Last week, the blog featured the alleged P150 million in Ben Hur Luy’s accounts. Also last week, the DOJ Secretary vowed that the investigation report on the 3rd batch of PDAF or pork barrel respondents, consisting of PNoy allies, will be on her desk two weeks from then. That means USec JJ’s deadline to submit the report to the DOJ Secretary falls due on Tuesday — this coming Tuesday. (on Tuesday therefore, it is appropriate to use the words: “maniningil kami, marami kaming pautang pero hindi pera, maniningil kami” 🙂 ) This week, let’s look at the investigation of the alleged unexplained wealth of VP Binay (“unexplained” at best): From the point of view of evidence, based on reports from ABS-CBN, Inquirer, and Rappler, the following is a summary of the alleged Binay Billions or “Baloloy Billions” or “Limlingan Billions” ♦ ♦ ♦ ADMITTED (interview of Abigail Binay), ESTABLISHED BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE (bank records) in VP Binay’s name together with his finance officer Limlingan:P 221 Million Binay-Limlingan joint accounts BDO and Metrobank, from “campaign contributions” 2009 onwards (not declared in SALN, declared in SOCE) ♦♦ ♦ ADMITTED (statement of VP Binay’s spokesperson), ESTABLISHED BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE (bank records): CANADA TRANSACTIONS,payments made by VP Binay or his group to Synnovate, Synnovate Ltd. and David Rink Consultancies, a market research firm in Canada: From joint accounts, transferred US $43,000, $35,000, and $45,000 to Synnovate
♦ ♦ ♦ ADMITTED (statement of VP Binay’s spokesperson), ESTABLISHED BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE (bank records). MORE CANADA TRANSACTIONS. From Limlingan account to a Canadian bank, $20,000, $73,000, and $51,000. — based on the admission that the money was used for services rendered by the Canadian firm for VP Binay, this Limlingan account therefore holds VP Binay’s money ♦ ♦ ♦ PARTLY ADMITTED AS TO THE EXISTENCE OF THE JOINT ACCOUNTS, BINAY-LIMLINGAN (interview of Abigail Binay that VP Binay and Limlingan have joint accounts), ESTABLISHED BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE (bank records): P 3.5 Billion deposits/withdrawals: either joint or individual accounts of Binay and Limlingan, (“the AMLC monitored transactions of $330,000, $250,000, and $317,000 — and deposits and withdrawals that amount to more than P3.5 billion from 2008 to 2014”) or: ♦ ♦ ♦ NOT ADMITTED BY VP BINAY’S GROUP, AS FAR AS THE LIMLINGAN ACCOUNT IS CONCERNED, AS THEIR MONEY : Limlingan P2 Billion transaction September 2010 (Unexplained), two separate transactions to two trust fund accounts at P500 Million each (or P One Billion). Total: P3 Billion ♦ ESTABLISHED BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE (bank records). The AMLC also observed other transactions in Binay’s other accounts, this time with Security Bank, PNB, RCBC Savings Bank – accounts under Binay’s name or owned jointly with Limlingan and Crystal from 2008 to 2012. Five accounts ♦ ♦ ♦ NOT ADMITTED BY VP BINAY’S GROUP AS THEIR MONEY BUT ADMITTED THAT THE HOLDER DOES NOT OWN/ NOT CAPABLE OF EARNING THIS KIND OF MONEY: ATE EBENG ACCOUNTS, P 1.8 Billion. (VP Binay’s executive assistant, Eduviges ”Ebeng” Baloloy’s accounts holds some P1.8 Billion in deposits and investments in several financial institutions) ♦ NOT ADMITTED BY VP BINAY’S GROUP AS THEIR MONEY, but “UNEXPLAINED WEALTH” according to AMLAC: Bank accounts of TIU, LEE, CHONG, and 16 other associates
(i think, from the point of view of the legal team: Today, there will be silence from VP Binay, Abigail Binay, and the spokesperson on these transactions until they regroup to assess with the lawyers and the media bureau)
News organizations reported today that about One Hundred Fifty Million Pesos was found in the bank accounts of plunder state witness Ben Hur Luy — to which the DOJ state prosecutor said this had not been proven and in any case Ben Hur is immune from prosecution under the Witness Protection Program. Not so fast, and not too cavalierly – it’s One Hundred Fifty Million Pesos apparently from pork barrel, too. The Rules of Court on the discharge of a state witness provide for immunity from prosecution for the crime for which the state witness is charged then discharged. In this case, Ben Hur Luy was discharged for the plunder cases filed against Enrile, Jinggoy, Bong Revilla, et al. He has immunity only for criminal prosecution for the criminal acts that he is testifying on. Nothing more.
It is not a blanket immunity for all kinds of criminal or civil actions for all kinds of acts he may have committed – but only immunity for the criminal acts upon which he is testifying (under the Rules of Court provision on immunity of a state witness).
HOWEVER, the Witness Protection Program may provide for immunity from forfeiture proceedings for ill-gotten wealth arising from criminal transactions that he is testifying on – immoral, maybe, legal, yes (it is condoned and allowed if it is the only way of convicting the masterminds and the state witness does not appear to be the most guilty)
The terms of his WPP contract should be examined and strictly construed, in favor of the public interest. Whether or not Ben Hur Luy has immunity from prosecution or forfeiture of the one hundred fifty million pesos of unexplained wealth depends on:
1.the terms of his WPP contract;
2. the nature of those funds and
3.the source of those funds.
Were those funds sourced from the transactions on which he testified (the Enrile, Jinggoy, Bong Revilla, et al cases)? ….. Or did those funds come from other pork barrel transactions? Look at the paper trail. Am I splitting hairs? It’s one hundred fifty million pesos in unexplained wealth, at best. The terms of his discharge as state witness, his WPP contract, and the paper trail of the one hundred fifty million pesos should be examined.
Unless JokoWi (Indonesian President Joko Widodo) and the Indonesian government believe that Mary Jane Veloso is a one-woman international drug syndicate, or that she is the queen and ringleader of a global network of drug traffickers, refusing to use her as witness to bust the drug ring that ensnared her does not make any legal, political, moral sense, or resemble any kind of logic. The Indonesian government had been informed by the Philippine government (thru President Aquino) this morning that the recruiter who inveigled Mary Jane Veloso to carry the suitcase with the heroin embedded and hidden in a sewn compartment, was now in custody. The custodial investigation of this illegal recruiter leads to at least four more persons-of-interest in the inner layer of the drug ring. The Philippine government and the Indonesian government can even enter into a bilateral agreement for the sharing of information on evidence on this matter and for prosecutorial cooperation. Yet, the Indon government refuses to pay any kind of attention. Even from the point of view of criminal law and law enforcement procedure, using Mary Jane Veloso as witness would yield more useful and admissible evidence that could lead to the inner layer of the drug conspiracy. Executing her now closes that door forever. Unless that is the intent of the Indon government: To forever seal the door to the possibility of identifying the operators of this drug trafficking syndicate. The senselessness of this strategy on the part of the JokoWi government (killing the unwitting “courier” when she has information on her “recruiters” and when one of her recruiters is now in custody — and forever closing the door that leads to the inner layer of the drug syndicate) puts in doubt the sincerity of the Jokowi administration in dealing with the drug menace.
