I entered my tita's house and I got greeted by three angry wagging tailed pups. I had to crouch and stretch out my arms and do what Chris Pratt did... "Stand down.. stand down.."
Aw that's probably the best movie I've seen so far this 2015. Seen it just recently, oh no not in the theaters of course, love life is currently arid these days, well by choice.. (tsk.. would somebody get back from Canada! damn it) On the couch, lights out, ear plugs, wifi. Dang the movie's that good I kept adjusting my glasses I couldn't put the damn tablet down.
Anyway. Let's get back to the cases.
This is ah... well this is not a rape case perse, because we'll be tackling not the criminal but the civil aspect of this case in order to contribute in our having a good grasp of typical banking laws and how it works. Although it started that way (criminally). But what were after here for is the controversial Supreme Court ruling in as far as executing the lower court decision of the attachment or garnishment of the accused' dollar account to pay-off the moral and exemplary damages awarded by the court since accused resorted to flight.
But first I will let you have a sneak peak to the gruesomeness of this case just so you would know where the Supreme Court was coming from when they decided on this very peculiar case. I know, as a law student I should write this case objectively. Law is after all what 70% exact science? hehe on the basis I guess on our perceived methodological rigor. (and pity has no place in science right?) But I in so far as injustice is concern couldn't muster to digest even more the already digested facts of this case and present you an even more skewed understanding of this case when it pertains to justice. So I will have to present it as it is. But luckily due to my desired appearance of compactness I want my every posts to comply with as standard in this blog, I will have somebody to do it for me. And that means using another blog post by another blogger as supplemental to this post.
Don't ask me, I don't know the guy really, I just accidentally got hold of his writing while browsing the case but click on this, he sort of wrote a blow by blow account of how the exact crime had transpired. Click this: The Eternal Student - The Salvacion Case. or better yet, read the actual case to make it a little bit more sanitized if you want it that way. Here's the link to the actual case- Salvacion vs CBP
Don't ask me, I don't know the guy really, I just accidentally got hold of his writing while browsing the case but click on this, he sort of wrote a blow by blow account of how the exact crime had transpired. Click this: The Eternal Student - The Salvacion Case. or better yet, read the actual case to make it a little bit more sanitized if you want it that way. Here's the link to the actual case- Salvacion vs CBP
There you go did you read it? I hear bloods raising now, I'm a vampire I could actually hear it (joke). Makes you wanna question what humanity is really fuckin' made of right? What kind of people are these right?? And makes you wanna clobber that fuckin' bastard right? I know how you feel. The thought of Bartelli's flight alone makes me wanna scream and shout on our public servants who allegedly let this thing happen maybe purely for monetary consideration whatsoever. The accused' mysterious flight alone is already a miscarriage of justice.
So the American tourist, was arrested for committing four counts of rape and serious illegal detention against the 12 year old Karen Salvacion. Yes its clear this is a pedophile case. And here's what happened after he got arrested. The police recovered from him several dollar checks and a dollar account in the China Bank. He was, however, able to escape from prison as I have implied earlier. So In a civil case filed against him, the trial court awarded Salvacion moral, exemplary and attorney’s fees amounting to almost P1,000,000.00.
Now I really don't know the inter-lying circumstances behind these case. I mean whether the trial court ruling should make me jump up and write "finally justice was rolling!" as I read the case. But who knows, the thought of a clandestine arrangement with the American Embassy may not be too far right? We know and have heard stories of how the American government extensively took care of their beloved citizens even when they're abroad right? The perks of belonging to a world power country. Who knows if some prim and proper US Embassy personnel have met with our locals and said "Listen we don't want this case to get blown out of proportion okay, so we need you to come down with us and settle this in an unwritten bargaining agreement. We know your laws, and one of them expressly and absolutely denies attachment or garnishment of a foreigner's dollar deposits. We will not hold you accountable for the repercussions of what might be the outcome of this case as long as you let our guy off the hook. That's all we asked for" hmhm. Of course that's just my creative juices working. I will not steal the glory of our courts in their some sort of admirable decisions in this case, but I dunno, it's just that all I see is a naive 12 year old girl who see the world with silver-lined clouds and a good-faith view that all Americans are good. Well reality bites.
