Businessman Roberto V. Ongpin: Not me. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO
MANILA, Philippines—“Who is persecuting whom?” Businessman Roberto V. Ongpin snapped back at Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Deputy Governor Nestor Espenilla Jr.
This was in reaction to a statement from Espenilla’s lawyer that the banking regulator was being “persecuted” by Ongpin, saying Espenilla was “singled out” among the three-member Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) in the graft charges filed by Ongpin at the Ombudsman last week. Ongpin sued Espenilla for causing injury to his business when Espenilla took back his earlier statements that DBP profited from Ongpin’s transactions over Philex mining shares.
Ongpin said the latest statement from Espenilla was “not only amusing but laughable.” “I understand very well that the AMLC is a collegial body, but of the three officials in it, only Deputy Governor Espenilla during the Senate hearings of last year stated under oath that the DBP (Development Bank of the Philippines) loans to Ongpin were ‘prudent,’ ‘positive,’ and made a lot of money for the DBP. That is obviously why I singled him out,” Ongpin said.
Due to several transactions with the DBP by Ongpin in November 2010, DBP made some P1.4 billion in profits, Ongpin said. But shortly after the new DBP management took over, Ongpin said he was singled out for allegedly availing of “behest” loans.
Ongpin lamented that the new management had chosen to ignore other much larger loans where, instead of making a pile of money, DBP had to write off billions in uncollectible loans.
When the Senate blue ribbon committee held hearings on the DBP transactions, Ongpin noted that Espenilla had testified that the loans were in order. But Ongpin added that Espenilla had subsequently contradicted himself in November 2012, when the BSP official signed an ex-parte decision as chairman of the AMLC before the Court of Appeals. Citing the “behest loans” granted to Ongpin by the DBP, this petitioned Ongpin’s bank accounts to be frozen.
Incidentally, Ongpin said the Senate blue ribbon committee hearings produced no negative conclusions about DBP’s loans to Ongpin, and no report was ever issued by the Senate on the hearings.
The Ombudsman filed a complaint against Ongpin in September 2012. In the first place, Ongpin said the Ombudsman had no jurisdiction on him, being a private citizen, unless conspiracy with government officials was proven. Ongpin said he was accused by the Ombudsman of culpability based on “clearly erroneous facts.” The most glaring of such errors, Ongpin said, was that the loans granted to Ongpin, some of which were collateralized by PhilWeb shares, were claimed to be “under collateralized” because these PhilWeb shares were “unlisted.”
“How the Ombudsman could have arrived at such a conclusion, where the entire investing public knows that PhilWeb is a listed stock and has been listed for the past 13 years, is totally beyond comprehension,” he said.
Information technology and gaming firm PhilWeb Corp. has a market capitalization of over P20 billion at the Philippine Stock Exchange.
Despite Ongpin’s motion for reconsideration in which these fundamental errors were pointed out, the Ombudsman affirmed the review resolution last January 8. The Court of Appeals also issued a freeze order on Ongpin’s bank accounts last December 6 and 26 and extended the freeze order for another 6 months.
In an open court hearing on December 18, Ongpin said the representative of the Solicitor General had manifested before the Court of Appeals that they needed at least six months to examine the accounts of Ongpin. At that point, Ongpin’s lawyer, Alex Poblador, immediately pointed out to the court it could not have been possible that the AMLC and the Solicitor General filed a petition for the freeze order when they admitted that they needed another six months to study the case. Despite this admission, the Court of Appeals decided to extend the freeze order for another 6 months.
As a result of the freeze order on Ongpin’s bank accounts, the businessman said his listed company shares lost value by several billions of pesos.
“Now may I ask, ‘Who is persecuting whom?’” Ongpin said.