Bongbong claims Tan firms

Ilocos Norte Rep. Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. finally appeared before the Sandiganbayan yesterday to lay claim to some of the business interests of tycoon Lucio Tan, but was rebuffed for failing to present original documents to back his testimony.

Marcos told the Sandiganbayan Fifth Division that he has personal knowledge of his late father’s significant holdings in nine of the 11 companies owned by Tan.

To prove his point, Marcos showed a list provided by Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) lawyer Catalino Generillo showing the names of the companies in which the late dictator had sizeable stakes.

But Tan’s lawyer former solicitor general Estelito Mendoza argued that the documents presented by Marcos were inadmissible because they were only photocopies of the original.

Marcos said he could not present the original documents because they were part of the materials seized from them by the US Customs in 1986 when the Marcos family was forced to flee the Philippines at the height of the EDSA people power revolution.

Fifth Division chairman Associate Justice Ma. Cristina Cortez-Estrada eventually stopped Marcos from testifying on documentary evidence, saying he should have at least presented certified true copies in the absence of the original copies.

Estrada also reminded Generillo that he should have made the necessary preparations before showing up at the hearing and facing the defense lawyers.

She also “lectured” Generillo on the “Best Evidence Rule,” which calls for the presentation of the original copies of the documents or at least their certified true copies.

“You are letting the witness (Marcos) compare two xerox copies of the documents being questioned by the defense lawyers,” Estrada told Generillo.

The documents in question consisted of a letter of Michael Schmitz, chief counsel of the US Department of Treasury, to PCGG Commissioner Cesar Parlade dated Sept. 27, 1990.

Schmitz said in the letter that they have in their possession certified copies of the business, financial and other documents seized from the Marcoses by the US Customs Services on Feb. 26, 1986 at the Hickam Air Base in Hawaii. The documents were in the baggage brought along by the Marcos party to Hawaii from the Philippines.

Emboldened by the apparent prosecution gaffe, Tan’s lawyers asked the Sandiganbayan to exclude Marcos as a witness and present a “credible” one in his place.

At the hearing, Marcos testified that Shareholdings Inc. is the holding company for the other Tan-owned companies where the Marcoses had interests.

He said this is divided into three other companies – Basic which owns 50 percent, and Falcon and Supreme, with 25 percent each. He recalled that in 1985, nine percent of Basic went to Supreme.

He said they have copies of the Deeds of Sale, Deeds of Assignments and other documents to prove ownership.

Interviewed after the hearing, Marcos assailed the defense lawyers’ bid to drop him as witness.

“I cannot see why I cannot be a credible witness because I merely spoke on the things that I knew from my own experience. So I don’t think there was any question that the things I testified to were things that I know of my own knowledge. Actually, the documents were those shown to me by my father,” he said.

He said during their past meetings with Tan at his father’s office in Malacañang, the Filipino-Chinese businessman even drew structures of the companies in which the Marcoses had interests.

He reiterated that there is no compromise agreement between the government and the Marcoses.

“We have been trying to come up with a settlement with the Philippine government for over 20 years. Unfortunately, that has not happened,” he  said.

Mendoza said it would be hard for them to cross-examine Marcos  on the basis of photocopied documents.

“If the documents are not going to be admitted, what is the purpose of having to testify at this point?” Mendoza asked.

Mendoza told the court he was “surprised” why after 17 years,  PCGG still has no copy of the original documents. Mendoza said the PCGG should have made representations with the US Treasury Department to secure copies of the original documents.

Generillo told the court that they could not present the original documents since these are now in the possession of the US government.

But when interviewed after the hearing, Generillo said he did not know why his predecessors at the PCGG did not get the original copies of the documents. “I do not know with the former lawyers. I just came in 1997,” he said.

Mendoza also said he found it intriguing that Marcos’ lawyers have a photocopy of Schmitz’s certification when it should be in possession of the PCGG.

While the letter is addressed to PCGG Commissioner Parlade, who is under the Office of the President, Mendoza said the “Best Evidence Rule” provides that the original should come from the Office of the President or the PCGG.

He said it has been 17 years since the letter from Schmitz was sent to PCGG and yet the PCGG hasn’t acquired the originals from the US Customs.

Mendoza said nothing was achieved in yesterday’s hearing. “It has all been a waste of time,” said Mendoza.

Mendoza also stressed that the question is not whether the Marcoses own part of Lucio Tan’s companies, but whether the companies owned by Tan were acquired using government money, which would be ill-gotten if these were.