Quantcast
pork barrel

AMLC denies probe on Corona’s bank records

By |


AMLC executive director Vicente Aquino addresses the media after participating in a hearing by the House Committee on Banks and Financial Intermediaries. KAREN BONCOCAN/INQUIRER.net

MANILA, Philippines – Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) executive director Vicente Aquino maintained on Tuesday that they did not inquire into the bank records of ousted Chief Justice Renato Corona.

Aquino said the records were “electronically transmitted to us. We did not inquire into (his) records.”

“There was no examination,” he stressed, saying that banks automatically send transaction records to the AMLC.

“There is no need to authenticate, these are public records,” Aquino added, referring to a 17-page report that the AMLC had provided to Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales.

The report was used by the Ombudsman as basis in her testimony during the impeachment trial that Corona had at least $12 million and  82  dollar bank accounts.


Follow Us




Recent Stories:

Complete stories on our Digital Edition newsstand for tablets, netbooks and mobile phones; 14-issue free trial. About to step out? Get breaking alerts on your mobile.phone. Text ON INQ BREAKING to 4467, for Globe, Smart and Sun subscribers in the Philippines.

Tags: AMLC , Anti-Money Laundering Council , banks , Politics , Renato Corona


  • kilabot

    deny, deny, deny. just sign waiver and release saln, prostitutes!!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TV7UX6Z5F4W3QJNODUMA6UTB2U Pinoydin

    Public Records my *SS… Can you publish them all here?

    • Toby Maguire

       this show your ignorance of the law.  not all public documents and records can be arbitrarily published.  they may be shown or made available to the inquiring public in the manner provided by the rules

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TV7UX6Z5F4W3QJNODUMA6UTB2U Pinoydin

        I’m an inquiring public… then show it then….

      • scorpio22

        Any “public” documents or records can in fact be published!  Show me a law or rules that a public document cannot be published,

        Any public document is open to the public that’s why they call it “public document” instead of “private document’. Can you tell the difference now?

        Know your law before you accuse someone of being ignorant of the law.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TV7UX6Z5F4W3QJNODUMA6UTB2U Pinoydin

    Public Records my *ss – Kung public records ito, i-publish mo!!! FOI Bill asaan na?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QA264KB7TICWJ5LQG5ZXN6CM2Y ruel

    Liar…liar! wala na talgang maayos gawin ang gobyernong ito kundi magsinungaling!…hays!Hypocrites!

  • KenKhoy

    magkamag-anak ba ni pnoy yan?

  • totoybelen

    The question is: Who transmitted the electronic information?.This is a big question. This electronic information may came from someone else, not necessarilly from the bank. That is why the AMLC will never authenticate it because it is very much questionable. Corona and the defence where trick forcing them to subpoena the ombudsman and defend what was unnecessary. Anyway the rest is history and Corona will wait until history clear him of wrongdoing.

    • Toby Maguire

       haaay nako. pag sinabing electronically transmitted to them by the banks, it means, the banks were the senders.  natural may mga protocols na established between AMLC and the banks as to the manner and authentication of the electronics documents being transmitted. may mga previous registration or enrolment of email addresses yan.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_MU6WDPWDTLS6XE3SASFOUNFFC4 casa negro

      Bobo.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/T6LZKWWWOJTNBOOZJVX4FLC5MA Marcela

        hahaha! nakakatawa. who transmitted daw the electronic info. baka ang computer ng malacanang. use your brains naman sometimes. joke only.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/MQUFN5MUXJVDJNB3ZOJYN5DYXA magpakatotoo

        may sariling isip siguro yung computer para magtransmit ng mga data papunta AMLC…. hehehehe

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/IQZXJQPCZXHXY3HMQB7QAXTYKA Rey Ban

       yes tama pala talaga yung defense ng mistrial since the creation of the articla of impeachment…wala pala talaga evidence..gusto lang ng puso ng lp na magkaroon sila sarili cj…para protection na rin cguro sa mga graft and corruption acts nila kasi si corona straight..ayaw nila ganun..madi dig up din ksi yung mga yaman ng mga yellows…mga mansion din pala

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/T6LZKWWWOJTNBOOZJVX4FLC5MA Marcela

      totoy, i’m sure you are good in computer. i’m also sure that you understand even a bit of computer programming. i’ll make it simplier for you: let’s say you either withdraw or deposit an amount equals to PHP500 hundred thousand pesos or more, the moment the bank teller or anybody in the bank hit ENTER on the computer, automatically that bank transaction is transmitted to AMLC because it was programmed that way.

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/Q63DUTCNJJKCYNURT4A4C6QZJM marco

    LIAR..like abNOY

    all the time from unanimous person…from small lady, from a ghost hehhe what else is new?

  • maximus_meridius

    Kunwari pa kayo AMLC.  You are worse than prostitutes!  Nagpapagamit kayo sa gobyerno ng twisted mind na Abnoy na yan.  Low lifers.

  • scorpio22

     “There is no need to authenticate, these are public records,” Aquino added,

    Since when did “any” bank, anywhere in the world made their transactional records public?

    Show me a bank that releases their transactional records in public and I will show you a bank that will close down the next day!

