Expresses support for my work
Because the name of South China Morning Post (HK), the newspaper I write for, was being dragged as well into the messy political battle, I had to inform my immediate editor at the Foreign Desk, Andrew London, of this fact.
This was after The Daily Tribune owner-publisher Ninez Cacho-Olivares wrote that based on her “a impeachable source”, “blogger and stringer of the South China Morning Post, Raissa Robles” passed on Chief Justice Renato Corona’s bank documents to a prosecutor in Corona’s impeachment trial.
After I personally told Ninez I had denied the rumor spread by Internet trolls, The Daily Tribune published yet another story. This time, it did not mention me but still named the newspaper I write for.
I was pleasantly surprised to learn that my SCMP editors not only supported me but Grego Torode, SCMP’s chief Asia correspondent, took the time out to discredit allegations on the Web about me that I was “moonlighting” as a journalist.
I am touched by SCMP’s concern for my physical safety. Here is the article that Greg wrote, which I am posting with SCMP’s permission. I also have SCMP’s permission to allow any Philippine media to repost it in full as well.
So there you have it — this is the paper I’ve been a correspondent for since 1996. To view start of the article, click on this link.
Journalist caught up in impeachment drama
Accusers insinuate Post’s correspondent gave prosecutors bank data on embattled chief justice
Updated on Feb 15, 2012
Raissa Robles, the South China Morning Post’s veteran Manila correspondent, has found herself at the centre of an online whispering campaign suggesting she gave bank account information relating to Philippines Chief Justice Renato Corona to prosecutors attempting to impeach him.
Robles is vigorously denying the allegations through her own blog as well as via statements to the Post, local newspapers and a major TV network.
While “amused” by some of the depictions of her, she said she fears she could be the victim of a smear campaign that, at worst, might incite supporters of the embattled Corona to violence.
“It is a very tense time and the chief justice is fighting for his political life. I only hope some of his supporters are not tempted by violence,” Robles said.
“There is no truth to the allegations whatsoever,” she said, adding that she had never received documents from bank employees, or passed on any bank documents. “I fear it’s a smear campaign because they can’t discredit my stories … I’ve always verified my stories, and I’m always fair.”
Robles’ stories have included a World Bank report into the misuse of a loan to enhance the “institutional integrity” of the Philippine Supreme Court – an objective described by Corona as a “huge lie”. She also investigated Corona’s cheap purchase of a luxury 3,000 sq ft apartment in Manila’s The Fort complex, home to some of the country’s wealthiest businessmen.
Her profile of Corona in the Sunday Morning Post last month quoted his concerns about the wider political climate as he prepared for trial. Corona, a former chief of staff to former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, was one of her last appointments when he became chief justice. Just a month before his impeachment on December 12, his court ruled against the maternal clan of the current president, Benigno Aquino, in awarding land to farm workers on the family hacienda.
“The problem with some people… is that they think that I am a thief like them,” Robles quoted Corona as saying.
Now she stands accused of being “the little lady” who illegally passed bank account files from a bank manager to a prosecutor investigating Corona. The “little lady” description was coined by the prosecutor, congressman Rey Umali.
“Whoever this ‘little lady’ is, it is not me… I’m really amused by these blogs and tweets that have described me as a ‘Girl Friday’ of a sitting magistrate who is at odds with Corona or that I’m merely ‘moonlighting’ as a journalist. My record stands for itself.”
Robles has written for the Post since 1996 and is proud of her record of asking tough questions of the country’s leaders without fear or favour. In 2002, she sparked a brief controversy when, a propos of rumours the president was in a loveless marriage, she asked Arroyo whether she still had “time for sex” with her husband. Arroyo answered “plenty”. Last year she asked Aquino about reports he was playing video games the night a sacked policeman shot and killed eight Hongkongers on a tour bus in Manila. Aquino issued a denial.
As a reporter in the Philippines since 1982, she has worked for local newspapers and contributed to international outlets including The Times, the BBC and Voice of America.
