Senator Recto pushes for higher tax-exempt bonuses for workers

Pending bills in the Senate will raise the tax exemption ceiling from P30,000 to P60,000, thereby benefiting more government and private employees, a Senator said on Thursday.

“More government and private workers would enjoy higher tax-free bonuses and other benefits up to P60,000 to P72,000 once the P30,000 ceiling on tax-exempt benefits is increased,” Senator Ralph G. Recto, chairman of the ways and means committee, said in a statement.

The ways and means chairman filed mid-last year Senate Bill No. 2879 titled 13th Month Pay, Christmas Bonus Excluded from Gross Income taxation.

He noted: “In the midst of soaring prices oil, commodities and utilities like power and water, the approval of this measure will give our workers something to look forward to at the end of 2012.”

Likewise, another senator, Miriam Defensor-Santiago, filed a similar bill last year increasing the tax cap for employees, Senate Bill No. 2739 or the Christmas Bonus and other Benefits Tax Exemption. Unlike Recto’s version, the lady senator wanted the cap to be raise to P40,000 or P10,000 more than the current P30,000 ceiling.

Both bills are pending at the committee level.

The 1997 National Internal Revenue Code Section 32(B) Chapter VI states that private and government employees having bonuses beyond P30,000 were automatically subjected to income tax.

Senator Recto explained that “the current P30,000 cap on tax-exempt bonuses as provided in the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) is outdated” citing that the “ceiling was arrived at when the lowest monthly basic salary for employees with Salary Grade 1 was P2,800 and that of the President of the Philippines with Salary Grade 33 was P25,000.”

“The P30,000 ceiling is now practically worth P15,000  while the ceiling should be adjusted to as high as P57,000 due to inflation,” the senator said citing a figure presented by the National Economic Development Authority.

Currently, the Salary Grade 1 for government employees is paid P8,287 while the Salary Grade 33 receives P107,470.

“[The] projected losses from the ceiling adjustment could be off-set by new revenues to be realized with the rationalization of fiscal incentives, adjusting the sin tax rates and even by proceeds from the estimated P120 billion coconut industry investment fund parked in San Miguel Corp.,” the senator added. —TJD, GMA News

Impeachment court disallows presentation of evidence on Corona’s ‘ill-gotten’ wealth

KIMBERLY JANE TAN, GMA News

The Senate, sitting as the impeachment court, disallowed the presentation of supposed evidence from the Bureau of Internal Revenue on the alleged ill-gotten wealth of Chief Justice Renato Corona in his ongoing trial.

The court granted the motion of the defense to prohibit the presentation of evidence on Corona’s alleged ill-gotten wealth.

“This impeachment court has arrived at a decision. This court will allow the introduction of evidence on impeachment Article Number II, paragraphs 2.2 and 2.3 but not the introduction of evidence for paragraph 2.4,” Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, presiding officer of the impeachment court, said at the start of Wednesday’s trial.

However, Sen. Franklin Drilon noted that “the court did not rule on that [paragraph 2.4] and will rely on the presumptions of law, particularly the Anti-Graft Law”.

Lead defense counsel Serafin Cuevas interjected that the ruling of the court was for the full exclusion of the paragraph.

But Drilon said he was “just putting on record” what they decided in caucus.

The paragraphs of Article II of the Articles of Impeachment mentioned by Enrile are:

2.2. Respondent failed to disclose to the public his statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth as required by the Constitution.

2.3. It is also reported that some of the properties of Respondent are not included in his declaration of his assets, liabilities, and net worth, in violation of the anti-graft and corrupt practices act.

2.4. Respondent is likewise suspected and accused of having accumulated ill-gotten wealth, acquiring assets of high values and keeping bank accounts with huge deposits. It has been reported that Respondent has, among others, a 300-sq. meter apartment in a posh Megaworld Property development at the Fort in Taguig. Has he reported this, as he is constitutionally-required under Art. XI, Sec. 17 of the Constitution in his Statement of Assets and Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN)? Is this acquisition sustained and duly supported by his income as a public official? Since his assumption as Associate and subsequently, Chief Justice, has he complied with this duty of public disclosure?