    Does this stupid Vicente Aquino think that he’s talking to small children or illiterate people? This guy should be fired for being stupid and an idiot!

    Hands down, Vicente Aquino is the moron of all morons ! ! !

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/IQZXJQPCZXHXY3HMQB7QAXTYKA Rey Ban

       mga dangerous admin allies…nakakasira ng buhay ng tao…nakakasira ng institusyons..

      • scorpio22

        I’m sorry Rey Ban but I have to correct you. “sumisira ng buhay ng tao…sumira na ng institusyons”

    • RobertoMagtuytoy

      Why don’t you try ask  AMLC?  Puro ka accusation eh.

      • scorpio22

        Ask AMLC what?

        I accuse Aquino of being stupid and an idiot because when you make stupid and idiotic statement, which he did, makes you stupid and an idiot.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/T6LZKWWWOJTNBOOZJVX4FLC5MA Marcela

        mawalang galang nga sa yo platyer. ang ibig sabihin ng public documents/records eh it is easily accessible if warranted, hindi yung puwede nang ikalat kung saan saan lang. sabi nga ni senator alan cayetano, “why do you have to complicate things eh napaka simple lang naman”. hope this enlightens you.

      • scorpio22

        You are absolutely correct that public documents are accessible to the public.

        But bank records, particularly their transactional records, are not public documents and that is exactly my point.

        So what did I complicate?

      • http://www.dafk.net/what/ Kilabot ng mga Balahibo

        I believe Sen. Companero Cayetano, in one of his discourses during the IC hinted that you can’t get anything from the ALMC, because they certainly tried. 

        It was supposedly on one of the Seneate Investigations on FG at the time.

        ALMC’s reply? Go get a court order! Well, not in so many words.

      • RobertoMagtuytoy

        Ask AMLC of reports, any report of bank transactions.  Then you will know.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_O5TQQYPGVHXCQLU4BRQR4FVBNA ramone

      You make such comment because you have never worked in a bank. Those who are working in banks can attest the veracity of Aquino’s answer: transactions involving at least 500,000.oo Php are electronically transmitted to AMLC.

      • scorpio22

        I’m referring to what a “public documents/records” are. What does it has to do with working  at a bank?  What is your issue?

  • CesarBelmonte

    Basta kalbo hwag kayong maniwala, mga certfied liars mga yan kagaya ni PNoy hindi tumutupad ng pangako niya.

  • http://twitter.com/Negastarr NegaStarr

    I pity Director Aquino. He had no choice but to reveal AMLC records.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QZZKXPEA67I7HELEIYM35QVYFA Jon

    Kumamada nanamana ang misteryosong little lady?
    Walang gustong umamin kung sino ang naglabas ng report.
    Basta lumutang na lang na parang bula.
    Sabagay, kung ang amo nila walang bayag para pirmahan ang waiver.
    Di susunod lang sila sa ugaling ponsio pilato ni Budoy.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_4RLENCX7D5QB7BPFJFBENEPZNE rage b.

    good enough at least corona admit it,after a long denial that he has no dollar acoount

    • scorpio22

      When did Corona ever deny he had a dollar account. I don’t remember ever reading about it in the newspaper or any media source.

    • http://www.dafk.net/what/ Kilabot ng mga Balahibo

      When did he deny about the dollar account?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_LKVJ5MCJJ66JIL6ZFHUZ3EXMNU Inocencio Jr.

    Ang labo, pero ang hindi ko ma intindihan ay kung bakit naniwala ang senado sa ganitong klasing ebidensya’t ipinagkalat pa ng Ombudsman. Trial by publicity ika nga’t naniwala naman ang karamihan…

    • josedin

      pano maging malabo, supplied nga ang data galing bangko. ang labo mo inocencio, inosente ka talaga.

    • steven0214

      Worked as research analyst for 20 yrs in one of the biggest bank in the US. Philippine banks who are members of the AMLA are mandatory required to electronically submit **transactions** over 500,000.00 to the AMLAC. CJ defense should have subpoena the AMLAC people or the designated banks if they are in doubt of the documents. CJ did not say that the $ accounts did not exist but instead said that they were already closed & that’s why 4 accounts were only left open. The ombudsman now can compare, analyze, research the documents of the AMLAC  (700 transactions) to the 5 banks since CJ signed the waiver. The Filipino people will know the truth ( as you have said Trial by Publicity ) behind the AMLAC report.        

  • Anggoy

    Cryin over spilled milk will only prolong the agony…..

  • repapips

    they did not probe. automatic naman kasi dapat yan pag more than php500,000.00 ang laman na bank di ba? 

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/NDH6O6PNTAJ23SNYTA6LSYY47Q Butuan

    Unless bobo yong mga IT programmers ng mga BANKO na gumawa ng Application System na nag transmit ng DATA (UI) patungo sa AMLC, then mali ang reports na hawak ni Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales. E kaso bago ma implement ang System na yan dumaan sa katakot-takot na Test Cycles (Unit testing, Integration Testing, System Testing and not to mention User (AMLC) Acceptance Testing!).  

