MANILA, Philippines—The manager of Philippine Savings Bank’s branch on Katipunan Avenue, Quezon City, will appear before the Senate impeachment court on Monday together with the bank president in compliance with a subpoena issued by the court.
But like PSBank president Pascual Garcia III, branch manager Annabelle Tiongson will reply only to questions relating to Chief Justice Renato Corona’s peso deposits.
“Yes, she will appear,” Garcia said Friday by text message when asked by the Inquirer if Tiongson would testify on Monday.
“I will still be there as I haven’t finished my testimony. But even if I am discharged as a witness, I will accompany her every time she is required to appear,” Garcia said.
He said that with the Supreme Court’s issuance on Thursday of a temporary restraining order on the inquiry into Corona’s foreign currency deposits at PSBank Katipunan, Tiongson would no longer be at risk of breaking the law.
Garcia was referring to the Foreign Currency Deposit Act (Republic Act No. 6426), specifically Section 8 which states: “All foreign currency deposits authorized under this Act are hereby declared as and considered of an absolutely confidential nature and, except upon the written permission of the depositors, in no instance shall … be examined, inquired or looked into by any person, government official, bureau or office whether judicial or administrative or private.”
10 specified accounts
The subpoena issued by the impeachment court was addressed to Tiongson from the start. But Garcia came in her stead, “because as president … he felt he owed it to PSBank, his subordinates, and the country to personally appear in the proceedings and abide by the orders of the court within the bounds of law,” the bank said in a statement Friday.
It said Garcia’s decision to appear before the Senate was “out of the respect of the bank for the impeachment court and the importance of the proceedings.”
The subpoena commanded PSBank to bring to the impeachment court the “original and certified true copies of the account opening form/documents” for 10 specified accounts, as well as documents showing the balances of [the] accounts as of Dec. 31 for the years 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010.”
In compliance with the subpoena, PSBank through Garcia submitted the documents and account balances for five peso accounts.
But as for the other accounts listed in the subpoena that were allegedly in the name of the Chief Justice, Garcia told the court that PSBank was unable to comply in view of RA 6426.
Privy to info
He said making disclosures and submitting documents pertinent to Corona’s alleged dollar deposits would result in PSBank officers and personnel being held criminally liable for violation of the law’s secrecy provision.
On the phone with the Inquirer, Senator Jinggoy Estrada said it was necessary for Tiongson to appear at the impeachment trial because she was privy to information that might not be known to Garcia.
Estrada said he and his colleagues were beginning to have doubts over the authenticity of Corona’s supposed bank records, photocopies of which the prosecution had submitted to the impeachment court.
“[The prosecutors] even attached the photocopies of these bank records to their request for subpoena, when these documents are supposed to be the subject of the subpoena,” he said.
Estrada said Tiongson would be asked to explain a record purportedly coming from the Katipunan branch and showing Corona with “$700k” in deposits.
The senator showed Garcia the photocopied document when the latter was grilled for the second day on Thursday.
Garcia said it was not standard practice for bank employees to write “k” to indicate “thousands” in currency.
Estrada aired the suspicion that news reports of Corona’s supposed $700,000 account might have been based on the document that the prosecutors had presented.
He and another senator who asked not to be named also observed that the “k” in the document looked more like a bank teller’s initial.
Doubtful evidence
Asked to explain, Estrada said: “That letter ‘k’—did it mean ‘thousand’ or was it just an initial? As Garcia said, it is not normal banking practice to use ‘k’ to indicate thousands. So, that puts the authenticity of the prosecution’s evidence in doubt. All we know is that the bank documents were allegedly handed to [House prosecutor Reynaldo] Umali by an anonymous source.”
He added that Garcia himself had noted “differences” in the photocopies submitted to the impeachment court by Umali et al. and genuine documents that depositors accomplish in opening an account.
Garcia had admitted during questioning that as a branch manager, Tiongson would be in a better position to comment on the authenticity of the bank documents allegedly signed by Corona.
While Garcia admitted the existence of Corona’s 10 accounts—five peso and five dollar deposits—with PSBank, he refused to say if these were savings, current or time deposits.
SC’s TRO
His refusal prompted Senator Sergio Osmena III to move that the impeachment court subpoena “any and all accounts—time deposits, certificates of deposits and any other such financial instruments” offered by PSBank—of which Corona had availed himself.
But after the Supreme Court’s issuance of the TRO, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile told the senator-judges to desist from asking questions about Corona’s dollar accounts.
The prosecution had asked that the Chief Justice’s peso and dollar accounts be examined in connection with Article 2 of the impeachment complaint charging him of betrayal of public trust for his failure to declare these in his statements of assets, liabilities and net worth.