On Tuesday, the defense panel had filed a motion to expunge evidence related to Corona’s alleged ill-gotten wealth, saying these were “irrelevant, improper and violative of [his] Constitutional rights.” Corona’s defense team said Article II merely charges him with failure to disclose his Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN).

Defense lawyers likewise asked the chamber  to prohibit Bureau of Internal Revenue commissioner Kim Jacinto Henares and the income tax returns (ITRs) of Corona and his family from being presented in the trial, saying these were also “irrelevant and immaterial” to the case.

Earlier in the day, the prosecution panel moved to deny both motions.

But Henares was eventually allowed to testify Wednesday but with limitations. — LBG/KBK/YA/HS, GMA News

PNoy urges Congress to push FOI bill

President Benigno Aquino III has ordered his communications team to “push” for the passage of the Freedom of Information (FOI) bill, a landmark but much-delayed piece of legislation that will lift the shroud of secrecy over government transactions and data.

Aquino gave the instruction at a meeting with the FOI study group, said Communications Group Undersecretary Manolo Quezon III at a press briefing on Wednesday.

“Basically everybody is asking the President’s stand on this. Has the President had any more reservation, questions or is he getting in the way of this? And I think this is his categorical answer everyone wanted to hear: he said push it,” Quezon said.

He believed the passage of the bill will be expedited as there is now general consensus for it not only on the part of Congress and FOI advocates, but also of the Palace and other sectors.

Quezon, however, could not say if the bill would be certified as urgent, noting that the bill is already pending at the committee level in Congress. In June 2010, the House of Representatives failed to ratify the bill due to lack of quorum and protests from congressmen. — Amita O. Legaspi/KBK, GMA News

SC urged to stop Corona impeach trial

MANILA, Philippines – A lawyer is urging the Supreme Court to issue a temporary restraining order that will block the Senate from hearing the Articles of Impeachment against Chief Justice Renato Corona.

In a petition for certiorari filed before the High Court, lawyer Vladimir Cabigao urged the SC to issue a temporary restraining order or a writ of preliminary prohibitory injunction on the impeachment trial against Corona.

Cabigao said the Supreme Court must rule as unconstitutional the House of Representatives’ mode of gathering signatures from majority lawmakers without circulating copies of the impeachment complaint.

He cited the statements of Navotas Rep. Toby Tiangco that he did not sign the complaint because he was not given a copy of the verified complaint.

Cabigao urged the SC to disregard the rules on technicalities, saying that public interest is involved in the impeachment complaint against Corona.

A total of 188 congressmen signed the impeachment complaint against Corona, which accuses the Chief Justice of betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution and graft and corruption. With a report from radio dzMM

MANILA, Philippines – A lawyer is urging the Supreme Court to issue a temporary restraining order that will block the Senate from hearing the Articles of Impeachment against Chief Justice Renato Corona.

In a petition for certiorari filed before the High Court, lawyer Vladimir Cabigao urged the SC to issue a temporary restraining order or a writ of preliminary prohibitory injunction on the impeachment trial against Corona.

Cabigao said the Supreme Court must rule as unconstitutional the House of Representatives’ mode of gathering signatures from majority lawmakers without circulating copies of the impeachment complaint.

He cited the statements of Navotas Rep. Toby Tiangco that he did not sign the complaint because he was not given a copy of the verified complaint.

Cabigao urged the SC to disregard the rules on technicalities, saying that public interest is involved in the impeachment complaint against Corona.

A total of 188 congressmen signed the impeachment complaint against Corona, which accuses the Chief Justice of betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution and graft and corruption. ABS-CBN News with a report from radio dzMM

Lacson dismisses ‘oust-Enrile’ allegations

MANILA, Philippines – Senator Panfilo Lacson on Saturday dismissed allegations that there are moves to remove Senator Juan Ponce Enrile from the Senate presidency, calling the allegations as “pure hogwash.”