    Tama si  Executive director Vicente Aquino.  The system has a default whenever a single banking transaction qualifies a category (i.e. equal or greater than P500,000.00, etc.) given regardless of who the account holders.  

    Dapat mag tanong kayo sa banko dahil sila ang gumawa (designed) ng Application system software hindi ang AMLC!

    • RobertoMagtuytoy

      Actually, if the Senate had pushed harder about the authentication?  They can easily download the information from AMLC servers.  What is more genuine than these data residing at the systems server?

  • Russell Ariola

    Automatic transmission nga eh. Di tama rin pala yung powerpoint ng ombudsman at hindi kathang isip.

  • pidalcopter2

    So what is there in it about AMLC report? Corona is a CERTIFIED LIAR… and thats it!  

  • gemini2011

    What is the meaning of automatic transmission? I see no reason why this can be misunderstood.

    • maximus_meridius

       ”automatic transmission” means you don’t need a “clutch” when you change gears.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003850900525 Renaldo Nuňez

    Suppliers of fake documents started to disown responsibility .They now been bothered by their conscience .But its too late the damage has been done. History will judge you and all those involve.

    • josedin

      understand that they did not inquire, data were submitted to them from the banks. if you can’t understand read taliba or balita.

  • http://www.yahoo.com JOSE RIZAL

    Too lame for an excuse…
    Same old…same old…lines used by LRA Chief (a Noynoy barkada KKK)…
    Carpio cannot read and understand bank transactions?…or a deliberate ones…professionalism ignored…. being an unverified report…just to accomplish the GRAND FISHING EXPEDITION via ENRILE’s IMPEACHMENT BOAT…and PRESTO ENRILE caught only JANITOR FISH…
    Hahaha! Wanna be the next American Idol Chief Justice?…do it the NOYNOYING way…
    Hahaha!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_4M77BVMNL7QPLQBYKGUSOK5PLM Xwcd Cxw

    Director Aquino should know that even “public documents” are being authenticated. kahit nga titulo ng lupa na public record, ina-authenticate ng RD. 

    ang tanong, why no need to authenticate, even aquino can easily do so? is he afraid to be liable the said document?

  • ztefertilizerscam5

    Who’s Next?
    Corrupt People
    Mike Arroyo,Ampatuan clan,Esperon,Norberto Gonzales,Chavit singson,Mickey and Datu arroyo,Euro Generals,Pabaon Generals Diomedio Villanueva, and Roy Cimatu,Nani Perez,Marcos,Gambling Lord Bong Penida,Joc Joc Bolante,Ebdane,Neri,Garci,Mr and Mrs.Ligot,Abalos,Gen Garcia,Merceditas Gutierrez,Raul Gonzales,Pechay Nograles, Danilo Suarez,cong. lagman suarez Mitos Magsaysay,villarosa,Mike Defensor, LITO ATIENZA, PAGCOR COFFEE SCAM GENUINO,Manoling Morato,Imee at Imelda Marcos, Miriam Santiago at Joker Arroyo and many more

    Pardon of controversial convicted criminals like Ninoy’s murderers, killer Claudio Tehanke and rapist Romeo Jalosjos

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_MHDYXOESUU67AMH324WVZKNFSI nilphil

    The information from the bank is required by law. Any fund movement in any bank accounts with the amount of P500,000.00 or more shall be reported by the bank concerned to AMLAC. This exercise does not need any court order.  

    • steven0214

      you are extremely correct, banks are mandatory required by the Anti Money Laundering  Law to submit transactions over 10,000.00USD or 500,000.00 pesos to the AMLAC. Here in the US we as employees are required to report unscrupulous transactions to our immediate managers & if found suspicious will be forwarded to the AMLAC. The US Federal Banks are extremely very strict because of what had happened on the 911 World Trade Center incident. Any country that are members of the AMLA are obliged to report this transactions.    

      • http://www.yahoo.com JOSE RIZAL

        Yes, but that’s not what happened in the recently concluded Enrile’s Impeachment Court.
        AMLC’s rule should be based on its enabling laws…that it should be predicated by a specific crime (e.g. Terrorism and it’s funding, kidnapping and the routing of its funds thru banks, and the like) …not to be used as some sort of a political vendetta…and using the personalities weakness out of the Basa-Guidote Ent fund being deposited pending any distribution thereto as a result of a corporate dissolution…Pinag-away-away lang ni BS Aquino ang mga angkan…all for his vendictiveness…
        Shame!  

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/FPGLAYFLIRUSI2NAEG3Q5E6PGU R

        Looks like you can’t even distinguish between Federal Bank (which is like a BPI or PSBank) , and the US Federal Reserve Bank which is under the Federal Reserve System…..which is like the BSP.

        ….and you claim to be a US bank employee?