Corona is the third-highest official to be impeached in the Philippines, after former president Joseph Estrada in 2000 and ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez last year. Prosecutors have this week been barred from examining his foreign currency accounts, which they claim contain ill-gotten wealth. The senate endorsed a high court temporary restraining order issued on Friday.
AUGUST C FERNANDO says
Raissa, I really am wondering why I am no longer getting any emailed msgs from your blog. Might somebody have cut my name/email addy off? Take care.
pls register again . There’s a feedburner widget on the left sidebar for registering.
Naisip ko lang po… this “little Lady”, may be it is Mrs. Arroyo, di kaya? she is “little” after all.
“Little Girl” yun.
Virgilio Aviado says
The staff members of each Senator must keep tab on the commentaries of Raissa and the comments made in her blog. So that each Senator is aware of what is happening outside the impeachment court.
Poor Cristina…sending a text msg …sent to many…..
immediately explaining the newly found 3 bank withdrawals at the time of impeachment filed against Renato as not his but her corporation.
This is Renato C.’s problem, compounded by Cristina C……
for the more they come out with bits and pieces defending themselves…. the more an avalanche fall over them…. questions and more questions.
Unfortunately, the people are not fools… they are so intelligent to read through the deceptions… Barbershops are filled with sharp intelligent analysts… they give haircuts and offer two bonuses….. of witty analysis and laughter.
The people are laughing ….
when was the sale of Cristina’s property?….. years and years ago…
then she only thought of withdrawing them… at the time of impeachment….???
because the money does not belong to Renato?
Come on…..masaya ka….. sinong linoloko mo… nyo….
Raissa, your earlier “Analyzing the Spouses Coronas….” was well done…. Is there a sequel with all the new revelations?
The barbers in the shops want to have something to discuss with their customers.
Thief justice nato corona said sometime in 2002 that he(nato) never come into his wife(cristina) family business but after a year he borrowed 11 millions? kapal muks ah. Paano kaya nangyari na mapahiram si nato nang BGEI gayong idenemanda nga itong si cristina corona nang shareholder nang BGEI at families nang Estafa? at ang nangyari ulit idenemanda nang mag asawang nato corona ang familya nang kanyang asawang si cristina nang LIBEL at mayroon conviction nangyari at ang estafa case ay unresolve hanggang ngayon….Nakakalito ito? Matapos ang hindi pagkakaunawaan at unresolved case nang familya ni cristina tungkol sa BGEI shares palagay kaya ninyo ay magpapatago ang familya ni cristina kay thief justice nato corona nang mahigit 30 million pesos sa PSBank at nagkataong sabay sabay na widraw noon dec. 12, 2011ang tatlong accnt. gaya nang sabi ni senador/judge estrada bakit nagkasabay ang araw na ini impeach si thief justice nato corona, parang nadadaduda at talagang nagdududa na siya? Ha ha ha….Lalong nababaon si thief justice nato corona sa kanilang mga kasinungalingan kanyang idinadahilan? Mabuti sana kong matanong natin ang mga familya ni cristina sa america kong totoong pinatago nila itong napagbilhan nang BGEI properties? Baka itinago lang nila nang totoo at hindi alam nang familya Basa dahil napunta na yata kay cristina ang BGEI sa tulong ni nato…..
The Corona’s wife has revealed that the Php 37 million in CJ’s accounts are owned by Basa Guidote Enterprises Inc. (BGEI) and that CJ has just deposited the amounts to his account for convenience as Mrs. Corona is always in Baguio. They did not bare such details before because she was sued by her relatives for estafa. The Php 37 million was the proceeds from the sale of BGEI property to the City of Manila.
Even assuming that indeed that said monies were sourced legally as proceeds from a sale of property, this revelation by Mrs. Corona begs more questions than answers:
1. If the sale is between BGEI and the City of Manila, check payment/s will definitely be in the name of BGEI. How come the monies ended up in the personal account of CJ?? Even assuming the bank branch accommodated the check and allowed the deposits to the personal account of CJ, are deposits reported by the bank as suspicious transaction as required under AMLA?