“The oust-JPE [Juan Ponce Enrile] move is pure hogwash. I can categorically state that there is absolutely no move from anyone, much less from Malacañang, to oust Senate President Enrile,” Lacson said in a press statement.

Lacson also said it would be illogical for President Benigno Aquino III to put pressure on the Senate to convict impeached Chief Justice Renato Corona, especially since Aquino, a former senator himself, knows how senators think.

“It is absurd to even imagine President Aquino putting pressure on the senators in order to secure a conviction,” the statement added.

Lacson said that even during the presidency of former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, efforts to contain the majority of senators under Enrile’s leadership failed despite “all her diabolical posturing during the height of her power.”

The senator, describing himself as an ally of the current administration, said he is “a natural magnet for recruitment,” but noted that he has yet to hear its members.

Lacson stressed that claims that senators can be forced into convicting Corona is unfair because majority of the senators “are not for sale.”

“It is unfair to every senator to even speculate on the matter of recruitment in relation to the impeachment. A great majority of us in the Upper Chamber are not for sale. That I can say with authority,” he said. (ABS-CBN)

 

 

Marquez: No ‘hakot’ crowd for Corona speech

By David Dizon, abs-cbnNEWS.com

Supreme Court spokesman Jose Midas Marquez did not order court employees and magistrates all over the country to declare a “court holiday” on Wednesday so they could hear Chief Justice Renato Corona denounce Malacañang’s attacks on the judiciary.

Instead, Marquez said he merely invited magistrates and court employees to listen to what he felt was a very important message from the Chief Justice.

“As a Court Administrator, I can [order them to go] but I did not do that. I didn’t want to dictate to them. If they wanted to be there, they can do so by their own volition. You can always see in their faces if they do not want to be there. Besides, those are judges. They are older than me so I can’t force them to do anything,” he said in Filipino.

“I invited them and my invitation was for them to go to the Supreme Court and listen to the speech of the Chief Justice and know what is on his mind. Maybe the judges and the court employees saw that it is a very important  message not just to them but the rest of the country,” he added.

Newspaper reports said more than 1,000 court employees trooped to the Supreme Court building on Taft Avenue to hear Corona’s speech. The court holiday resulted in the temporary suspension of proceedings in the Maguindanao massacre case.

For his part, Presidential Spokesman Edwin Lacierda said Marquez deliberately created confusion so he could deny ordering court employees to listen to Corona’s speech.

He said the instructions for the judiciary to go on work holiday came directly from Office of the Court Administrator.

He also noted that not all magistrates heeded Marquez’s call since the Sandiganbayan still continued to work.

Lacierda said he has spoken to some judges who said they feel “insulted that Corona is trying to present that the judiciary is under attack.”

“It is a case of accountability of Chief Justice Corona,” he said.

Meanwhile, Marquez said Corona was simply fed up when he accused the President of wanting him removed from office so that Malacañang could control the Supreme Court.

“Siguro talagang napuno na. Alam naman natin na matagal na siyang nagtitimpi at nagpipigil sa kanyang sarili pero wala pong humpay at walang tigil sa pagbatikos at pagpuna hindi lamang sa Punong Mahistrado pero pati sa buong Korte Suprema. At ito nga ay humantong sa mabilis na paghahain ng impeachment complaint sa kanya,” he said.

Marquez said Corona has already indicated that he will not resign his post but will answer all charges at the impeachment trial. He said many lawyers have offered their services to defend Corona before the Senate.

The SC spokesman said it is up to Corona if he will heed Malacañang’s call that he take a leave of absence while on trial. He said he expects the Chief Justice to take a leave only if he feels he cannot attend to his duties at the Supreme Court while focusing on the impeachment trial.

Summary of the impeachment complaint vs CJ Corona

I.          RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST THROUGH HIS TRACK RECORD MARKED BY PARTIALITY AND SUBSERVIENCE IN CASES INVOLVING THE ARROYO ADMINISTRATION FROM THE TIME OF HIS APPOINTMENT AS SUPREME COURT JUSTICE WHICH CONTINUED TO HIS DUBIOUS APPOINTMENT AS A MIDNIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE AND UP TO THE PRESENT.  