      • RobertoMagtuytoy

        AMLA AT A GLANCERationale for Enacting the LawThe Philippines , while striving to sustain economic development and poverty alleviation through, among others, corporate governance and public office transparency, must contribute its share and play a vital role in the global fight against money laundering. Hence, the compelling need to enact responsive anti-money laundering legislation in order to establish and strengthen an anti-money laundering regime in the country which will not only increase investor’s confidence but also ensure that the Philippines is not used as a site to launder proceeds of unlawful activities.Salient FeaturesCriminalizes money laundering Creates a financial intelligence unit
        Imposes requirements on customer identification, record keeping and reporting of covered and suspicious transactions
        Relaxes strict bank deposits secrecy laws
        Provides for freezing/seizure/forfeiture/recovery of dirty money/property
        Provides for international cooperation6Money Laundering is a crime whereby the proceeds of an unlawful activity as defined in the AMLA are transacted or attempted to be transacted to make them appear to have originated from legitimate sources.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/FPGLAYFLIRUSI2NAEG3Q5E6PGU R

        AMLA is not the issue.  The act of the AMLC/AMLT with regards to the Corona accounts is. 

        Aquino is denying the inquiry because he knows… WITHOUT A COURT ORDER, it is illegal.

        By now, majority of even the ordinary people know what the AMLA is  Every bank account holder knows this very well.

        Stick with the issue at hand.  Focus on the article.

      • steven0214

        R, what I meant with the US Federal Bank is FEDERAL RESERVE BANK (FRB) which is equivalent to the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas. Ordinary US banks are not referred to as Federal banks they are just called US banks. Federal Reserve Banks also act as clearing house bank with some small banks as their members. I, as a research analyst have direct phone communications with them & also have electronic access to their WEB SYSTEM (FEDWEB). I worked for more than 20 years at Bank of America (BOA) & sorry I forgot to place the word **RESERVE** on US FEDERAL BANK which is very smart of you. Anyway, I am just explaining my humble knowledge of the AMLA which is always tackled in our weekly & daily huddle. Our customer informations are *strictly* confidential, in fact no cell phones, cameras, ipods, ipads or any electronic devices on our desk. Customer infos cannot be left open on our desk even if we go to bathrooms,15 minute breaks & meetings. Fax & copy machines should also be clean of paper customer infos. Discarding of the customer information should be placed in a Locked Disposal Bin. When we go home, all paper documents should be kept locked in a safe cabinet of which only 2 people have the key. But if we see suspicious activity on our customer info we report this immediately to our supervisor & if found true will be forwarded to the AMLC. That’s why even there’s the Bank’s customer confidentiality the AMLA still overrides the Bank’s Secrecy Law.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/FPGLAYFLIRUSI2NAEG3Q5E6PGU R

        Might do you good to study the Federal Reserve System…for when you get promoted. : )

        The bank environment in America is very different….confidentiality is held very high.  There is a list of Federal offenses covering bank staff and employees with regard to confidentiality.  Banks may also be sued and made liable for breach of confidentiality and identity theft.

        You may also want to study THE USA PATRIOTIC ACT, (it has both the International Anti-Money Laundering Abatement, and the Financial Anti-Terrorist Act of 2001), in relation to THE BANK SECRECY ACT of 1970.

        Good luck with your job.

        PS….there is a Federal Bank, it is a privately owned US bank.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/FPGLAYFLIRUSI2NAEG3Q5E6PGU R

      Correct! Banks automatically report all transactions above P500,000 and stays in a database. No need for court order.

      To collate all the transactions of Corona, AMLC did a search/query to produce that 17 page report.  That is an act of “inquiring into his records”.  It needs a court order.

      • RobertoMagtuytoy

        It needs court order when you inquire/collate/search/generate report from the BANK’s MAIN SERVER and not from AMLC’s DATABASE SERVER..

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/FPGLAYFLIRUSI2NAEG3Q5E6PGU R

        No.  Even AMLC/AMLT needs a court order to inquire into anybody’s account.  No exceptions.  That’s why Aquino is denying there was any inquiry.

        The database was queried….a report was produced. Where is the court order?

      • RobertoMagtuytoy

        AMLA AT A GLANCE

        Rationale for Enacting the Law
        The Philippines , while striving to sustain economic development and poverty alleviation through, among others, corporate governance and public office transparency, …etc..etc
        History of the Act
        Republic Act No. 9160 otherwise known as The Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2001 was signed into law on September 29, 2001 and took effect on October 17, 2001 .  etc.etc
        Salient Features:
        1.  Criminalizes money laundering Creates a financial intelligence unit.
        2.  Imposes requirements on customer identification, record keeping and reporting of covered and suspicious transactions
        3.  Relaxes strict bank deposits secrecy laws.
        4.  Provides for freezing/seizure/forfeiture/recovery of dirty money/property.
        5.  Provides for international cooperation

        Palagay ko naman , self explanatory na yung #3.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/FPGLAYFLIRUSI2NAEG3Q5E6PGU R

         You wasted your time…your post doesn’t cover the issue at hand.  So, here it is :

        Sec. 11. Authority
        to Inquire into Bank Deposits. – Notwithstanding the provisions of
        Republic Act No. 1405, as amended; Republic Act No. 6426, as amended; Republic
        Act No. 8791, and other laws, the AMLC may inquire into or examine
        any particular deposit or investment with any banking institution or
        non-bank
        financial institution upon order of any competent court in cases of
        violation
        of this Act when it has been established that there is probable cause
        that
        the deposits or investments involved are in any way related to a money
        laundering offense: Provided, That this provision shall not
        apply
        to deposits and investments made prior to the effectivity of this Act.

