Ill-gotten wealth lawsuit vs Marcos couple, Tan junked

By Jomel R. Paguian

THE PHILIPPINE Supreme Court (SC) has upheld the dismissal of another ill-gotten wealth lawsuit against the late dictator Ferdinand E. Marcos, Sr., his estate and cronies including business tycoon Lucio C. Tan involving company stocks worth P41 billion.

In a 62-page decision, the tribunal said the anti-graft court Sandiganbayan correctly dismissed the case after the government failed to prove that the assets were state-owned.

by Mr. Marcos Sr. and his alleged accomplices was inadmissible.

“Even if we apply the comprehensive definition of ill-gotten wealth, the pieces of evidence relied upon by the republic failed to establish all its elements,” the High Court said in the Oct. 3 ruling written by Associate Justice Rodil V. Zalameda.

“It was not shown, through these pieces of evidence, if and how the respondents took undue advantage of their office, authority, influence, connections or relationship,” it added.

The Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) filed the lawsuit in 1987, seeking to recover wealth that the late dictator, his wife Imelda and Mr. Tan allegedly obtained illegally through the liquidation of General Bank and Trust Co. and Mr. Tan’s acquisition of assets through Allied Banking Corp.

PCGG also accused the tycoon of delivering to the Marcos couple a substantial beneficial interest in shares of stocks in Asia Brewery, Inc. in exchange for concessions and privileges for his business ventures.

Mr. Tan also allegedly gave improper gifts, bribes, concessions and guaranteed dividends to the Marcos couple.

PCGG in 2020 estimated the money it sought to recover in the case at P41 billion.

President Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr. and his sisters Imee and Irene were impleaded as representatives of their father’s estate.

The high court said the testimony of Marcos, Jr. in August 2007 and February 2018, which the state used as evidence, was hearsay.

The younger Mr. Marcos had recounted the meetings between his father and Mr. Tan regarding the alleged interest of the Marcoses in the tycoon’s businesses.

But the tribunal said he did not have personal knowledge of the supposed 60-40 business arrangement or share transfers between and among the various companies tied to the case.

“The court finds that Marcos Jr.’s testimony is hearsay and may not be used to prove the truth of the facts asserted,” the court said.

The affidavit of Rolando Gapud, the supposed financial executor of the Marcos couple, was also deemed hearsay.

“Gapud’s affidavit remains devoid of probative value for purposes of establishing the truth of Gapud’s claims on the alleged 60-40 business arrangement between Marcos and respondent Tan,” it said.

The court likewise dismissed Mr. Tan’s written disclosure in 1986 on the 60-40 business arrangement including the incorporation of holding companies and delivery of deeds of trust, which could not be admitted as evidence since Mr. Tan had not been cross-examined on its contents.

In the same ruling, the court affirmed the Sandiganbayan’s finding that the government failed to substantiate its claim that former Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP) executives Don Ferry and Cesar Zalamea had acquired ill-gotten wealth.

PCGG alleged in its lawsuit that the sale of the controlling interest in the state lender to Mr. Tan’s Sipalay Trading Corp. had caused significant financial losses to DBP because Sipalay Trading was severely undercapitalized.

“The pieces of evidence presented by the republic reveal that their complaint is still anchored on their allegation that respondents Ferry and Zalamea, as DBP officers, acted in bad faith and in conspiracy with respondents Tan, et al. in entering the Sipalay deal,” the court said.