• Midnight Appointments in violation against Sec. 15, Article VII of Constitution
• Arturo de Castro v. Judicial and Bar Council and President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, et. al., SC held that the prohibition does not apply to SC but only to executive department and other courts lower than SC.
• Indeed, Newsbreak report showed that “he has consistently sided with the (arroyo) administration in politically-significant cases”. Newsbreak further reported when it tracked the voting pattern of Supreme Court justices, “Corona lodged a high 78 percent in favor of Arroyo”
• A table shows that in 10 cases show respondent’s voting pattern in cases involving Arroyo government’s frontal assaults on constitutional rights prior to his appointment as Chief Justice.
• During his tenure as Chief Justice, Respondent also sided with Arroyo in the following 3 cases such as in (1) Biraogo v. The Philippine Truth Commission of 2010, (2) Bai Omera D. Dianalan-Lucman v. Executive(revoking midnight appointments) and (3) Aquino vs. COMELEC (redefining districts of camsur)

II.         RESPONDENT COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION AND/OR BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST WHEN HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE TO THE PUBLIC HIS STATEMENT OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES, AND NET WORTH AS REQUIRED UNDERSEC. 17, ART. XI OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION.

• Respondent failed to disclose to the public his statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth as required by the Constitution.
• Some of the properties of Respondent are not included in his declaration of his assets, liabilities, and net worth, in violation of the anti-graft and corrupt practices act.
• Respondent is suspected of having accumulated ill-gotten wealth, acquiring assets of high values and keeping bank accounts with huge deposits (among others, a 300-sq. meter apartment in the Fort in Taguig).

III.        RESPONDENT COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION AND BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST BY FAILING TO MEET AND OBSERVE THE STRINGENT STANDARDS UNDER ART. VIII, SECTION 7 (3) OF THE CONSTITUTION THAT PROVIDES THAT “[A] MEMBER OF THE JUDICIARY MUST BE A PERSON OF PROVEN COMPETENCE, INTEGRITY, PROBITY, AND INDEPENDENCE” IN ALLOWING THE SUPREME COURT TO ACT ON MERE LETTERS FILED BY A COUNSEL WHICH CAUSED THE ISSUANCE OF FLIP-FLOPPING DECISIONS IN FINAL AND EXECUTORY CASES; IN CREATING AN EXCESSIVE ENTANGLEMENT WITH MRS. ARROYO THROUGH HER APPOINTMENT OF HIS WIFE TO OFFICE; AND IN DISCUSSING WITH LITIGANTS REGARDING CASES PENDING BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT. 

• Respondent previously served Arroyo as her chief of staff, spokesman when she was Vice-President, Presidential Chief-of-Staff, Presidential Spokesman, and Acting Executive Secretary.
  • Flip-flopping of the Corona Court on FASAP vs. PAL  on a mere letter from Philippine Airlines’ counsel Atty. Estelito Mendoza (and also in the flip-flopping case of League of Cities v. COMELEC)
• Respondent compromised his independence when his wife, Cristina Corona, accepted an appointment as on March 23, 2007 from President Arroyo to the Board of the John Hay Management Corporation (JHMC) in violation of Code of Judicial Conduct
  • serious complaints were filed against Mrs. Corona by her fellow Board members because of acts of misconduct and negligence. Instead, on acting on the complaint, the complainants were removed and Mrs. Corona promoted as OIC board chair
• Respondent has been reportedly using the judicial fund as his own personal expense account, charging to the Judiciary personal expenditures.
• Respondent Corona discussed with litigants (Lauro Vizconde and Dante Jimenez) regarding the Vizconde massacre case, which was then pending before the SC, and accused fellow Justice Carpio for loobying for acquittal, in violation of Code of Conduct and Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
• Respondent Corona irregularly dismissed the Inter-petal Recreational Corporation case under suspicious circumstances. 

