Benhur Luy
The United Coconut Planters Bank (UCPB) has not found any transaction record of pork barrel scam whistleblower Benhur Luy and three others as claimed by former Sen. Ramon “Bong” Revilla Jr.
“UCPB has no records of any documents covering the period from 2006 to 2010 pertaining to the accounts specified in the Request for Issuance of Subpoena,” the bank reported to the Sandiganbayan.
The bank submitted the report after the antigraft court’s First Division issued a subpoena duces tecum on May 8.
Attached with the report was a certification, dated May 18, and signed by UCPB vice president and branch banking support division head Noel Calalang.
Revilla, who was charged with plunder and graft in connection with the multibillion-peso pork barrel scam, had asked the court to subpoena:
• Bank accounts number SD101930000724, SD101930001080, and 101930000724 under the name of Benhur Kilapkilap Luy;
• Bank accounts no. SD101930000724 and SD101930001080 under the account name Benhur Luy;
• Bank account no. 101930001066 under the name of Luy’s mother, Gertrudes Kilapkilap Luy;
• Bank account no. 101930000815 under the name of whistleblower Merlina Pablo Suñas, and;
•Bank account no. 101930000797 under the name of whistleblower of Marina Cortez Sula, misspelled by the UCPB report as “Surla.”
More account records
Aside from UCPB, Revilla also asked the court to subpoena account records from other banks: 24 under Luy’s name, 21 under the name of his brother Arthur, four under the name of his mother Gertrudes, 14 under Sula’s name, and six under Suñas’.
These accounts were said to be with Banco de Oro Unibank, Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co., Bank of the Philippine Islands, and state-run Land Bank of the Philippines.
The said banks, however, have yet to submit their compliance reports.
Revilla said the bank records were relevant to his plunder and graft cases, as he maintained that the whistleblowers as well as their employer Janet Lim-Napoles were the ones truly “responsible for the illegal appropriation of the [Priority Development Assistance Funds]” or PDAF.
He pointed out that the whistleblowers were also respondents in the Anti-Money Laundering Council’s (AMLC) pending forfeiture case against Napoles at the Manila Regional Trial Court Branch 53.
“Accordingly, an inquiry into the whereabouts of the illegally acquired amount subject of this case must likewise be extended to those deposits recorded in the names of the respondents in the AMLC Case,” Revilla’s request stated.
Revilla’s plunder trial is scheduled to begin on June 1, but the case is still at the pretrial stage.
He is accused of pocketing P224.5 million in kickbacks in exchange for diverting his PDAF allocations to dubious foundations allegedly controlled by Napoles.