2. If CJ does not own the monies, then it should have been reflected as a Liability in his SALN. Another way is to disclose the said monies as funds for safekeeping under his SALN. But were the monies properly disclosed in his SALN? Can he invoke accounting ignorance even as he was once work for SGV and 2 banks?
3. If CJ willingly accepted the monies and deposited the same to his account, is he then acting as dummy for Mrs. Corona to hide the said monies from other BGEI shareholders? Is this a clear case of estafa, racketeering or what? Is this a high crime? Is this betrayal of public trust?
These beg answers, CJ.
Johnny lin says
If Mrs Corona’s alibi was she was always in Baguio, how could that reconcile with her excuse to open an office of CJHF in Manila because she could not go to Baguio?
Lies after lies are like crumbling domino tiles.
Check the accounts of Mrs. Corona if there were similar amounts of withdrawals and deposits from other banks around the time CJ made deposits and withdrawals. It would not make sense they were using same bank to transfer deposit from corporate to personal.
It did not make sense either to entrust the money to CJ because the corporation was dissolved since 2003. If the money were already deposited in another bank, why moved it when the excuse is frequent travel?
If she claimed as reason that the transfer to another bank was to earn higher interest then the question would be, was it withdrawn because the deposit matured already? if not, there is no sense again because penalty would be imposed on the withdrawal that will offset the potential interest earning. Maturity of time deposits could be verified by banks.
@ johnny lin,
I don’t. know if the relatives of cristina corona & thief justice nato corona can still TRUST them because cristina was sued by her families of estafa sometimes in early year of 2000 & up to now, the case was not yet resolve & cristina in return filed a libel case on her aunties/uncles with a conviction. so they are not in good terms.
37 milllion pesos proceeds of the BGEI properties was keep in renato corona 3 saving accnt. in PSBank? That was impossible? Terrible Mistake for the BGEI shareholders if the answer of cristina was true that said huge amount was not renato corona savings? then if that is the case, show us the truth & evidences? unti unti na silang mag asawa corona mababaon dahil sa kanilang kasinungalingan at panlilinglang/ pandaraya…
oo nga naman agree with johnny why would she open an office of cjhf in manila and then claim she frequents herself in baguio? hehehe
too bad, you caught her?
Johnny lin says
Disgustingly Pathetic this Corona family, their lies are public knowledge coming from their own mouth.We read or heard their previous statements, then when trying to make alibis or present tthemselves their excuses or thru their lawyers, the new statements contradicted their previous statements.
Other examples of public lying:
Now: we are a family of NO ordinary means
Before: We did not have the money to pay for my expensive back surgery, its good Mrs. Arroyo was so generous to pay all my bills.
Now: Corona wanted Justices Carpio and Sereno to inhibit in SC because they are partial.
Before: Corona refused to inhibit in SC because he denied he was partial.
Now: our children could afford to buy our property because my son in law has thriving medical practice. BIR later said their daughter did not have enough income.
Before: Atty Salvador said the Coronas got their money from selling 2 properties without naming the people who bought them. Atty Esguerra said the money of Corona were not his but belonged to BGE corp. Their own lawyers contradicted each other. Besides, before Corona wrote in his SALN he borrowed money from BGE to buy properties. WHICH LIE IS THE TRUTH?
Coronas on national TV professed that they are devoted God fearing catholics, receiving Holy Eucharist in public view while sleeping every night and waking up every morning living with their lies. Pinnacle of Hypocrisy!
Coronas do not only suffer from the complexes of pathological and congenital liars, both also carry the hereditary chromosomes of lies transferring to their children the dominant genes of lies, putting it scientifically.
Wonder what their children and son in law feel when they meet other people in social gatherings or in the malls or in church?
Wonder if DR. CASTILLO tells the truth on the medical condition of his patients? Because if he were that rich, he would have made a press conference showing his net worth to dispel any doubt that he could not afford to buy the 18 million pesos property. An HONEST DOCTOR will exactly do that to preserve his reputation among his patients and keep the honor of his own family. His silence speaks of their family dignity and professional integrity.
SO CALLOUS AND WRETCHED!