IV.        RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST AND/OR COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION WHEN IT BLATANTLY DISREGARDED THE PRINCIPLE OF SEPARATION OF POWERS BY ISSUING A “STATUS QUO ANTE” ORDER AGAINST THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN THE CASE CONCERNING THE IMPEACHMENT OF THEN OMBUDSMAN MERCEDITAS NAVARRO-GUTIERREZ.

• Respondent railroaded the proceedings in the Guttierez case in order to have a Status Quo AnteOrder issued in her favor.
  • Newsbreak showed that most of the justices received the Petition after the deliberations, while three (3) justices (Velasco, Bersamin and Perez) who voted to issue the Status Quo Ante Order received the petition a day after the status quo ante order was granted.
• Its issuance violated the principle of separation of powers since the Supreme Court prevented the House from initiating impeachment proceedings.

V.         RESPONDENT COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION THROUGH WANTON ARBITRARINESS AND PARTIALITY IN CONSISTENTLY DISREGARDING THE PRINCIPLE OF RES JUDICATA AND IN DECIDING IN FAVOR OF GERRY-MANDERING IN THE CASES INVOLVING THE 16 NEWLY-CREATED CITIES, AND THE PROMOTION OF DINAGAT ISLAND INTO A PROVINCE. 

• Respondent violated the principle of the immutability of final judgments (“flip-flopping”) known to have been instigated through personal letters or ex-partecommunications addressed to the Respondent:
  • League of Cities v. COMELEC case involving the creation of 16 new cities,
  • Navarro v. Ermita which involved the promotion of Dinagat Island from municipality to province,
  • FASAP v. Philippine Airlines, Inc., et al.

VI.        Respondent Betrayed the Public Trust By Arrogating Unto Himself, And To A Committee He Created, The Authority And Jurisdiction To Improperly Investigate An Alleged Erring Member Of The Supreme Court For The Purpose Of Exculpating Him. Such Authority And Jurisdiction Is Properly Reposed By The Constitution In the House of Representatives via Impeachment.  

• Vinuya vs. Executive Secretary,it was alleged that rampant plagiarism was committed by the ponente, Associate Justice Mariano del Castillo
• It appears that, with a clear intent of exonerating a member of the Supreme Court, Respondent, in violation of the Constitution, formed an Ethics Committee thereby arrogating unto himself, and to a Committee he created, the authority and jurisdiction to investigate an alleged member of the Supreme Court.

VII.       RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST THROUGH HIS PARTIALITY IN GRANTING A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (TRO) IN FAVOR OF FORMER PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO AND HER HUSBAND JOSE MIGUEL ARROYO IN ORDER TO GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO ESCAPE PROSECUTION AND TO FRUSTRATE THE ENDS OF JUSTICE, AND IN DISTORTING THE SUPREME COURT DECISION ON THE EFFECTIVITY OF THE TRO IN VIEW OF A CLEAR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE CONDITIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT’S OWN TRO.            

• The Supreme Court, under the Respondent, immediately acted upon the Petition and granted the TRO despite the fact that there are clear inconsistencies in former President Arroyo’s petition
• It appears from reports that the ponente to whom the petitions were raffled was an Associate Justice. Under the Internal Rules of the Supreme Court, a TRO can only be considered upon the recommendation of the ponente. In view of certain objections against the grant of the TRO, a holding of a hearing within the short period of five (5) days was recommended. Despite this recommendation, the Respondent engineered a majority of 8 votes (as against five dissenters) the immediate grant and issuance of the TRO in favour of former President Arroyo and her husband in blatant violation of their own internal rules.
• Despite the conditions laid by the SC for the issuance of the TRO, Respondent allowed the issuance of the TRO notwithstanding the fact there was non-compliance of an essential pre-condition
  • Due to the Arroyos’ abject failure to comply with Condition 2, the Supreme Court en banc in its November 18, 2011 deliberations, by a vote of7–6, found that there was no compliance with the second condition of the TRO. Consequently, for failure to comply with an essential condition for the TRO, the TRO is not effective. However, by a vote of 7-6, the Supreme Court decided there was no need to explicitly state the legal effect on the TRO of the noncompliance by petitioners with Condition Number 2 of the earlier Resolution.
  • However, the SC decided that the TRO was effective despite non-compliance with an essential condition of the TRO. It is notable that Respondent did not chastise Marquez for his outrightly false and public misrepresentation.
  • Worse, the Respondent did not correct the decision that was issued despite the fact that the decision did not reflect the agreement and decision made by the Supreme Court during their deliberations on November 18, 2011.

