History repeats itself

During the Estrada administration, we had the Jose Velarde account controversy. Estrada was being impeached and during the proceedings an envelope was presented that would give vital information on the identity of the bank depositor that was using Jose Velarde as an alias. The people conducting the investigation opted for not opening the envelope and their decision triggered the downfall of Pres. Estrada.

Right now, we have a similar problem on hand. The whole country is dying to know the identity of the person who has Account No. 400-922932 and Account No. 13706 in the Coutts Bank in Hong Kong. That is where Manila Rep. Mark Jimenez alleges that he had deposited to the $2 million that Justice Secretary Hernando Perez purportedly extorted from him. Jimenez even claims that he has video footage identifying the persons who received the $2 million extortion money. If true, it makes a mockery of the bank secrecy law. Of course, it is probably not the bank that recorded the transaction in video, but how open can a bank deposit be made?

Now, Ernest Escaler, who allegedly brokered the $2 million transaction has given this statement: "As a private banker, I am prohibited to reveal the nature or particulars of any account which may have been opened through my services." But he has dared Jimenez to give him written permission to disclose the facts concerning the $2 million deal. Jimenez had a ready reply, "I cannot give you the permission because it is not my account. . ." So it is back to square one.

To this day, the identity of the depositor who used the alias Jose Velarde has not been established in court. We hope that this will not be the case in the current $2 million bank deposit. What is at stake here is the prestige of the Department of Justice. According to a report, Justice Secretary Perez is willing to issue a special power of attorney that will give Jimenez blanket authority to withdraw from the $2 million supposedly deposited in Coutts Bank.

The main stumbling block in this case is the bank secrecy law. To get to the truth two things will have to be established: First, did Jimenez actually deposit $2 million in the Coutts bank in Hong Kong in the date he mentioned? Second, it was deposited on whose account? Admittedly, you can have accounts under pseudo names. That is why we didn’t say under what name, but on whose account?

This is a case between a representative of Congress and a representative of justice. The case is giving both Congress and the Department of Justice a bad image. Although he cited health and not the case as the reason, Justice Secretary Perez has had to go on leave. We hope that this case does not drag the way the plunder case against Estrada has been constantly being delayed. But the important thing is for justice to triumph. In short, its ultimate result should be nothing but an application and affirmation of what is right and just.