The “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine
G.R. Nos. 157294-95
November 30, 2006 Joseph Victor G. Ejercito, Petitioner, vs. Sandiganbayan (Special Division) and People of the Philippines, Respondents.
Illegally obtained bank accounts information may still be admissible as evidence. R.A. No. 1405 does not stipulate in a specific provision the inadmissibility.
Contrast this to the Anti-Wiretapping Law (R.A. No. 4200):
Hmmm…the fruit may actually be Corona himself…
He was a a midnight appointee who took his oath of office from a usurper of the Presidential office named gloria.
The FRUIT of the POISONOUS TREE!
AUGUST C FERNANDO says
“The defense is expected to explain the pattern of inconsistencies in Corona’s SALNs when they get the chance to present their evidence. They continue to question the admissibility of the evidence and testimonies regarding bank accounts, saying the documents were acquired illegally and should therefore be inadmissible in court. Corona’s counsels have constantly said they have an explanation.” TO CORONA DEFENSE TEAM – ENOUGH WITH YOUR BALONEY AND HOGWASH! SHUDDAP OREDI!
AUGUST C FERNANDO says
Hi, Raissa! I am wondering why I have not been receiving latest posts from your Blogs.
I haven’t done anything.
i don’t know.
HOw did you sign up for the latest posts?
There is an attempt to confuse the majority of the Filipinos by the use of technical legalism and delaying exhibitionism of Corona defense lawyers..
The common tao is simply asking… Is Corona worthy of the highest public trust to be in the highest public office in the Supreme Court? At the end, it is a YES or no.
For them… SALN declared by Corona…… versus ….undeclared and under-declared of Corona’s properties, cash and investments show a huge difference.
Corona said “in due time” this will be explained…. what?
the SALN is black and white for all to see….
how can defense explain ….
that the Corona SALN sworn under oath was a mistake?
that they have documents to show that they should be there but were not placed?
that it could be corrected…. what?
After all these years… his SALN stayed in the confidential cabinet of the Supreme Court …and never ever corrected…
Show just two…….the SALN and the BPI bank accounts summary of just 2-3 bank balances…
Show them….to our fish vendors in our markets…
Show them… to the busy retail sellers of Divisoria..
They will even compute to you, faster than a calculator, the eye-popping difference.
Let the bright defense lawyers refute their findings in the vendors’ jurisdiction.
Raissa, Will the people benefit to have an uncluttered and uncomplicated presentation?
They are the true jurors, vox populi, represented by Congress.
But they are alienated by the legalistic jargon. Is it possible that they will lose respect and trust to the institutions of government? Kasi para sa “elitie” “inglesero” may alam sa “supena juice si ti kum” lang iyan
This is where the power of the pen will be of great influence for the enlightenment of our dear people.
This is where we respectfully submit our humble request for your kind consideration. Is this a possible focus…an active impeachment series for the many? Please share your power to the many.
You may rest your case for now …regarding N.Olivarez with reservation in the future Let the supportive bloggers continue the vigilance and fight re:N.O.
Thank you …honorable Raissa.
Rogelio Dela Rosa says
Raissa, you always claim fairness in everything you write yet you almost all of your posts have been largely Pro-PNoy, anti-Corona, anti-Marcos and God knows pro this or anti that. For someone who likes to call herself a journalist, you can’t seem to take a neutral stand on just about anything you write.
You already denied that you are the “little lady” in question yet you have yet to condemn the prosecution for even coming up with an incredulous story to begin with, let alone do your own investigative piece on what is now perceived by many people as underhanded tactics in winning their case. How about blasting Tupas and company for their ineptness and constant fishing expeditions that only end up backfiring in their face with every single trial day.
At least the Inquirer shows some semblance of their “Balanced News, Fearless Views” tagline while GMA-7 continues to live up to their slogan, “Walang Kinikilingan, Walang Pinorprotektahan” by covering all facets of the impeachment trial.
What about you, Raissa? How about some semblance of neutrality for a change?
I’m preparing a pc on this. Wait.