      • RobertoMagtuytoy

        Malinaw naman, ”
        the AMLC may inquire into or examine

        any particular deposit or investment with any banking institution or
        non-bank
        financial institution upon order of any competent court in cases of
        violation…etc”……..in case of violation ito or when they suspect that a certain account is being used by a criminal.     Sa kaso po nung kay CORONA, hindi po nag inquire ang AMLC, nag report po automatically ang system sa AMLC dahil lumampas yung mga transaction ni CORONA, which exceeds 500,000 per transaction per day in conformity with and by the RULES.AMLC is not suspicious of these transaction kasi kilala si CORONA.  But when asked by the OMB to GENERATE a REPORT of these TRANSACTIONS and  handover to them, they simply comply.  WHO needs then a COURT ORDER for what?

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/FPGLAYFLIRUSI2NAEG3Q5E6PGU R

        you are saying then that there was NO PROBABLE CAUSE, therefore no need for a court order, ergo, no inquiry into the bank account.

        But a report was generated without probable cause, ergo no court order…just the OMB’s asking…..No provision in the law that specifies the Ombudsman may request WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE or COURT ORDER.

        This then goes into effect…..

        Sec. 16. Prohibitions
        Against Political Harassment. – This Act shall not be used for
        political
        persecution or harassment or as an instrument to hamper competition in
        trade and commerce.

        Political persecution or harassment.

      • http://www.dafk.net/what/ Kilabot ng mga Balahibo

        Both.

        As Sen Cayetano pointed out during IC, he asked the help of the ALMC to open FG’s transactions recorded in the ALMC.

        ALMC says not until you have a court order.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_5LZVQRWKWONXTKG7OLYPFZBUDU Ramses

    non authenticated documents are fake and not admisible to any court… nobody can use it as evidence.. if they allow it, ordinary people are in trouble, they can make fake accusations..

    • scorpio22

      Non-authenticated documents are not necessarily fake. However, you are correct that in order to use in court as a documentary evidence, it has to be authenticated.

      • http://www.dafk.net/what/ Kilabot ng mga Balahibo

        You are right.

        The only way it has a value in the court of law if there is someone who, of authority, will validate the data.

        Unvalidated docs, when left untouched, is usually appreciated the same value as fakes, uncorroborated, inadmissible evidence.

      • RobertoMagtuytoy

        OK.  Heto nga ang scenario:

        Validate natin ang account ni CORONA as reported to AMLC electronically by his banks.Nasa Senate hearing tayo , after all the server access formalities, acess natin yung DATABASE at mag download tayo ng REPORT ng AMLC, shown in the widwscreen, in realtime.  Tapos, Printout natin yung dowloaded REPORT.

        NGAYON,  question,  Kailangan pa bang PIRMAHAN ng taga AMLC yung printout para maging admissible as evidence?

      • http://www.dafk.net/what/ Kilabot ng mga Balahibo

        “Validate natin ang account ni CORONA as reported to AMLC electronically by his banks.”

        Yes, for that, we need predicate crime. Such as kidnapping, smuggling, etc. But lets not worry about that. Im sure this administration can find one, if not, manufacture one.

        “Senate hearing tayo,..”

        #1. The Senate as an investigating body in aid of legislation o as impeachment court (closed, but for the argument, lets assume its still open).

        #2. If Senate is sitting as an open The court is there not to FIND evidence against the accused. Its supposed to WEIGH or consider the evidence against the accused.

        Hindi naman pwede na ang judges, at ang prosecution, naka tag team vs any accused diba.

        #3. If Senate is sitting as a fact finding body (in aid of legislation). Then its not a court. It has no judicial ruling and no imposable punishment (except contempt if it warrants). The question now becomes incorrect since it is not the proper forum for any one accused. And anyone can invoke self protection rights in these … kangaroo court if it is treated as a court of law.

        Remember, the law makers cannot be the same ones that should interpret the law.

        “after all the server access formalities, acess natin yung DATABASE at mag download tayo ng REPORT ng AMLC, shown in the widwscreen, in realtime.  Tapos, Printout natin yung dowloaded REPORT.”

        Hmmm. sino mag facilitate satin ng access sa ALMC? Sino mag didirect satin sa proper server? File directory? And files? Diba ALMC personnel din.

        Big question. Sino magsasabi na ito yung mga files para kay RCC, at kung hindi para sa ibang tao?

        Sino mag sasabi at mag co-coroborate na tunay itong mga files na ito, at hindi honeypot (false data used mostly as counter intelligence).

        Kung hindi the right personnel ng ALMC ang gagawa, WOULD YOU BE SATISFIED kung ‘ako’ ang mag presinta ng SERVER, tapos ‘ako’ ang mag sabi sa inyo saan yung directory and files?  Syempre hindi dba, hindi naman ako ALMC and you wouldn’t know kung tutoo yung data o hindi.

        Hence, your paragraph all boils down to proper ALMC personnel having to participate at such hearing.

        “NGAYON,  question,  Kailangan pa bang PIRMAHAN ng taga AMLC yung printout para maging admissible as evidence?”

