligence (Al)-enabled tools to detect anomalies, flag irregular transactions, and prevent manual override of controls. e) Perception and Feedback Surveys. - Each agency shall conduct an employee and client integrity perception survey at least once every two (2) years to assess cultural shifts, public confidence, and front-line service risk; and f) Anti-Corruption Compliance Reporting. - Each agency shall submit an Annual Anti-Corruption Compliance Report to the ACMC. This report may be submitted as a standalone document or as a section within the agency's annual report or performance accountability submissions to oversight

institutions such as the Department of Budget and Management (DBM), the Commission on Audit (COA), or the Civil Service Commission (CSC), as applicable. The report shall summarize the following: 1. Updated corruption vulnerability risks; 2. Implementation status of the Internal Anti-Corruption Plan; 3. Innovations adopted to strengthen integrity systems; 4. Actions taken on grievances or internal referrals; 5. Internal and external challenges encountered. The ACMC shall issue guidelines on harmonizing such reporting requirements with existing performance and accountability frameworks.

Sec. 8. Public Disclosure and Integrity Dashboard. -

a) There shall be established a centralized Public Disclosure Dashboard, to be developed, maintained, and regularly updated by the Secretariat of the ACMC, in coordination with the Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT); b) The dashboard shall serve as the government's official public transparency portal on anti-corruption mainstreaming and shall contain, subject to data privacy limitations, the following: 1. Agency-level summaries of corruption risks, internal control initiatives, and monitoring results, with identifying names redacted as necessary; 2. Status reports on the implementation of Internal Anti- Corruption Plans, including performance indicators and audit trail enhancements; 3. Integrity metrics, benchmarks, and compliance scores per agency, developed in accordance with guidelines to be issued by the ACMC. c) The dashboard shall be accessible to citizens, civil society, and researchers for monitoring, participation, and policy feedback. Civil society organizations, sectoral councils, academic institutions, and citizens shall be granted access to the dashboard for monitoring, research, or feedback purposes. Verified reports and constructive

assessments submitted through the platform shall be officially received and reviewed by the ACMC Secretariat; and d) The ACMC shall ensure the usability, security, and real-time updating of the dashboard and shall explore partnerships to promote public awareness and utilization of the tool.

Sec. 9. Whistleblower Protection and Incentives. -

a) A strengthened Whistleblower Protection Program is hereby institutionalized to protect individuals who, in good faith and without malice, disclose corrupt practices, systemic risks, or institutional misconduct in the public sector. In furtherance of this provision, the Anti-Corruption Mainstreaming Council (ACMC), in coordination with the Office of the Ombudsman, the Civil Service Commission (CSC), and the Department of Justice (DOJ, shall promulgate harmonized guidelines for the implementation of whistleblower protection across government agencies. The Program shall recognize, align, and build upon existing protection mechanisms under the Ombudsman Rules of Procedure, the Civil Service Rules, and the Witness Protection Program (WPP) of the DOJ, and shall include the following guarantees: 1. Freedom from Retaliation. - Whistleblowers shall be protected from reprisal, including but not limited to administrative harassment, constructive dismissal, demotion, unjust transfer, or denial of promotion; 2. Confidentiality and Safe Reporting. - Agencies shall ensure the confidential handling of identities and reports. Digital and physical whistleblower systems shall be secure, independent, and accessible; 3. Access to Assistance. - Whistleblowers may request legal assistance, psychosocial support, temporary reassignment, or relocation, subject to protocols established in the Implementing Rules and Regulations;

b) Subject to rules on confidentiality, whistleblowers who contribute to the successful identification, resolution, or prosecution of corruption risks or violations may be granted commendations, awards, or financial incentives, in accordance with ACMC-issued criteria and subject to budget availability; and c) The rights and protections of whistleblowers shall be upheld regardless of the outcome of the investigation, provided the disclosure was made in good faith and absent malice or gross negligence.

Sec. 10. Investigation and Enforcement Coordination. -

a) The Anti-Corruption Mainstreaming Council (ACMC) shall have the authority to refer verified reports, risk alerts, and unresolved control breaches to the appropriate investigative and prosecutorial bodies, including the Office of the Ombudsman, Department of Justice (DOJ, or law enforcement agencies, as may be warranted under applicable laws; b) The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) is hereby authorized to initiate civil actions for the recovery of public funds, restitution of damages, or administrative forfeiture of unlawfully acquired assets, based on documentary referrals or corruption risk triggers submitted by the ACMC or partner agencies; c) All government agencies, government-owned or -controlled corporations, and local government units shall cooperate with formal investigations, internal reviews, or field validation exercises initiated under this Act, and shall respond to official requests for documents, explanations, or records by the ACMC, Office of the Ombudsman, or the OSG within fifteen (15) working days from receipt of such request, unless a longer period is justified and approved by the requesting body; and d) Failure to comply with investigation-related requests under this section may constitute obstruction of compliance and may be subject to administrative or disciplinary proceedings.

