From a “small lady” to a congressman.
The plot on Thursday thickened as to how prosecutors got hold of purported copies of Chief Justice Renato Corona’s bank records, now under a microscope in his ongoing impeachment trial.
Annabelle Tiongson, manager of the Philippine Savings Bank (PSBank) Katipunan branch, testified that she was approached last January 31 by Quezon City Representative Jorge “Bolet” Banal seeking her assistance on verifying a photocopy of the Chief Justice’s bank document.
Tiongson said she did not accommodate Banal, a former councilor who purportedly walked into the branch and introduced himself as a “congressman already.”
“I’m sorry. That’s not possible,” she recalled telling Banal, who introduced himself to her as a congressman.
Apart from being told that he was “part of the secretariat” of some group, the witness said she no longer sought an elaboration “because I was so shocked with what he showed me.”
Tiongson said she asked how Banal got the documents, but was told: “I will tell you if you help us, as soon as you help us.” The congressman supposedly added: “So many people are helping us.”
Tiongson’s account prompted Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago to move that Banal be subpoenaed by the impeachment court.
Rebuff confirmed
Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, the presiding officer, granted the motion, but it was later modified into an “invitation” out of the principle of inter-parliamentary courtesy.
Banal showed up at the session hall and volunteered to give his version of the story. He admitted showing the document to Tiongson and was rebuffed.
“She was very firm, but she was very polite. She told me that she really couldn’t (do it) and I also didn’t want her to do anything against her will,” he told the court.
“I’m sorry if I caused any problem. I just wanted to help our team. On hindsight, it seems what I did only made things worse,” he added in Filipino. He was asked to return during the trial on Monday to answer questions from senator-judges.
Banal, a deputy majority leader and ex-officio member of the House committee on justice who belongs to the prosecution team’s secretariat, said he got the paper from an anonymous sender who purportedly left it outside his house at St. Ignatius Village in Quezon City.
He said it contained a handwritten note “$700K.” He said he wanted to make sure that the figure meant $700,000 so he “tried my luck” with Tiongson.
Banal said he got a separate paper pertaining to a separate $300,000 deposit allegedly of Corona. He said he met with the informant, a woman, at his father’s house in St. Ignatius. He said he never got to confirm the information.
“It’s true that there are also others helping us,” he said.
‘Small lady’
Sen. Loren Legarda earlier noted that Tiongson was approached by Banal two days before an alleged “small lady” handed over what seemed to be the same set of documents contained in an envelope to Rep. Reynaldo Umali, a House prosecutor.
Umali claimed he could not recall circumstances regarding the woman. Senate CCTV cameras showed that no woman had given the prosecutor such an envelope on February 2, the day of the supposed incident.
Under Enrile’s questioning, Tiongson said Banal’s visit came before PSBank President Pascual Garcia ordered that Corona’s bank records be transferred from the Katipunan branch to the head office for “safekeeping.”
During the visit, Tiongson said the congressman carried a photocopy of what appeared to be Corona’s specimen signature cards. She said Banal was showing only portions of the document, but she said she saw the name of the Chief Justice anyway.
After the congressman left, she said she checked the bank’s vault and found that Corona’s specimen signature cards were still inside.
Santiago commended Tiongson for rebuffing Banal.
“So he was just making an overture and you frustrated him?” she told the witness. “Very good of you as a bank official obeying the law.”
Entries appear authentic
Enrile questioned Garcia why some entries in the copies of the leaked bank documents of Corona appeared to be authentic. A copy of these documents had been attached to the prosecution’s request to subpoena the Chief Justice’s bank records at PSBank.
“The information is authentic but between annex and the original, the way some of that information is indicated is different,” Garcia testified.
Enrile asked him: “How would anybody know those (pieces of) information—although they were not properly indicated according to your bank procedures in a document—be in the hands of other people?”
Garcia said he had “no idea” and added: “The personal details are authentic. Most of the details are authentic up to a certain point. But there are differences.”
Enrile replied: “Precisely! To the extent of the authentic details, those could not have been known to people if they had no access to your documents.”