Johnny lin says
Matandang gwapo aka Rogelio de la Rosa
Baka si Cuevas ka, he he he
Did you write the same note to Bobi Tiglao, post it here please including the date you wrote it and prove Tiglao will write a piece that is pro PNoy
If you did not write same request, enviness is a sin, the way Corona is sinful and receiving communion, you better join Corona in church. INC nga pala si Cuevas.
Or read Coronaption at the bottom, he he he
Enrile, Defensor et.al are having a ball castigating the prosec team, I don’t think we should get involved in that kind of caper. What I’d like and hope to see is for Corona to come clean with his financial dealings. He and Gloria Arroyo are very SCHEMING peeps (I know many woud agree with me) I’m totally GOBSMACKED that some misguided legal people are donating their time and skills defending these two INSIGNIFICANT piece of [email protected] when in fact there are many hardworking poor people who can benefit more from their expertise. GRRRRRRRR Argggghhhh
john c. jacinto says
@Rogelio: Problema ba ‘yan? Andiyan naman si Ninez, Tiglao, Tatad, Earning Maceda, et al. Kung saan ka masaya, doon ka. Tsupii!!
Virgilio Aviado says
Raissa is pro people.
Dr. Pulding Salcedo says
Salamat sa column mo at natunton din namin etong pasyente namin si Natong Balatong aka “Rogelio de La rosa” . Me sakit na paranoia to, matindi sayad sa ulo nito, Pag me tama, ang galing mag Ingles ang galing magrason parang may katuturan. Actually nakaka amuse kung hindi mo lang sisiryosohin. Kumakain pa to ng apoy. Kaya ko tinatagalog kasi hindi ito marunoing magtagalog, kahit na pinanganak sa Bangkusay.Salamt ulit.
Dr. Pulding Salcedo
Rogelio,its time to go home, okay. relax, Papa is here. Stay where you are, we will see you later with your favorite Happy meal. .
from Papa Pulding.
Anton Mendoza says
LAF OWT LAWD!!!
Juan Alila says
Alam nyo po ba na madami dyan neutral journalist daw sila. The truth is, ala silang alam sa investigative journalism gaya ng ginagawa ni Raissa. Yang mga neutral neutral na yan ay nagrereport lang kung ano nakikita nila.. hindi yan sila nag aaral kung ano nakatago at tinatago na ayaw ipakita. Pwedi ba pasalamat nalang tayo merong Raissa. At iho, kung ayaw mo ng style ni Raissa.. walang pumipigil sa iyo na basahin ang ibang mga blog or ulat tulad kay Ninez? Okay lang ba sa iyo iyon iho?
Journalists take on different functions.
Juan Alila says
exactly! iba iba ..
Sui Generis III says
Ang ganda ng point ni Senator Alan Cayetano kahapon.
(SIC) Kung si Clarissa Ocampo pinayagan ng Impeachment Court (estrada impeachment) na mag volunteer witness at mag disclose ng Bank records without subpoena at pinayagan ng Korte ang kanyang salaysay at at isinumiteng records na walang violation sa Bank Secrecy Laws… eh bakit hindi rin pwedeng ituring na ganun yung Bank Records na ibinigay nung “small Lady” sa prosecution.
Basta wag lang nila munang pakialaman ang Dollar account kahit na may karapatan din dun ang taong bayan ayon sa punto ni Justice Serreno sa kanyang Dissenting Opinion.
Nagtataka ako kung bakit walang news network na nag expound ng kanyang punto eh valid point yun.
Sana igiit nila yung punto na yun para matapos na agad yung balitaktakan sa Bank Records.
AUGUST C FERNANDO says
I really think this obsession with Cheat Justice Corona’s dollar deposits is redundant. Becoz his peso deposits alone are already a killer-diller! Even a math row-4-stude would know that.
But what if the dollar deposits are enough to elevate the accusation to plunder?
what happens if by the time the defense stated their case and they were able to prove to the court that the 3 peso accounts were not his but from the firm of his wife.. what then? remember, its not yet their turn to present its case..