VIII.      RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST AND/OR COMMITTED GRAFT AND CORRUPTION WHEN HE FAILED AND REFUSED TO ACCOUNT FOR THE JUDICIARY DEVELOPMENT FUND (JDF) AND SPECIAL ALLOWANCE FOR THE JUDICIARY (SAJ) COLLECTIONS.

• Respondent has reportedly failed and refused to report on the status of the JDF Funds and the SAJ collections.
• There is likewise the reported failure of Respondent to account for funds released and spent for unfilled positions in the judiciary and from authorized and funded but not created courts.
  • In particular, the annual audit report of the Supreme Court of the Philippines contained the observation that unremitted funds to the Bureau of Treasury amounted to P5.38 Billion
  • the Special allowance for Judiciary along with the General Fund, Judiciary Development Fund in the amount of P559.5 Million were misstated resulting from delayed and/or non-preparation of bank reconciliation statements and non-recording /uncorrected reconciling items.

Joker Arroyo, Bongbong Marcos criticize move to oust Chief Justice Corona

KIMBERLY JANE TAN, GMA News
Even as they are expected to act as senator-judges in an impeachment trial next year, opposition Senators Joker Arroyo and Ferdinand ‘Bongbong’ Marcos Jr. on Tuesday criticized the move to oust Chief Justice Renato Corona from his post.

In separate interviews, Arroyo and Marcos said the administration’s initiative reeked of autocracy.

“The negative effect of this is that President [Benigno] Aquino would achieve being an autocract without having to declare martial law. It is a bid for power disguised under the claim of transparency and clean government,” Arroyo told reporters.

On Monday night, the House of Representatives impeached Corona for alleged graft and corruption, culpable violation of the Constitution, and betrayal of public trust.

On Tuesday, the House of Representatives transmitted the Articles of impeachment to the Senate.

The trial is expected to take place next month, as Congress takes its Christmas break this week.

Full control of government

In the interview, Arroyo said he was worried that if Corona is removed from office, it will effectively give Aquino almost full control of the government.

He explained that the President already controls the executive and most of the legislative branches. With Corona out of the way, the Bicolano senator said Aquino would be able to control the judiciary, too.

“We will have an Aquino court rather than an [former President Gloria Macapagal] Arroyo court.  Who opposes now the government? No one. One man will control the government,” he said.

A human rights lawyer, Arroyo noted that even the late President Ferdinand Marcos had to declare martial law to be able to achieve this.

“By stroke of genius, the President will be able to control the government without having to declare martial law,” he added.

The younger Marcos, for his part, said the Supreme Court is just “the flavor of the month excuse for the shortcomings of this [Aquino] administration.”

“The problem with blaming or needing scapegoats is if, say, the CJ is successfully removed from his office, does that make this administration any more competent than it is?” he lamented.

“Will that automatically make them better at alleviating poverty? Better in governance and providing basic services and bringing down the crime rate? Will it improve the economy? Or do we again look for a new scapegoat? The sooner we admit to our own shortcomings, the quicker it will be to correct them. The more we stay with the blame game, the deeper the hole in which we are in becomes,” he added.

Still, Marcos said that he will decide on the impeachment case “based solely on what [he] believe[s] to be fair and just whether it be popular or not.”

“That’s what I owe the people [who] voted for me. That’s what I can give to my country,” he said.

Meanwhile, Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago said she was concerned because some of the senators were not lawyers and may have difficulty in standing as judges of the impeachment court.

