Saturday, August 11, 2007 Gov't appeals dismissal of case v. Marcoses
THE Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) reiterated on Friday its appeal to the Sandiganbayan to reconsider its May 29 decision dismissing an ill-gotten wealth case involving some P220 million in suspected Marcos deposits with the Security Bank and Trust Company.
Through the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), the PCGG said the government's claim is not covered by bank transactions that the anti-graft court had earlier found to be spurious.
The transactions involve some P981 million allegedly owned by the late strongman Ferdinand E. Marcos as covered by a Certificate of Deposit issued by Security Bank.
During trial, the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) presented the Certificate of Deposit and insisted that since only P770.79 million was paid by the bank, it should be obligated to pay the unpaid balance of P220 million to government.
The Fifth Division of the Sandiganbayan ruled last May 29 that the Security Bank "had sufficiently shown and had indubitably established that there were remittances or transactions that were spurious."
The Security Bank noted that the PCGG was very much aware of the spurious transactions as early as the first audit conducted by the agency and Central Bank in 1986.
Based on the documentary evidence presented by Security Bank, the court said it was able to confirm that the signatures of the bank employees were forged.
Security Bank said it is in no obligation to pay the amount being claimed by the government.
"In the normal course of its business, the Bank unknowingly acted on the spurious inward telex payment orders, using its own funds to credit the fraudulently indicated beneficiaries, resulting to a loss because there were no funds actually received by the Bank," the defendant bank said.
The PCGG however said the "alleged spurious remittances just have nothing to do, have no relation with and did not benefit any of the accounts that form part of defendant's admitted obligation."
It added that the government should not be made to suffer or answer for whatever loss it incurred from the alleged fraudulent acts or mistakes committed by the bank's personnel. (Sunnex)
