Philippine Authorities Freeze 25 Crypto Wallets in Flood-Control Plunder Probe
Key Takeaways
- β’The Court of Appeals has ordered the freezing of 25 crypto wallets, 86 bank accounts, four investment accounts and one insurance policy connected to an unnamed Philippine lawmaker.
- β’The Sept. 21 order is based on probable cause of plunder under Republic Act No. 7080, which applies when a public official amasses at least 50 million pesos in allegedly ill-gotten wealth.
- β’Investigators found funds moved through intermediaries, corporations, commercial banks, a money service business and a virtual asset platform, while the subjects appeared to lack revenues supporting their investments.
- β’The freeze is valid for an initial 20 days, can be extended by the Court of Appeals for up to six months, and does not establish criminal guilt.
- β’Since 2021 amendments to the Anti-Money Laundering Act designated virtual asset service providers as covered institutions, the AMLC's authority over digital assets has expanded to require monitoring and reporting of suspicious transactions.

Philippine authorities have frozen 25 virtual asset wallets, 86 bank accounts and other financial assets linked to an unnamed prominent lawmaker as part of a widening investigation into alleged corruption involving flood-control projects.
The Court of Appeals issued the freeze order on Sept. 21 after finding probable cause that the assets could be connected to alleged plunder under Republic Act No. 7080, the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) said. Plunder under that law covers a public official's accumulation of ill-gotten wealth of at least 50 million pesos through a combination of overt or criminal acts. The order also covers four investment accounts and one insurance policy.
The AMLC has not named the lawmaker, corporation or other individuals covered by the order. The agency cited confidentiality rules governing freeze-order proceedings. The council's official website is available at amlc.gov.ph.
Crypto enters the money trail
According to the investigation, funds linked to the investments moved through several financial channels, including intermediaries, corporations, commercial bank accounts, a money service business and a virtual asset platform.
The AMLC said the subjects had no apparent operating revenues that would support the scale of their investments. It also said the use of multiple recipients and financial channels made the suspected funds more difficult to trace.
The 25 frozen wallets add a digital-asset dimension to the Philippines' investigation into alleged flood-control kickbacks. Authorities have not disclosed which cryptocurrencies the wallets contain, their value or the virtual asset service provider involved.
The freeze order does not establish criminal guilt. Instead, it temporarily prevents the covered assets from being transferred or disposed of while the investigation continues. Freeze orders under the Anti-Money Laundering Act take effect for an initial 20 days and can be extended by the Court of Appeals, on the AMLC's application, for up to six months.
Wider financial investigation
The latest order forms part of a broader government effort to trace suspected proceeds from alleged corruption tied to public infrastructure projects. Earlier investigations also examined the movement of suspected illicit funds through cryptocurrency.
Authorities have said digital assets can create an additional layer between funds and their alleged source, particularly when transactions involve multiple wallets or overseas platforms. The AMLC said it will continue working with government agencies and financial institutions to identify, trace, restrain and recover suspected illicit assets.
For the cryptocurrency industry, the case underscores the scrutiny applied to virtual asset transactions in financial-crime investigations. It also demonstrates how Philippine authorities are using traditional court orders to target digital assets alongside bank accounts and investment accounts. The AMLC's reach over crypto has grown since 2021, when amendments to the Anti-Money Laundering Act designated virtual asset service providers as covered institutions required to monitor and report suspicious transactions. Whether the freeze is extended, whether forfeiture proceedings follow and whether the wallets' contents and provider are identified remain open questions as the inquiry progresses.
Source: CryptoMeter