“My fear is these senators [who] do not study… it will be their legal assistants who will in effect decide the case,” she said.

The impeachment trial is expected to begin next year.

Santiago had won a seat in the International Criminal Court (ICC).  But she said that she will still be able to participate in the impeachment trial because the ICC won’t summon her immediately. She is expected to take oath in March 2012. — RSJ, GMA News

Cops unload anti-riot shields at NAIA after SC allows Arroyo to leave

Shortly after the Supreme Court upheld its temporary restraining order allowing former President Gloria Arroyo to go abroad, police at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport took precautions against possible rallies.

Police personnel unloaded anti-riot shields from a police vehicle that arrived in front of the NAIA Terminal 1 before 2 p.m., radio dzBB’s Sam Nielsen reported.

The police personnel brought the anti-riot equipment inside the airport and declined to comment when asked if they were expecting protests, the report said.

In Taguig City, a team of Taguig police personnel also proceeded to the St. Luke’s Medical Center where Arroyo had been staying since Tuesday night.

The Taguig policemen said they were there for “security preparation” but did not elaborate, radio dzBB’s Allan Gatus reported.

Asked if they were there to escort Arroyo to the NAIA, the police personnel declined to comment, the report added.

Arroyo had booked a 5:10 p.m. flight for Singapore. Her camp said she has a Saturday appointment with a doctor there.

On the other hand, Arroyo’s legal spokesman, defeated senatorial bet Raul Lambino, said Arroyo is still not sure if she would push through with her flight.

Lambino said they were still not sure if Arroyo is physically fit to travel.

However, he hailed the high court’s decision upholding the TRO as a “triumph of the rule of law.” — LBG, GMA News

CA issues freeze order vs oil firm’s assets over smuggling raps

The Court of Appeals (CA) has issued a 20-day freeze order against the bank accounts of a petroleum company whose officers are facing smuggling charges before the Department of Justice (DOJ).

In an 11-page resolution penned by Associate Justice Michael Elbinias, the CA’s First Division has found enough grounds to freeze the accounts and all related web accounts of Cross Country and Petroleum Corporation located at Unit 3105 World Trade Exchange Building, 215 Juan Luna Street, Manila and Aleli Arellano, Jerome Canada and Samuel Mora.

Arellano is a major stockholder of the oil firm which had been able to engage in multi-billion peso oil importation business despite a paltry capitalization of only P3 million.

She allegedly signed some of questionable import entries of the oil company.

Canada is a customs broker who signed some of the questionable import entries of the Cross Country.

The freeze order became possible following the petition filed by the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC).

Ordered frozen are the assets of the oil firm in Asia United Bank, Security Bank, Metrobank, Bank of the Philippine Islands, Banco de Oro, Green Bank, Land Bank, Phil. National Bank and Export and Industry Bank.

The appeals court directed the concerned banks to comply with the order.

Both parties were directed to attend the hearing set on November 10, 2011 at the CA Building in Manila, “in order to determine whether or not to modify, lift, or extend the effectivity of the freeze oder.”

Records showed that the company was able to import nearly P8.5 billion worth of petroleum products between March 2009 and September 2010.

Also facing charges before the DOJ are Mora, duties and VAT-refund representative of Cross Country; Canada, customs broker and several others, among them customs employees who allegedly conspired to defraud the government of taxes.

These violations supposedly gave the government legal justification to consider all subject Cross Country shipments as fraudulent and demand from the company payment of the entire amount of the petroleum products imported to the tune of P8.5 billion.

In its ruling, the CA stated that “after a careful and judicious examination, the petition for the issuance of a freeze order is justified by a finding of probable cause.”

“…Unless the bank accounts subject of the petition are frozen and placed under the custody of the law, there is imminent certainty that the funds contained in the accounts …will be withdrawn…and out of reach of the law enforcers,” the resolution stated.

Concurring with the ruling were Associate Justices Andres Reyes Jr. and Celia Librea-Leagogo.