Dear PAO,

I have a friend who owed me money amounting to P2,500,000 when he was still a businessman. This year, he was elected as a councilor in our municipality. I tried asking him to pay me back but he reasoned that he still cannot pay me. Can I file a case against him and request that his salary as a councilor be used to pay his debts? Thank you.

Tina

Dear Tina,

In instances where a creditor seeks to collect a debt from his debtor, the creditor should first issue a demand letter to the debtor. The said demand shall notify the debtor that the obligation has become due and demandable, and shall likewise require the debtor to settle the amount owed within a specified period.

Should the debtor fail or refuse to comply with the demand, the creditor may file a civil action for collection of a sum of money. Considering that the amount involved exceeds P2 million (P2,000,000), jurisdiction over the case lies with the Regional Trial Court (RTC). (Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as amended by Republic Act 11576) The complaint may be filed either in the place where the creditor resides or where the debtor resides, at the election of the creditor. (Section 2, Rule 4, Rules of Court)

Upon rendition of final judgment in favor of the creditor, the judgment award may be enforced through the issuance of a writ of execution. Such execution may be carried out by means of garnishment of the debtor’s bank deposits or salary, or by levying upon the debtor’s personal and real properties. (Section 1 in relation to Section 9, Rule 39, Rules of Court)

Even the salaries of government officials may be subjected to execution proceedings. In Atty. Fred L. Bagbagen vs. Anna May P. Perez (GR 274980, Feb. 17, 2025), the Supreme Court, speaking through Associate Justice Samuel H. Gaerlan, held that salaries and bonuses which have already been deposited into the government official’s private account are deemed segregated from public funds and may properly be subjected to garnishment, having acquired the character of private funds.

The high court ruled that the garnishment of salaries of public officials is justified not merely on the ground that such funds have lost their public character upon deposit, but more so because they are not among those exempt from execution under existing laws and Rules of Court. Significantly, the garnishment of property pursuant to a writ of execution operates as a form of attachment, thereby creating a lien that places the property within the jurisdiction and control of the court which issued the writ. Consequently, the garnished property is deemed to be in custodia legis, and is placed under the exclusive control of the court for proper disposition.

Applying the foregoing to your case, in the event that the court renders a favorable final judgment, it may issue an order for the garnishment of the salary of your debtor, a municipal councilor, considering that such salary, once deposited into his personal account, no longer forms part of public funds and, therefore, does not enjoy exemption from execution.

We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice was based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.

Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to [email protected]