And I dunno, maybe its a fact that I hardly see a convicted American behind our local bars. (bars ha.. the one with the vertical designs..remember?) Hard as I try to justify that premise, sad to say it isn't necessarily so. But I'm not anti-Americans okay? (Oh please please US Embassy don't deny me if ever I'd apply for visa in the near future.. please please :) ) and I know man's morals has degenerated since what after the 1950s? but I will not hesitate to touch on this racial issue just so that any foreigner that lands their foot on the part of this earth gets the bad signal that they themselves should and would clean up their own ranks. Besides, they themselves are a disgrace to their own race as they consider us to ours. What do you think the bastard will do when he reaches home? Pop open some bottles of beer with his crooked buddies and revel on his virile exploits? This is one of the reasons why sometimes I believe the barrel of a gun is quicker to do more justice than justice it self.
Now going back to the case, Salvacion's family tried to execute the judgment on the dollar deposit of Bartelli with the China Bank but the latter refused invoking Section 113 of Central Bank Circular No. 960 which exempts foreign currency deposits from attachment nor garnishment. It also invoked Rep. Act No. 1405 (An Act Prohibiting Disclosure of or Inquiry into, Deposits with any Banking Institution) as its answer to the notice of garnishment.
Asked to comment on the petition of Salvacion, the Central Bank reiterated its stand and said that Section 113 of CB Circular No. 960 was copied verbatim from a portion of RA No. 6426 as amended by P.D. No. 1246, which amended among other things, Section 8 of the law, which reads: Sec. 8. Secrecy of Foreign Currency Deposits. – All foreign currency deposits authorized under this Act, as amended by Presidential Decree No. 1035, as well as foreign currency deposits authorized under Presidential Decree No. 1034, are hereby declared as and considered of an absolute confidential nature and, except upon the written permission of the depositors, in no instance shall such foreign currency deposits be examined, inquired or looked into by any person, government official, bureau or office whether judicial or administrative or private; Provided, however, that said foreign currency deposits shall be exempt from attachment, garnishment, or any other order or process of any court, legislative body, government agency or any administrative body whatsoever. It explained that the purpose of the law is to encourage dollar accounts within the country’s banking system, which would help in the development of the economy, and even said that the law may be harsh as some perceive it, but it is still the law.
Well for its part, lets give China Bank a little bit of credit here. Expressing sorrow or sympathy with the ordeal of the minor. It was only too willing to release the dollar deposit of the foreigner but refrained from doing so because the law prevented it and it has no choice but to follow the law.
The Solicitor General expressed a different view stressing "the far-reaching implications on the right of a national to obtain redress for a wrong committed by an alien who takes refuge under a law and regulation promulgated for a purpose which does not contemplate the application thereof in this case. It opined that the law seeks to protect a lender or investor but not a mere transient or tourist who is not expected to maintain the deposit in the bank for long."
And I dunno, maybe its a fact that I hardly see a convicted American behind our local bars. (bars ha.. the one with the vertical designs..remember?) Hard as I try to justify that premise, sad to say it isn't necessarily so. But I'm not anti-Americans okay? (Oh please please US Embassy don't deny me if ever I'd apply for visa in the near future.. please please :) ) and I know man's morals has degenerated since what after the 1950s? but I will not hesitate to touch on this racial issue just so that any foreigner that lands their foot on the part of this earth gets the bad signal that they themselves should and would clean up their own ranks. Besides, they themselves are a disgrace to their own race as they consider us to ours. What do you think the bastard will do when he reaches home? Pop open some bottles of beer with his crooked buddies and revel on his virile exploits? This is one of the reasons why sometimes I believe the barrel of a gun is quicker to do more justice than justice it self.
Now going back to the case, Salvacion's family tried to execute the judgment on the dollar deposit of Bartelli with the China Bank but the latter refused invoking Section 113 of Central Bank Circular No. 960 which exempts foreign currency deposits from attachment nor garnishment. It also invoked Rep. Act No. 1405 (An Act Prohibiting Disclosure of or Inquiry into, Deposits with any Banking Institution) as its answer to the notice of garnishment.
