Philcomsat issues

MANILA, Philippines - We write in behalf of our client, Atty. Luis K. Lokin Jr., with regard to the statements of Mr. Federico D. Pascual in his Postscript column entitled, “PCGG ‘bantay-salakay’ stunts must be stopped”, which appeared in your newspaper on 11 July 2010.

Mr. Pascual started by defending his unusual interest in PHC, claiming that he is a “stockholder of long standing” of PHC. However, Mr. Pascual’s name does not appear in the list of registered PHC stockholders of record as of July 2009.

It is clear that whatever interest that Mr. Pascual has in PHC is not by virtue of his stockholdings, which has not been established, but is impelled by other intent. His claim that he does not speak for any other group is belied by the fact that all the information and allegations that he published in his column come from the group of Erlinda I. Bildner or are based upon the pleadings that the Bildner group has filed before the courts. Clearly, Mr. Pascual is taking their side in the PHC controversy, which explains why he repeatedly writes against our client and the other directors and officers of PHC not allied with the Bildner group.

Whatever the consideration or reason, Mr. Pascual should not be allowed to use precious space in your prestigious newspaper in order to further personal interests, or interests of the Bildner group, especially since these matters and issues are already pending before the courts.

Moreover, Mr. Pascual should also scrutinize the claimed Presidential Commission on Good Government (“PCGG”) nominees who were appointed by former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, including Ramon Jacinto, formerly with First Women’s Credit, and who have allied themselves with the Bildner group. The PCGG comptrollers and asset monitors in the Philcomsat companies have reportedly been removed coinciding with the appointment of Mr. Jacinto and other nominees, rendering the PCGG helpless in monitoring the disbursements of the funds in the control of the Jacinto-Bildner group. Mr. Pascual should also look into these peculiar developments if the assets and properties of the company are to be truly protected.

In his column, Mr. Pascual writes, “Lawyer Luis K. Lokin Jr. said his signature was forged on an alleged PHC (Philcomsat Holdings Corporation) resolution used to guarantee a personal P31.5-million loan of businessman Benito Araneta from the then foundering Bankwise. If he says so, we grant him that.”

However, Mr. Pascual tended to mislead the readers when he mentioned the name of Atty. Lokin with the purported issue regarding PCGG nominees who supposedly “sneaked” into the PHC board and who “proceeded to help themselves to its treasury.”

For the record, Atty. Lokin is not and never was a PCGG nominee or a PCGG official. Mr. Pascual should not have involved or mentioned the name of Atty. Lokin together with or in relation to any issue or article concerning them. Atty. Lokin, who is also the incumbent president of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, Manila III Chapter, has been duly elected as a member of the PHC board to represent the private sector. As such, it is reiterated that he has never issued any Secretary’s Certificate to guarantee any loan with Bankwise. He has never dealt with, directly or indirectly with said bank regarding any loan involving the corporation. The Secretary’s Certificate was obviously fabricated in order to harass the legitimate Board members of PHC and concoct allegations against them.

Our client has been the victim of one of the hazards of the profession — that of facing the unreasonable ire of disgruntled litigants who resort to harassment lawsuits and smear media campaigns to destroy the name and reputation of the lawyers who represent contending parties. He has even faced administrative charges for conflict of interest.

Fortunately, his name was cleared when the Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal of the case, which was the basis for the charges of conflict of interest, based on the ground of lack of jurisdiction. There was no trial on the merits that can give rise to any potential conflict of interest situation, and the court did not delve into the interests or shareholdings of the parties involved.

Mr. Pascual says that he respects the courts. In any event, he should just allow the legal proceedings to take its course. Whatever his reasons, he should realize that his unusual interest and insistence upon publishing alleged issues concerning the Philcomsat companies make the impression upon the reading public that he is attempting to influence the courts to decide one way or the other. Especially so since the individuals that he is lambasting or mentioning in his columns are not given any opportunity to air their side before Mr. Pascual publishes his stories.

We would welcome the opportunity to address the concerns of Mr. Pascual concerning PHC, if he sincerely wants to protect whatever interest he has in the company. For while the Bildner group has spent much time and resources filing lawsuits against Atty. Lokin and other lawyers, the real culprits who managed and had control of the company funds and assets may easily get away.

We trust that we have clarified our position on the matter and request that this letter be printed in full in the same column and space where the subject article was published, in the interest of journalistic fair play.