MANILA, Philippines – Two former law school deans yesterday supported Vice President Jejomar Binay in questioning the latest forfeiture case filed by the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) before a Manila court.
Former college of law deans Amado Valdez of the University of the East and Pacifico Agabin of the University of the Philippines agreed with lawyers of Binay that the petition for issuance of a freeze order on a bank account of the Vice President cannot proceed at this time due to a ban for filing of such case one year prior to a general election.
They cited Section 2 of Republic Act 1379, which provides that “no such petition shall be filed within one year before any general election or within three months before any special election.”
“Forfeiture cases can’t be filed against public officials within a year before general elections,” Valdez said.
“Also, no judgment could be rendered on forfeiture within six months before general elections,” stressed Valdez, also president of the Philippine Association of Law Schools and founding president of the International Association of Constitutional Law.
Asked what could have been the purpose behind the one-year ban in the law, both Agabin and Valdez gave the same response.
“The purpose of the prohibition is to avoid political persecution,” Agabin explained.
Valdez, for his part, said: “(That portion of the law was made) perhaps in order to prevent harassment and ensure a level playing field.”
He stressed that even the AMLC is covered by the one-year filing ban and should not have moved for the forfeiture of Binay’s bank account so close to the 2016 national elections.
Valdez said in light of the provisions under RA 1379, the Manila court “in effect should suspend action (on the AMLC petition) until after the elections.”
The legal experts issued the statements following AMLC’s filing of the forfeiture case before the Manila Regional Trial Court Branch 57 against the bank accounts of 63 corporations and individuals, including a lone account of Binay.
The AMLC petition was filed on Nov. 12, a day after the lapse of the original six-month freeze order on the Binays’ assets, filed on May 11.
Based on the AMLC petition, the Manila RTC reportedly issued a
20-day “Provisional Asset Protection Order” (PAPO) the following day, on Nov. 13, on several accounts including Binay’s account that contained P1.7 million.
The Binay camp earlier stressed that the order was not a determination of the truth on the allegations against the Vice President. Binay has likewise vowed not to touch the assets that are subject of the Manila court’s PAPO.
Apart from R.A. 1379, the Binay camp had likewise cited Section 16 of the Anti-Money Laundering Act, which provides that “no case for money laundering may be filed against and no assets shall be frozen, attached or forfeited to the prejudice of a candidate for an electoral office during an election period.”