Dear Attorney,

I hope this message finds you well. I am seeking your legal guidance regarding a summons I received back in April 2012. The case relates to the violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 (BP 22), which pertains to the issuance of a bounced check. I had issued a check in connection to a transaction with a company, which has now become the subject of the case. Unfortunately, the people I dealt with in that transaction did not fulfill their obligations, and it seems that their failure has placed me in this legal predicament. I recently learned that this case has affected my NBI clearance, which consistently registers a "hit."

Given this, I am deeply concerned about the ongoing repercussions and would appreciate your insights on how to address this issue, especially as it has persisted for over a decade now.

Please advise me on my legal options, the potential remedies I can pursue, and the steps I should take to resolve this matter as soon as possible. Your expert guidance on BP 22 cases and their legal consequences would be invaluable in helping me navigate this situation.

Sincerely,
A Concerned Individual

Understanding Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 (BP 22)

Introduction to BP 22
Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, also known as the Bouncing Checks Law, was enacted in 1979 to address issues arising from the issuance of checks without sufficient funds. This law was designed to protect the integrity of checks as financial instruments and to prevent their abuse. Under BP 22, any person who makes or issues a check knowing at the time of issuance that they do not have sufficient funds to cover the payment faces both civil and criminal liabilities.

The case you are referring to involves the issuance of a check that was eventually dishonored, leading to a legal complaint under BP 22. It's important to understand the legal framework of BP 22 and its implications on individuals who find themselves in similar situations. This article aims to provide a detailed and thorough discussion on all the legal aspects related to BP 22, as well as potential remedies for those facing charges under this law.

Key Elements of BP 22 Violations

To fully understand the issue at hand, it is essential to break down the specific elements required for a violation of BP 22 to occur. For a person to be charged under BP 22, the following elements must be present:

The Issuance of a Check
The first element requires that the accused must have issued a check. It doesn’t matter whether the check was issued as payment for goods or services, or as a loan repayment. The mere issuance of the check is the starting point of a potential BP 22 case.
Insufficient Funds
At the time the check was issued, there must be knowledge that there were insufficient funds in the issuer’s account to cover the amount of the check. This includes scenarios where the check bounces due to lack of funds, closed accounts, or a stop payment order issued by the account holder without valid reasons.
Dishonor of the Check
The check must have been dishonored by the drawee bank, typically due to insufficient funds, and the issuer must be notified of this fact. The dishonor of the check solidifies the violation.
Failure to Settle
The law gives the issuer five days from the date of dishonor to settle the payment or make arrangements to ensure that the check is funded. If the issuer fails to do so, BP 22’s penal provisions apply.

Penalties Under BP 22

The penalties for violating BP 22 include both criminal and civil liabilities. On the criminal side, a person found guilty under BP 22 may be sentenced to imprisonment of up to one year or fined an amount equal to double the value of the check in question, but not exceeding ₱200,000.

In terms of civil liability, the issuer of the check must pay the value of the check, plus any damages resulting from the dishonor, such as interest and litigation costs.

Notable Features of BP 22 Penalties

Imprisonment
BP 22 provides for the possibility of imprisonment for violators, with sentences ranging from 30 days to a maximum of one year, depending on the severity of the case. However, in recent years, the courts have emphasized the need for leniency, especially in cases where imprisonment may be disproportionate to the nature of the offense. In some cases, courts have opted for alternative penalties, such as fines, instead of imprisonment.
Fines
Fines imposed under BP 22 are set to double the value of the dishonored check but may not exceed ₱200,000. It’s also important to note that paying the fine does not relieve the issuer of their obligation to settle the amount of the dishonored check.
Compounding of Cases
Courts have emphasized that civil liability under BP 22 remains even if the criminal aspect of the case is resolved through fines or imprisonment. This means that the aggrieved party can still pursue civil action to recover the value of the check, including interest and other damages.

Defenses and Legal Remedies for the Accused Under BP 22

If you are facing charges under BP 22, it is essential to understand the available defenses and legal remedies that could help mitigate or even dismiss the case. Some of the possible defenses include:

Good Faith and Lack of Malice
One common defense is that the check issuer did not intend to defraud the payee. If the check was issued in good faith, and there was a reasonable expectation that the account would have sufficient funds to cover it at the time of issuance, the courts may consider this in the accused’s favor. It is important to show that there was no deliberate attempt to deceive the payee.
Payment After Dishonor
BP 22 allows the issuer to settle the obligation within five days of receiving notice of dishonor. If the accused can prove that they made arrangements to settle the amount within this timeframe, they may avoid criminal liability, though civil liability may still persist.
Preliminary Negotiations or Agreements to Settle
In many cases, the parties involved can negotiate settlements outside of court. This often results in a dismissal of the criminal aspect of the case if both parties agree to settle the amount in dispute. The courts may consider a settlement offer as an indication that the accused is acting in good faith.
Prescription of the Offense
Like many other criminal offenses, charges under BP 22 are subject to a prescriptive period. If the case is filed too long after the check was dishonored, the accused can argue that the statute of limitations has lapsed, effectively barring prosecution.

Practical Steps for the Accused

For those facing charges under BP 22, including the person writing this letter, it is essential to take proactive steps to resolve the situation as early as possible. Some practical steps include:

Consult an Attorney
Seek the help of a lawyer experienced in handling BP 22 cases. They can provide you with specific legal advice based on the facts of your case and guide you through the process of defending yourself or negotiating a settlement.
Attempt Settlement with the Complainant
Many BP 22 cases can be resolved through a settlement between the parties. By making arrangements to pay the value of the dishonored check and any associated damages, the complainant may agree to withdraw the charges. This is often the fastest and least costly way to resolve the matter.
File a Motion for Dismissal Based on Lack of Evidence or Valid Defense
If you believe that the prosecution lacks sufficient evidence to prove that you violated BP 22, you can file a motion to dismiss the case. Your lawyer can help you assess the strength of the case and determine whether this is a viable option.
Clear Your Name from the NBI Database
One of the significant concerns raised in the letter is the "hit" on the NBI clearance. Once a BP 22 case is resolved, either through settlement, acquittal, or payment of fines, the accused can request clearance from the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) to remove the record from their database. This ensures that the case will no longer appear in future NBI checks.

Conclusion

Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 is a law that holds check issuers accountable for issuing checks without sufficient funds, ensuring that checks remain a reliable instrument in commercial transactions. However, for those facing charges under BP 22, there are several legal remedies and defenses available, particularly if the check was issued in good faith or if the issuer takes prompt action to settle the obligation.

For individuals like the letter writer, it is crucial to seek the help of a qualified lawyer to navigate the complexities of BP 22 cases. By understanding the legal framework and taking proactive steps, it is possible to resolve the matter and avoid further legal and personal complications.