        Yes.

        #1 Same reason as above. (ALMC personnel participation)
        #2 Same reason as above. IC court cannot ‘fish’ evidence. It has to be provided by either prosecution or defense. Courts can warrant, allow or disallow evidence and testimonies.

      • RobertoMagtuytoy

        hahahhhaha……You know little how and what a DBMS is. hahahhah JOKJOKJOK?

      • http://www.dafk.net/what/ Kilabot ng mga Balahibo

        hahaha,

        if you say so.

        (Been using MySQL since 2003 v4.0.16, linux since RH8, and php since 4.2.1, apache since 1.3.x.. before that..)

      • RobertoMagtuytoy

        alam mo pala. then don’t mislead the readers.  You know fully well how it works, it resides as ones and zeros until queried to output as ASCII…it is meant to  save space.  an application will do the trick of the output.  DBMS is not like your daily FILES and FOLDERS.

      • http://www.dafk.net/what/ Kilabot ng mga Balahibo

        ahahaha,

        don’t believe everything you read and hear. I could also be a retired SC associate, or sitting in muntinlupa waiting ‘for life.’ or an actor who plays the part of a LAMP developer, or all of em. hahaha.

        sorry po. i just picked up on the ‘jok jok jok’

        no intention of misleading anyone.

        anyway the original point was, u still need AMLC personnel to be there (IF) you will have the senate access the servers and print the report yourself. And he has to be sworn in, and the works.

      • RobertoMagtuytoy

        Answer the Q. the dbase reprt, admissible ba as evidence after it has been queried and printed in front of the hearing body?

        of course the Hearing Body should authenticate the printout, marked as evidence.

      • http://www.dafk.net/what/ Kilabot ng mga Balahibo

        If the server access was facilitated by an ALMC personnel, and SWORN by that ALMC personnel that it is the a) it is the right table (or report) and b) that part of his job has something to do with the gathering of the report. then YES.

        If I get a ALMC personnel to allow me to access ALMC server, draw my queries, then show it in the wide screen. Then NO.

        You see it doesn’t MATTER whether the data was physically provided by the ALMC personnel (printed then hand carried to court), OR that access to the servers were granted by that ALMC personnel which then the Senate used to open up the ALMC report.

        Reason is still:

        1) its not the courts job to GET evidence, its to weigh them.
        2) Its nothing without ALMC personnel corroboration and testimony of its truthfulness.

        If I was the defense, and you present me with data no one could corroborate, even if you do it in court, I would have your entire exercise be compared to ordinary uncorroborated testimony and then have it stricken off the record.

        Also, please to not be mistaken that the court, any court is a place where evidence is gathered. Evidence should already be provided, long before you allege wrong doing.

    • marlaw

      The transactions were electronically transmitted by the bank to the AMLC. So, it follows, whatever transaction made and recorded there in the bank is the same as the one transmitted electronically. If there is transaction recorded, then it only means there is a transaction made. I don’t think the bank would send fictitious transactions involving thousands or millions of dollars or pesos to an authorized government agency like the AMLC. Now, with the waiver of Corona, the Ombudsman and BIR can conduct a full scrutiny and investigation of these supposed transactions by going into his bank records to check wether the transactions were true or if they really existed. On the other hand, we must remember that Corona was convicted not because the transactions were true or not, existed or fictitious, authenticated or not, the document was illegally acquired or not, the anonymous lady said so, etc. Corona was convicted by his own admission that he has US$ 2.4M & P 80M that he didn’t declare in his account. His alibi that because of the FCDA law he didn’t declare his dollar accounts and the supposed co-mingled funds in his  peso accounts he didn’t declare the same in his SALN were both discarded and controverted by the impeachment court. The fact, that his impeachment is political in nature, reasons by technicalities would never prosper. The main issue actually was moral if wether he is fit or unfit as SC Chief justice the fact that his explanations were inconsistent and tantamount to public lying. In summation, he betrayed the public trus and deserved removal.

      • http://friendsoffelix.wordpress.com/ paulevans

        Kaya yung impeachment court mo naging kangaroo court.

      • Nang_Day_55

        You were biased to start with. Corona based on evidences and coming from him, was not fitted to be the Chief Lawyer of the land!! Read the facts, there was no fiction about it..he was guilty..did not deserve his title.

      • steven0214

        very well said, thumbs up man !! 

  • http://www.yahoo.com JOSE RIZAL

    In his speech, His Mediocrity used the phrase, “…pwede pala…(followed by the usual Tuwid na Daan rhetorics)”.
    “His Mediocrity” had successfully experimented, using all the resources of the government thru “The Duck and the Devil” – type strategy, with the aid of Enrile’s American Idol-type Impeachment court…
    That’s why he said, “…PWEDE PALA…” + (the usual Twuid na Daan rhetorics — his unwritten law).
    Now comes to signing of a bank waiver, his mouthpieces replied, “HINDI PWEDE, PALA”…+ usual Tuwid Na Daan EXCUSES…
    Is this nation still being led by a sane leader?  Hahaha! 