Asked to comment on the petition of Salvacion, the Central Bank reiterated its stand and said that Section 113 of CB Circular No. 960 was copied verbatim from a portion of RA No. 6426 as amended by P.D. No. 1246, which amended among other things, Section 8 of the law, which reads: Sec. 8. Secrecy of Foreign Currency Deposits. – All foreign currency deposits authorized under this Act, as amended by Presidential Decree No. 1035, as well as foreign currency deposits authorized under Presidential Decree No. 1034, are hereby declared as and considered of an absolute confidential nature and, except upon the written permission of the depositors, in no instance shall such foreign currency deposits be examined, inquired or looked into by any person, government official, bureau or office whether judicial or administrative or private; Provided, however, that said foreign currency deposits shall be exempt from attachment, garnishment, or any other order or process of any court, legislative body, government agency or any administrative body whatsoever. It explained that the purpose of the law is to encourage dollar accounts within the country’s banking system, which would help in the development of the economy, and even said that the law may be harsh as some perceive it, but it is still the law.
Well for its part, lets give China Bank a little bit of credit here. Expressing sorrow or sympathy with the ordeal of the minor. It was only too willing to release the dollar deposit of the foreigner but refrained from doing so because the law prevented it and it has no choice but to follow the law.
The Solicitor General expressed a different view stressing "the far-reaching implications on the right of a national to obtain redress for a wrong committed by an alien who takes refuge under a law and regulation promulgated for a purpose which does not contemplate the application thereof in this case. It opined that the law seeks to protect a lender or investor but not a mere transient or tourist who is not expected to maintain the deposit in the bank for long."
FINALLY THE ISSUE:
Should Section 113 of Central Bank Circular No. 960 and Section 8 of Republic Act No. 6426, as amended by PD 1246, otherwise known as the Foreign Currency Deposit Act be made applicable to a foreign transient?
Well basically there are 2 laws (among others) which is the subject of controversy here.
R.A. 1405 - which is the Bank Secrecy Law
R.A. 6426 - which is the Foreign Currency Deposit Act
R.A. 1405 - which is the Bank Secrecy Law
R.A. 6426 - which is the Foreign Currency Deposit Act
The former covers all bank deposits and no distinction is made between domestic and foreign deposits, the latter which is a special law is designed especially for foreign currency deposits in the Philippines. But of course since we are talking about a foreign transient's dollar deposits the latter had been given more applicability.
HELD:
HELD:
The answer is NO. (There you go... now I can write that justice had been at least rolling since the lower court's dispensation)
Supreme Court said the "provisions of Section 113 of Central Bank Circular No. 960 and PD No. 1246, insofar as it amends Section 8 of Republic Act No. 6426, are hereby held to be INAPPLICABLE to this case because of its peculiar circumstances."
The reason why it was peculiar was because the suspect, an American tourist escaped from jail and after “hearing the testimony of Karen, the Court BELIEVED that it was undoubtedly a shocking and traumatic experience”, which required compensation.
Let me quote what the SCRA said:
Supreme Court said the "provisions of Section 113 of Central Bank Circular No. 960 and PD No. 1246, insofar as it amends Section 8 of Republic Act No. 6426, are hereby held to be INAPPLICABLE to this case because of its peculiar circumstances."
The reason why it was peculiar was because the suspect, an American tourist escaped from jail and after “hearing the testimony of Karen, the Court BELIEVED that it was undoubtedly a shocking and traumatic experience”, which required compensation.