AUGUST C FERNANDO says
Raissa, could this PLUNDER side not be taken later after the Cheat Justice is booted outta SC?
Ninez probably meant the “other woman”. Good thing you cleared your name Raissa.
Just read about an article titled “They’re Wrong!” by BERTENI “TOTO” CATALUÑA CAUSING, Editor-in-chief, Dyaryo Magdalo
If anyone can dispute this, then dispute this so this can be discussed
I’m supplying here the full text of the article. Ms. Raissa, please feel free to delete if you find this without basis… no worries, I understand, but here it is….
By BERTENI “TOTO” CATALUÑA CAUSING
Editor-in-chief, Dyaryo Magdalo
Whatever Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago or the Supreme Court or others in the same side of the fence say, this author is steadfast that dollar deposits in the Philippines can be subpoenaed by the Impeachment Court.
They are wrong!
The proof is the very same law they cited as absolutely exempting dollar deposits from being scrutinized by the Impeachment Court.
They cite Republic Act 6426.
Yes, I also cite Republic Act 6426.
This time, however, I will also cite in tandem Presidential Decree 1246, the last law that amended RA 6426,
To know, let it be known that RA 6426 became a law on April 4, 1974 and the crucial provision is Section 8, entitled “Secrecy of foreign currency deposits.”
This Section 8 looks like it is ABSOLUTE in keeping foreign currency deposits secret that only the owner of the accounts can allow it to be opened.
But they all missed!
Yes, they all missed the “whereas clauses” or the purposes of the law, PD 1246, that amended RA 6426 on Nov. 21, 1977 (a martial law day).
For better understanding, let the purposes of PD 1246 be quoted as follows:
“WHEREAS, under Republic Act No. 6426, as amended by Presidential Decree No. 1035, certain Philippine banking institutions and branches of foreign banks are authorized to accept deposits in foreign currency;
“WHEREAS, under the provisions of Presidential Decree No. 1034 authorizing the establishment of an offshore banking system in the Philippines, offshore banking units are also authorized to receive foreign currency deposits in certain cases;
“WHEREAS, in order to assure the development and speedy growth of the Foreign Currency Deposit System and the Offshore Banking System in the Philippines, certain incentives were provided for under the two Systems such as confidentiality of deposits subject to certain exceptions and tax exemptions on the interest income of depositors who are nonresidents and are not engaged in trade or business in the Philippines;
“WHEREAS, making absolute the protective cloak of confidentiality over such foreign currency deposits, exempting such deposits from tax, and guaranteeing the vested rights of depositors would better encourage the inflow of foreign currency deposits into the banking institutions authorized to accept such deposits in the Philippines thereby placing such institutions more in a position to properly channel the same to loans and investments in the Philippines, thus directly contributing to the economic development of the country;”
First, note that the purpose of the law clearly says that the absolute confidentiality is only intended for “depositors who are NONRESIDENTS and are NOT ENGAGED IN TRADE OR BUSINESS IN THE PHILIPPINES.”
Now, any public official in the Philippines CAN NEVER BE NONRESIDENTS.
Also, any public official in the government CAN NEVER BE ALLOWED to engage in trade or business in the Philippines.
Second, note that the third paragraph of the purposes or “whereas clauses” mentioned the word “exemptions” with an “s” at the end. This means that the amending law wants MORE THAN ONE EXEMPTION.
If there are more than one exemption, what are those exemptions?
This can be answered by reading in full the same Section 8 of RA 6426 as already amended, and it reads as follows:
“Section 8. Secrecy of foreign currency deposits. – All foreign currency deposits authorized under this Act, as amended by PD No. 1035, as well as foreign currency deposits authorized under PD No. 1034, are hereby declared as and considered of an absolutely confidential nature and, except upon the written permission of the depositor, in no instance shall foreign currency deposits be examined, inquired or looked into by any person, government official, bureau or office whether judicial or administrative or legislative, or any other entity whether public or private; Provided, however, That said foreign currency deposits shall be exempt from attachment, garnishment, or any other order or process of any court, legislative body, government agency or any administrative body whatsoever. (As amended by PD No. 1035, and further amended by PD No. 1246, prom. Nov. 21, 1977.)”