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IWSC74JRY6R3OJ6DO4XJUWECS4 paranoid_penguin

      what’s funny about your comment? 
      “meaningless laughter is a sign of ill breeding” 

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_LHIWGAYTSGJDTVKOHUFKD7JRBI Jasmin

    ah….. ganun??  kaya pala wala’ng authentication galing AMLC kasi di rin nila alam kung totoo/tama yan!!  anyway, OMBUDSMAN, AMLC and COA can be help for GRAVE MISCONDUCT! administrative offense ito!!

    • archangel uriel

      kung mayrun man dapat na kasuhan ….. walang iba kungdi ang banks ….eh sila ang nagtatransmit ng mga records sa amlc….. ano ba yan …… logic lang pooo……

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IWSC74JRY6R3OJ6DO4XJUWECS4 paranoid_penguin

      hahaha…wala ka bang alam sa information technology? huwag ka maniwala sa mga comment dito…di naman to authenticated dba? 

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IWSC74JRY6R3OJ6DO4XJUWECS4 paranoid_penguin

      Huwag mo rin paniwalan yung nakita mo sa ATM mo…baka di pa authenticated yung balance mo….at wag ka maniwala sa calculator ng PC mo….baka mali ang computation nyan….labo nman na buhay to!!!….wahahahha

      • lostRunes

        Yung authenticated na “45″ properties eh kasinungalingan… galing ring PC yun.. paano pa kaya yung hindi authenticated??

  • lostRunes

    Ah ok.. parang yung LRA list ng 45 properties na nag supply lang sa kanila eh yung data base ng computer. Wala raw silang kasalanan dun. Galing PC lang yon. Electronically supplied. Oo nga Mr. Vicente Aquino. kapani paniwala yan. Dapat explain mo mabuti yan sa senate inquiry. ikanga ni Farinas eh.. PALUSOT!

  • $20722540

    hahaaaa!!! bakit di mo sinabi noon.  question is: why did you give the report to morales with no court order?  yeh palusot sabihin mo inutusan ka ni noynoying

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_7IGQYIPU6AFTVRJ742XT2X44M4 Jef

    Hindi ba kayo nag iisip….meaning these eletronically dollar account reports of the CJ is genuine from the bank itself…automatically transmitted to the AMLC…..ano yan another palusot….hintay nyo na lang yong investigation ng ombudsman at BIR….shame on you

    • agong1

      pala isipan nga paano na leak sa yellow media eh.. PDI ko yata naunang nabasa ito..

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/WKULLE6N6KVLY72ZQW4QC5A4QE J

    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

  • agong1

    palusot na naman ng AMLA, then if this is true enrile,drillon,tanada,tupas , bank also sending their bank transaction…oppps baka mabuking ka Aquino….dont tell me all goverment officer $ account is less than  500k  but having 100million pesos in saln. most of these are in export business logging for ex..

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/FPGLAYFLIRUSI2NAEG3Q5E6PGU R

    There was an inquiry into the accounts…the 17-page report was generated.  Where is the court order?

    By Law:

     Sec. 11. Authority
    to Inquire into Bank Deposits. – Notwithstanding the provisions of
    Republic Act No. 1405, as amended; Republic Act No. 6426, as amended; Republic
    Act No. 8791, and other laws, the AMLC may inquire into or examine
    any particular deposit or investment with any banking institution or
    non-bank
    financial institution upon order of any competent court in cases of
    violation
    of this Act when it has been established that there is probable cause
    that
    the deposits or investments involved are in any way related to a money
    laundering offense: Provided, That this provision shall not
    apply
    to deposits and investments made prior to the effectivity of this Act.

    • RobertoMagtuytoy

      Malinaw naman, “the AMLC may inquire into or examine
      any particular deposit or investment with any banking institution ornon-bankfinancial institution upon order of any competent court in cases ofviolation…etc”……..in case of violation ito or when they suspect that a certain account is being used by a criminal.   

       Sa kaso po nung kay CORONA, hindi po nag inquire ang AMLC, nag report po automatically ang system sa AMLC dahil lumampas yung mga transaction ni CORONA, which exceeds 500,000 per transaction per day in conformity with and by the RULES.AMLC is not suspicious of these transaction kasi kilala si CORONA.  But when asked by the OMB to GENERATE a REPORT of these TRANSACTIONS and  handover to them, they simply comply.

       WHO needs then a COURT ORDER for what?

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/FPGLAYFLIRUSI2NAEG3Q5E6PGU R

        you are saying then that there was NO PROBABLE CAUSE, therefore no
        need for a court order, ergo, no inquiry into the bank account.

        But a report was generated without probable cause, ergo no court
        order…just the OMB’s asking…..No provision in the law that specifies
        the Ombudsman may request WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE or COURT ORDER.

        This then goes into effect…..

        Sec. 16. ProhibitionsAgainst Political Harassment. – This Act shall not be used forpoliticalpersecution or harassment or as an instrument to hamper competition intrade and commerce.

        Political persecution or harassment

      • RobertoMagtuytoy

        sa MATA ng AMLC there is no probable cause to inquire.  Dahil ang personality involved here is known to be RENATO CORONA.

