Premature to throw out bank records, prosecutors say

Wednesday, February 15, 2012

MANILA -- Documents of Chief Justice Renato Corona's bank accounts should still be admitted as evidence by the Senate impeachment court despite doubts on the provenance and authenticity of photocopies that House prosecutors attached to their request to subpoena the records, the panel said.

In its Compliance to a Senate order to explain testimony from Philippine Savings Bank (PSBank) officers that the photocopies may have been faked, the prosecution said it is premature to say that the photocopies are indeed fake. It said the bank has "a natural motive to deny the authenticity of Annexes A to A-4 (the photocopies) because they would want to avoid potential liability for the possible leakage of their bank records."

They said the actual records of Corona's peso and dollar accounts have to be compared with the photocopies for proper verification. While on the witness stand Monday, PSBank branch manager Annabelle Tiongson said that may be a violation of the Foreign Currency Deposit Act and of a Supreme Court temporary restraining order (TRO) barring the disclosure of dollar accounts without Corona's written permission.

Compliance (Re PS Bank Documents) v.2 With Correction

The Senate had voted to respect the TRO but reserves the right to defend the legal basis of a subpoena on Corona's bank records.

The prosecution added "10 accounts identified in Annexes A to A-4 were confirmed to be existing by no less than PSBank president Pascual Garcia." The defense panel also confirmed the existence of the accounts when it promised to open them "in due time," prosecutors said. They said this suggests the photocopies are "seemingly and reasonably authentic."

Oriental Mindoro Representative Reynaldo Umali, a prosecutor, said he was given the documents by a "small lady" when he was leaving the Senate on February 2. Although Senate security cameras have no footage of anyone handing Umali anything, the prosecution said it cannot comment on the footage since it has not seen the videos. "It should be borne in mind that (Umali) never claimed to have a perfect recollection of the circumstances in which the documents were given to him," it said.

Prosecutors said "even assuming for the sake of argument that there was a possible violation of the confidentiality of bank accounts, it would not warrant the exclusion or non-admission of evidence in relation to the bank accounts." Citing the Supreme Court decision in Ejercito v. Sandiganbayan, prosecutors said the Bank Secrecy Law "nowhere provides that an unlawful examination of bank accounts shall render evidence obtained therefrom inadmissible in evidence."

At any rate, the panel said, "Questions of admissibility are premature at this point because the prosecution has not yet made a formal offer of documentary evidence."

The Compliance was signed by Representatives Umali, Joseph Emilio Abaya (Cavite), and Niel Tupas Jr. (Iloilo). Tupas is chief prosecutor and Abaya is prosecution manager. (Sunnex)