A repeated reading of the same Section 8 shows that IT DOES NOT REPEAL Republic Act 1405, which became a law on Sept. 9, 1955.
In Section 2 of RA 1405, it says that ALL DEPOSITS, in foreign or local currencies, are “considered as of an absolutely confidential nature” except upon written permission of the depositor, or in cases of impeachment, or upon order of a competent court in cases of bribery or dereliction of duty of public officials, or in cases where the money deposited or invested is the subject matter of the litigation.
Let Section 2 of RA 1405 be quoted:
“Section 2. All deposits of whatever nature with banks or banking institutions in the Philippines including investments in bonds issued by the Government of the Philippines, its political subdivisions and its instrumentalities, are hereby considered as of an absolutely confidential nature and may not be examined, inquired or looked into by any person, government official, bureau or office, except upon written permission of the depositor, or in cases of impeachment, or upon order of a competent court in cases of bribery or dereliction of duty of public officials, or in cases where the money deposited or invested is the subject matter of the litigation.”
Not one of the laws mentioned above have been repelled.
ERGO, if any public official cannot benefit from exemption to secrecy of dollar or other foreign currency accounts, HOW MUCH MORE FOR A JUSTICE OR THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT?
Johnny lin says
Are you sure what you posted is correct
“depositors who are non residents and are NOT engaged in business or trade …”
If correct, decree or law promotes hiding wealth by foreign criminals but not legitimate business. It does not make sense lawfully.
I thought FCD law was to encourage business or trade in the Philippines.
PD 1246 and RA 6426 were cited in J. Carpio’s dissenting opinion.
Whereasses are just that…ASSES created by executive orders.
Marcos’ PD didn’t change the ABSOLUTE nature of the FCDUs secrecy.
RA 6426 is specific and RA 1405 is general.
A specific provision of law TRUMPS a general provision. Thus, FCDUs are absolutely secret unless its depositor presents a written permission to disclose them.
Let’s hope the SC finally decides with the purpose (whereasses) of RA 6426 in mind. Let’s hope the justices decide in line with what Dean Andy Bautista had in mind when he wrote his FOUR CENTAVOS:
Hi, pls see my LATEST post and tell me what you think –
Does the bank secrecy law really protect ALL of Corona’s dollars?
Ok, thanks. Been waiting for a new post.
I just hope I can digest it (…despite knowing that you always make it a point in making issues clearer for us readers).
wow, great info. thanks
Berteni "Toto" Cataluña Causing says
Thank you so much for posting here what I wrote. If gives me honor.
Berteni C. Causing
rafael l. vidal says
THANK YOU GREG TORODE for confirming to all, especially to ninez, that our beloved RAISSA has been a veteran Manila Correspondent, NOT A PART-TIME JOURNALIST, of your prestigious South China Morning Posts.That affirmation should now close the ninez malicious allegations, she being proven to be not credible as an old member of the fourth estate.
In yesterday’s ABS-CBN online, Erna Maceda reveals the BINAY’S 2013 PARTIAL SENATORIAL BETS, namely: CHIZ, LOREN, GRINGO, KOKO, jackie enrile (son of johnny), Joey de Venecia, and maceda. Maceda also floated the likelihood of Binay’s runningmate in 2016, namely CHIZ, JINGGOY or BONG REVILLA.
Do you guys now understand why CHIZ, JINGGOY, GRINGO, LOREN & KOKO, among others, voted to respect the SC’s TRO?
MGA KASAMA SA CYBER PLAZA MIRANDA, BIBIGYAN KO SILANG LAHAT NG BUGOK NA ITLOG SA 2013 AT 2016.
P.S. ernie pala, sori.
Joe StaAna says
Ang dami nang umaangal na TRAPO sa bagong SALN form na inilabas ng Civil Service Commission. Di na nila kase alam ang gagawin kung paano maitatago ang kukupitin o nanakawin nila sa kaban ng bayan.