Let me quote what the SCRA said:
Supreme Court ruled that the questioned law makes futile the favorable judgment and award of damages that Salvacion and her parents fully deserve. It then proceeded to show that the economic basis for the enactment of RA No. 6426 is not anymore present; and even if it still exists, the questioned law still denies those entitled to due process of law for being unreasonable and oppressive. The intention of the law may be good when enacted. The law failed to anticipate the iniquitous effects producing outright injustice and inequality such as the case before us.The SC adopted the comment of the Solicitor General who argued that the Offshore Banking System and the Foreign Currency Deposit System were designed to draw deposits from foreign lenders and investors and, subsequently, to give the latter protection. However, the foreign currency deposit made by a transient or a tourist is not the kind of deposit encouraged by PD Nos. 1034 and 1035 and given incentives and protection by said laws because such depositor stays only for a few days in the country and, therefore, will maintain his deposit in the bank only for a short time. Considering that Bartelli is just a tourist or a transient, he is not entitled to the protection of Section 113 of Central Bank Circular No. 960 and PD No. 1246 against attachment, garnishment or other court processes.Further, the SC said: “In fine, the application of the law depends on the extent of its justice. Eventually, if we rule that the questioned Section 113 of Central Bank Circular No. 960 which exempts from attachment, garnishment, or any other order or process of any court, legislative body, government agency or any administrative body whatsoever, is applicable to a foreign transient, injustice would result especially to a citizen aggrieved by a foreign guest like accused Greg Bartelli. This would negate Article 10 of the New Civil Code which provides that “in case of doubt in the interpretation or application of laws, it is presumed that the lawmaking body intended right and justice to prevail.”
"Respondents are hereby REQUIRED to COMPLY with the writ of execution issued in the civil case and to RELEASE to petitioners the dollar deposit of Bartelli in such amount as would satisfy the judgment."
___________________________________
Postscript:
I remember back in the Corona Impeachment days. They were deciding on whether to invoke the ruling in this case with regard to the applicability of the Foreign Currency Deposit Act with the then Chief Justice's supposed dollar accounts. The senate majority leader A.P. Cayetano explained to Garcia that the impeachment court was invoking the SC ruling in the Salvacion case, which states that the secrecy of dollar deposits cannot be allowed to “impede the interest of justice.” Still, Garcia maintained that the depositor’s written consent is required.
It would have been interesting to see how the Supreme Court would have handled it had it been the proper jurisdictional impeachment court. I mean you know, will it apply its ruling in this case with regard to the petition of Philippine Savings Bank to stop the Senate Impeachment Court from looking at the dollar accounts of CJ Corona? Like... will the Supreme Court find an exception to the Foreign Currency Deposit Act in the case of their Chief Justice? Woah.. intriguing.
Our rule books says, you know R.A. 6426's emphasis is that the purpose of this law is to protect foreign investors and depositors and encourage the flow of foreign currency in the economy right?
Now whether it will be used to shield a public official from any examination or investigation for charges of graft and corruption or ill-gotten wealth. That still remains to be seen. To be seen what?... well you know.. as they say... a culture of impunity is gradually reeking the highest court of the land. Well granted if the 'gods of olympus' have decided otherwise granted they were the jurisdictional impeachment court during that time, boy that would surely send a wrong signal to public officials and criminal elements. I mean you know... like "Well woop my ass, I'd rather put my money in a foreign deposit accounts since its beyond reach of 'any court, legislative body, government agency or any administrative body whatsoever' " right? bingo!! 'I've created a monster'.
I think the Supreme Court granted given jurisdiction to decide on the impeachment case, if it had to decide is bound to decide on the Corona Case the way it decided in this Salvacion Case notwithstanding the fact that the Chief Justice hasn’t been found guilty nor liable for any damages then yet right?
Well, even PNoy in his meddling with the Corona Case conveniently forgot to mention that R.A. 6426 was held to be “inapplicable” to that case because of its “peculiar circumstances.”
And oh, what’s disturbing is when PNoy said that “The Palace was considering appealing the TRO on the basis that the Supreme Court may not interfere in impeachment proceedings.” Tsk tsk I remember the President’s men being reminded that he cannot interpret the law the way he wants to since the Supreme Court is the sole and final interpreter of the law right? Otherwise, he is just confirming to the public the allegations that he is the main instigator in the ousting of the former Chief Justice. Uh-oh.
And oh, what’s disturbing is when PNoy said that “The Palace was considering appealing the TRO on the basis that the Supreme Court may not interfere in impeachment proceedings.” Tsk tsk I remember the President’s men being reminded that he cannot interpret the law the way he wants to since the Supreme Court is the sole and final interpreter of the law right? Otherwise, he is just confirming to the public the allegations that he is the main instigator in the ousting of the former Chief Justice. Uh-oh.
Well, all's well ends well.
