from Standard Today
Some readers of the March 7 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer may have been genuinely puzzled by its banner headline: 4 Garcias held in US jails, with the following sub-headline: Ex-general’s wife, 3 sons all US citizens.
Some clarification is in order. The four Garcias are the wife and three sons of Maj. Gen. Carlos F. Garcia, former comptroller of the Armed Forces of the Philippines. They are Mrs. Clarita Depakakibo Garcia, Timothy Mark Garcia, Juan Paolo Garcia, and Ian Carl Garcia. All four are US citizens.
Clarita and Timothy Mark were arrested by US authorities on March 5 in Detroit, Michigan, according to the Inquirer, on the basis of an extradition request from the Philippine government for the crime of plunder committed in Quezon City between 1993 and 2004.
Juan Paolo and Ian Carl were arrested separately on February 25 by US authorities, the former in Pontiac, Michigan, the latter in Las Vegas, Nevada. They were arrested following their indictment last December 2008 by a federal grand jury and charged with conspiracy to commit bulk cash smuggling of $100,000 in December 2003 in San Francisco International Airport.
In my article titled Plunder and Gen. Garcia (March 22, 2005), I wrote: “The story got bigger because their mother, Clarita D. Garcia, trying to wiggle her sons out of their mess as well as trying to retrieve the confiscated $100,000, signed a sworn statement in April 2004 before US authorities admitting that ‘I always declare the money when I bring it into the US. I declared the money in 1993, in 1995 when I had a medical operation. I declared $100,000 on December 17, 2003. I also declared $200,000 in January 2003….’
“Apparently asked to explain their sources of income, Mrs. Garcia wrote in the sworn statement that their money comes from two corporations, a daycare school, and her husband’s job as a two-star general in the Philippine military. In addition, she said, ‘(husband) Carlos receives travel money and expenses in excess of several thousand dollars. I often travel with my husband on business and my travel expenses and shopping money in excess of US$10,000 to $20,000 is provided to me. He also receives cash for travel and expenses from the businesses that are awarded contracts for military hardware. These businesses are in Europe and Asia. He also receives gifts and gratitude money from several Philippine companies that are awarded military contracts to build roads, bridges and military housing….The expense money, gratitude money and shopping money is not declared as income…..’
“Although the military high command apparently heard of the San Francisco incident soon after it happened, its ‘investigation’ was discontinued ‘for lack of evidence,’ and then AFP Chief-of-Staff Gen. Narciso Abaya (no relation) did not remove Gen. Garcia from the office of comptrollership until February 2004.
“Military court-martial proceedings against Gen. Garcia were not started until January 2005, or 13 months after the San Francisco incident, and the charges were only for the minor offenses of perjury and falsification of public documents, not for unexplained wealth…” Gen. Garcia was convicted of the perjury charge only last month., four years after the charge were filed.
Again, from my article Plunder and Gen. Garcia: “It was subsequently revealed in media, after August 2004, that the Garcias own real estate in the US: a $765,000 (Trump Tower) condo on 502 Park Avenue and a $750,000 apartment at 222 East 34th Street, both in New York City, and a house in the town of Westerville, Ohio, of undisclosed value. It was further revealed in media that there are at least eight luxury vehicles registered in their names at the Land Transportation Office, and that Gen. Garcia maintained 40 bank accounts in several Philippine banks. All this from a monthly salary of P37,000 as AFP deputy comptroller…..”
..
“…..In their complaint for plunder, (Lawyers Frank) Chavez, (Mario) Ongkiko et al submitted eleven annexes to support their case, including US Customs reports evidencing transfers of dollars to the US by the Garcias and declared by them: $15,000 in 1993, $10,400 in 1995, $100,000 in 2003, and $204,230 in 2004; foreign currency certificates of time deposits in 2002 with Allied Bank for $75,000 and $30,000; the report of US Customs regarding the $100,000 seized in San Francisco in December 2003; a purchase agreement with Trump Park Ave. Condominium for one unit worth $765,000; and Clarita D. Garcia’s sworn statement to US authorities trying to explain a) why sons Juan Paulo and Ian Carl did not declare the $100,000 in December 2003; and b) how and where the Garcias earn their money.
“Also submitted in the complaint as Annex B and Annex G were two articles written by me for the Manila Standard: “Corruption and Taxes” (Feb. 02, 2005) and “GMA and Garcia”(Oct.28, 2004).
“In ‘Corruption and Taxes’, I had written, among other things, “Why would anyone need 40 personal bank accounts in his name, for chrissakes? It can only mean that each account is likely a parking space for somebody else who does not want his or her name to appear in the bank documents but who is actually the beneficial owner of the money stashed in it as his or her share of the money accumulated by Gen. Garcia by whatever means….” Hence, the Jane Doe, John Doe, James Doe and Joel Doe in the complaint.
In April 2005, the outgoing US Ambassador, Francis Ricciardone, speaking before the Foreign Correspondents Association of the Philippines, urged the government of President Arroyo to adopt a continuous trial for Gen. Garcia and offered to turn over to it the voluminous documents in the US government’s possession. His offer and suggestion were ignored, and Gen. Garcia remained in limbo.
But the recent flurry of developments in this case raises the question of: Why, all of a sudden? Does this mean that those 40 bank accounts have now been obliterated from bank records and their beneficial owners now safely hidden in total anonymity? We shall see what we shall see.
The key question in all this is: Why do we have Justice in Slow Motion in this country? I am not a lawyer, but isn’t this Garcia case what lawyers call an Open and Shut Case? In a case of Plunder or Unexplained Wealth, I have been told by lawyer-friends, the burden of proof is with the accused. The accused must prove that the wealth in his or her name was legally acquired. The prosecution does not have to prove that the wealth was illegally acquired.
How can Gen. Garcia and his wife and sons show that their alleged illegal wealth (valued at P303,272,005.99) can be explained by his salary of P36,015 a month?
And, while we’re at it, why are some of the cases against Imelda Marcos still pending even after 20 years?
It seems to me that the remedy lies in continuous daily trials lasting 90 days for high-profile corruption cases, not in adopting the jury system, as advocated by some groups. If we had trial by jury, the cases against Imelda Marcos would still have languished for 20 years or more, many members of the jury would have died by now – causing more delays as replacement jurors are selected and screened - and the legal system would have been bankrupted since it would have been required to pay the salaries of the sequestered jurors – whatever their means of livelihood - while they were serving in the jury.
Justice delayed is justice denied. But in a land dominated by 50,000 lawyers, that truism does not seem to infuriate anyone. *****
No comments:
Post a Comment