Sec. 11. Institutional Culture and Integrity Mainstreaming. -

All covered entities shall undertake measures to strengthen ethical awareness, 3 agency-wide accountability, and a proactive culture of integrity. These shall include, 4 but not be limited to, the following: a) Monthly "Integrity Check-In" Bulletins or Communications. - Agencies shall publish internal updates on compliance efforts, process reminders, risk alerts, and success stories related to corruption prevention and institutional reforms; b) Quarterly Integrity Discussions. - Government offices shall dedicate at least one flag-raising ceremony or equivalent internal gathering per quarter to discuss agency integrity performance, lessons from past issues, or updates on anti-corruption plans; c) Recognition of Good Practice. - Heads of agencies are encouraged to establish merit-based internal recognition programs or awards for offices, teams, or personnel that have demonstrated strong internal controls, zero verified incidents, or exceptional contributions to risk reduction and institutional ethics; d) Inclusion in Performance Management. - Compliance with the provisions of this Act and agency integrity efforts shall be considered in the performance evaluation of relevant units and accountable officers, consistent with existing civil service rules; and e) Media Engagement and Transparency. - Agencies shall recognize the role of media, including independent journalists and public information platforms, as essential partners in promoting transparency and accountability. Subject to applicable laws on data privacy, security, and due process, agencies are encouraged to share non-confidential integrity data, compliance reports, and reform updates with the public and the media, and to respond to good faith inquiries on corruption risks and institutional efforts. The ACMC shall issue guidelines to support responsible information disclosure, promote transparency protocols, and facilitate constructive engagement with the press and other public interest communicators.

Sec. 12. Monitoring, Evaluation, and Legislative Review. -

a) The ACMC shall develop and adopt a Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for this Act, which shall include measurable Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for institutional integrity, risk mitigation, and compliance; b) The Department of Economy, Planning, and Development (DEPDev) shall assist Congress in conducting a triennial legislative review of this Act, and shall prepare an implementation assessment, emerging risk landscape, and policy improvement recommendations based on nationwide compliance and performance data; c) The performance indicators to be used shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 1. The number, quality, and trend of corruption risks identified and disclosed per agency or sector; 2. The extent of execution and success of Internal Anti- Corruption Plans, including resolution of previously reported risks; 3. Changes in employee and citizen perception of transparency, accountability, and institutional trust as measured through independent surveys or audit-based ratings; and 4. Innovations or reforms introduced as a result of internal or ACMC-led assessments. d) The ACMC shall publish an Annual Anti-Corruption Compliance Report, which shall include agency-level summaries, highlights of reform efforts, dashboard analytics, and recommendations for further action. Such report shall be transmitted to the Office of the President and both Houses of Congress.

Sec. 13. Harmonization with Existing Mandates. - Nothing in this Act shall

diminish the mandates of the Anti-Red Tape Authority (ARTA), the Office of the Ombudsman, the Commission on Audit, or other agencies involved in promoting transparency and accountability. The ACMC shall coordinate with these bodies to ensure synergy and avoid duplication of functions. The ACMC shall also issue

1 harmonization guidelines, including integration of this Act's requirements with existing citizen charter compliance, audit protocols, and performance accountability systems.

Sec. 14. Penalties and Administrative Sanctions. -

a) Failure to Submit Required Reports. - Non-submission or unjustified delay in submitting the Corruption Vulnerability List or the Annual Anti- Corruption Compliance Report shall constitute gross neglect of duty, and may be subject to appropriate disciplinary action in accordance with Civil Service laws and rules; b) Falsification or Misrepresentation. - Knowingly submitting falsified, incomplete, or materially misleading corruption risk reports, or omitting known risks from declared lists, shall be considered a serious administrative offense, and shall be subject to disciplinary proceedings and, where warranted, criminal prosecution under applicable laws; c) Obstruction and Retaliation. - Any act of reprisal against a whistleblower or agency personnel who participates in the implementation of this Act, or any act that obstructs the lawful conduct of field validations, internal reviews, or data submissions, shall give rise to disciplinary, civil, or criminal liability, without prejudice to other sanctions provided under existing laws such as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act; and d) Institutional Accountability. - Where institutional non-compliance is established through repeated failure to report, validate, or act on documented corruption risks such as when an agency fails to act upon verified corruption risks or persistently fails to comply with the requirements of this Act for two (2) consecutive reporting cycles, the ACMC shall formally refer the matter to the Office of the Ombudsman and the Commission on Audit for appropriate legal, fiscal, or administrative action, without prejudice to existing oversight mechanisms.

Sec. 15. Appropriations. - The funds necessary for the implementation of this

Act shall be charged against the current year's appropriations of the concerned agencies. Thereafter, such amounts shall be included in the annual General Appropriations Act.

Sec. 16. Implementing Rules and Regulations, - Within ninety (90) days from

the effectivity of this Act, the ACMC shall promulgate the implementing rules and regulations in consultation with relevant agencies and stakeholders.

Sec. 17. Transition and Phase-In. - Within one (1) year from the effectivity of

this Act and its IRR, all covered agencies shall have: a) Submitted an initial Corruption Vulnerability List and draft Internal Anti- Corruption Plan; b) Designated a unit or team responsible for compliance monitoring under this Act; c) Registered with the data reporting portal or other similar platform or mechanism established by ACMC; and d) Participated in at least one ACMC-led orientation, training, or consultative session. The ACMC may issue supplemental guidelines to facilitate phased implementation by agency size, mandate, or risk level. Technical assistance shall be prioritized for local government units and under-resourced agencies.

Sec. 18. Separability Clause. - If any provision of this Act is declared

unconstitutional or invalid, the remaining provisions shall remain in full force and effect.

Sec. 19. Repealing Clause. - All laws, presidential decrees, executive orders,

rules and regulations, or parts thereof inconsistent with this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.

Sec. 20. Effectivity Clause. - This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its

publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two (2) national newspapers of general circulation. Approved,