The 6-month Freeze Period on Binay Assets should not be a cause for jubilation
Posted on Wednesday, 13 May 2015
The 6-month Freeze
Period on Binay Assets
should not be a cause
for jubilation
By Apolinario Villalobos
The media exploded the freezing of the Binay assets and
those of their dummies that include bank deposits, securities and insurances
for six months. The total amount involved is more than Php11B in 242 bank
accounts. However, the aggrieved party was not notified formally about this and
their lawyer failed to get a copy even from the office that issued the freeze
order. Where is seriousness in all this process? Also, will the six months
freeze period achieve its desired result? Who will stop the Binays from
withdrawing their stashed wealth after six months?
The SOP in coordination was not observed when the office
responsible for the freeze, did not bother to give a copy of the order to the
concerned party. Meanwhile such negligence will surely give the aggrieved party
a reason to use “technicalities” in asking a higher court for the lifting of
the freeze. That is how dysfunctional the government and its agencies are!
On the other hand, the senator daughter, Nancy and their
lawyer, a certain Certeza, vehemently denied such enormous amount because out
of the total number of accounts in question, she says that only several are in
the name of his father, the Vice-President. The problem with senator Binay is
that she has been presuming that Filipinos are pea-brained, for what kind of
fool will deposit embezzled money and assets in his own account? She forgot
that there are people who are willing to be used as “conduit” or “dummy”. As a
senator she should know this common scheme, as she was one of those who
questioned Janet Lim Napoles during Senate hearings about scams involving pork
barrel of lawmakers and ghost NGOs. To put an end to all the accusation, the family
should bring out their dummies, especially, Limlingan, so that they can assume
ownership to the said accounts.
What is incomprehensible is the short period of freezing, as
if the ban has been slapped without seriousness. Six months is obviously not enough
in view of the enormous amount involved and the gravity of the cases of graft
and corruption against the Binays. Also, those who filed the request for the
freeze are so naïve as not to perceive that the six months period is not enough
to prevent the Binays from using their money for the forthcoming election in
2016, if this is their objective.
Along this line, the TRO issued by the court on the
suspension of Junjun Binay as mayor of Makati, viewed to be unfair by many
sectors as it will give the said mayor the opportunity to dispose documents
related to his graft case, is still fresh in the mind of the Filipinos. Presumably, this time, the court could have
granted the freeze request on the Php11B, but only for a “convenient” period of
six months to the advantage of the Binays who can easily withdraw their money
as soon as the ban is lifted. The court is obviously very careful…..especially,
as some of the rogues in robe have been exposed lately. In Pilipino, the
appropriate statement for this action is: “pinagbigyan lang, para walang
masabi”.
Discussion