        SI RENATO PO ay hindi biktima ng persecution at lalong hindi ng Harassment. He was IMPEACHED.

        Alam mo ba kung mag inquire ka sa banko you will know exactly how much is the current deposit.

        Sa AMLC reports, they are only transactions of the day that exceeds 500,000 pesos.  Yun pong galaw ng pera at hindi yung kung magkano ang naka deposito.  

        Kung mag tatanong ka sa Banko kung magkano ang aktwal deposit eh sakop po iyon ng COURT ORDER.

      • lostRunes

        Nag iimbento ka ng di naka saad sa batas. The Ombudsman used this as a basis to say that Corona has $12 million. Kasinungalingan. Political persecution at its finest.

      • RobertoMagtuytoy

        Pagalawin nyo nman ang imagination nyo, dyos me!

      • lostRunes

        Yun yung problema eh, hindi batas ang batayin eh, IMAGINATION!

      • RobertoMagtuytoy

        Basahin mo mula umpisa ng thread at tapos pagalawin mo ang imagination mo. Meaning na intindihan mo punto por punto, at mag liliwanag sa iyo na sangayon sa BATAS yung argument about “COURT ORDER”.

        Inquiry sa BANKO ng particular account ang dapat may court order. There we go again.

      • RobertoMagtuytoy

        SI RENATO po ay hindi biktima ng political harassment o ng isang persecution.  Simple lang, sya po ay na- IMPEACHED.

  • Nang_Day_55

    Please….it is common sense. No need to get a court order. Any banking transaction of 500,000.00 pesos or more is ELECTRONICALLY TRANSMITTED TO AMLA!! for anybody. 20 voted for guilty..and only 3 for acquittal..no need for a court order to question this result either.

    • andres1999

       Sorry, this 20 are political votes, not conscience vote. Money and power talks, because stupid listens.  Pag nabisto nyo si presidente may undeclared dollar accounts, impeach nyo rin ba?   Yan sagutin mo ng conscience vote mo.

      • bagombong

         tumahimik ka na,,,kasi ang katwiran mo mana kay Corona…parehong stupid

      • Nang_Day_55

        Any government official who is impeachable if there are grounds for impeachment has to answer to the people. My conscience votefor Corona is guilty, my political vote for Corona is guilty…Corona is unfit to be the chief magistrate of our country.

  • edlee1

    Palusot!   hindi nga nag inquire nakita lang nila kasi inireport sa kanila ng banko, ang problema binigay mo ang reocrd sa Ombudsman kasi ni request ng ombudsman sa yo, ngayon ang tanong pewde mo ba isiwalat yan sa publiko ng walang court order. hinde kaya nga ang ombudsman ang ng siwalat para may lusot kayo…….

    • bagombong

       tangengot ka pala eh…di ba sa batas , the Ombudsman has the only authority to seek help sa lahat ng ahensiya ng gobyerno…nagkataon na may nag-file ng reklamo kay Corona, para malaman kung totoo , eh di humongi ng kopya ni Corona sa AMLC kung totoong may dollar sya..kasi kung wala, wala naman maibibigay ng AMLC, eh yun pala ang dami…eh di buking sya…

    • wil15

      My reply is in English because I am Ilonggo and not conversant in tagalog. I hope you are after the truth and your mind is opened to understand what I am trying to explain.

      1. All banks are mandated by the Anti Money Laundering Act (AMLA) to report to the Anti Money Laundering Council (AMLC) all transactions that are 500,000 pesos and above.

      2. The Ombudsman requested AMLC for a copy of the list of bank transactions of all accounts  in the name of Renato Corona reported by the banks to AMLC because of the case filed by Risa Hontiveros et al in the office of the Ombudsman against Corona.

      3. The Ombudsman can request information from AMLC because in the SALNs that Corona signed, he authorized the Ombudsman to obtain and secure from appropriate government agencies documents that may show assets, liabilities, net worth, business interest and financial connection.

      4. AMLC submitted a confidential report to the Ombudsman and the Ombudsman was forced to disclose the report because she was summoned by the Impeachment Court as a hostile witness of the defense. The disclosure was legal because it was done as a testimony in the court of law.

      • lostRunes

        “AMLC submitted a confidential report to the Ombudsman and the Ombudsman was forced to disclose the report ” The powerpoint was forced too? The COA was forced to interpret it? Wow. Kasi nung nag testimony si Ombudsman feel na feel niya eh. In fact, the powerpoint was proven to be fabricated. 82 “fresh” dollar accounts? Kahit si Bill Gates hindi ganun karami ang accounts

    • RobertoMagtuytoy

      iba naman ang premise dito ! ISIWALAT sa PUBLIKO ng walang COURT ORDER?

  • WAJ

    Anything that is submitted to the Government should be a matter of public record(s)…with certain limitation.



Copyright © 2014, .
To subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines, call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.
Factual errors? Contact the Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk. Believe this article violates journalistic ethics? Contact the Inquirer's Reader's Advocate. Or write The Readers' Advocate:
c/o Philippine Daily Inquirer Chino Roces Avenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets, Makati City, Metro Manila, Philippines Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94
Advertisement
Advertisement
Marketplace
Advertisement