In the light of more than half-year lack of proper reply from the PCGG head on my emails regarding PCGG's failure to recover bulk of martial law ill-gotten/untaxed wealth, I am constrained to issue the following additional statements:
For: PCGG Chairman Andres Bautista
This is to follow up for the 4th time your response to my unanswered emails on questions/issues involving PCGG, as shown in my herein reissued 3rd follow-up email with related ANNEXes.
With all due respect, your failure to reply to my emails have at least the following unflattering implications:
1. It seems to show that you are a blatant and repeated violator of Section 5 (a) of R.A. 6713 (which mandates government officials to respond to communication from the public within 15 working days from receipt thereof), something totally unbecoming of someone who was even nominated for the highest position in the Supreme Court, the court which dispenses final judgment on violators of the laws of the land.
2. It seems to portray PCGG's inability to recover bulk of martial law ill-gotten/untaxed wealth in a sinister light—that it is merely the product of PCGG's intentional failure to do what it really takes to prosecute the ill-gotten wealth cases before the Sandiganbayan or appropriate court. From its early origins up to the present, PCGG’s cited continuing failure appears to be intentional—under the present PCGG head, by way of his seemingly playing dumb and ignoring through silence and inaction the propounded available tax-evasion legal strategy, successfully pursued in the US against Al Capone in the 1930s.
Worse, the PCGG Chairman recommended in early January 2013 the abolition of PCGG on a taken-for-granted but unsubstantiated ground—that the long pending ill-gotten wealth cases are weak owing to lack of evidences and witnesses, when such lack can beovercome under the long available tax-evasion legal strategy, suggested to him way back on September 2, 2012 under my 1st email on the matter, which legal strategy he is supposed to know with or without my suggestion. While the PCGG head has notpresented any valid refutation of the efficacy or feasibility of this legal strategy, he totally disregarded it in his unwarranted recommendation to abolish PCGG, which is the first step to consigning to oblivion the ill-gotten wealth cases under a succeeding possibly corrupt Administration (which may enter into mutually beneficial secret settlement and alliance with the ill-gotten wealth claimants), especially if PCGG is no longer around to indirectly remind the public of the existence of the ill-gotten wealth cases.
In sum, under the PNoy administration, the above evil implications suggest PCGG's serving as witting or unwitting accessory in the ill-gotten/untaxed wealth claimants' continuing success--in thwarting the government's effort to recover bulk of the poison fruits of martial law plunder and wholesale corruption.
Thus, the PCGG head has to demonstrate to all concerned, including members of the Philippine legal profession who are copy furnished this email, that the suggested legal strategy is not feasible—if such is really the case—otherwise he himself will serve to validate the foregoing unflattering implications of his failure to respond to the questions/issues raised in my herein reissued emails.
For: The Cabinet Cluster on Good Governance
and Anti-Corruption, headed by President
Benigno Aquino III himself
As a CPA, I recommended the tax-evasion legal strategy for martial-law ill-gotten/untaxed wealth cases, treated at length in my herein reissued emails. It is the result of my special “management audit”of PCGG’s work based on data and information gathered from the Internet and media reports. Integral part of the audit is to seek the side or reaction of the audited organization on the audit findings,which is exactly what I have been doing through my series of emails to the present PCGG head.
As a concerned citizen, I deserve the courtesy of a reply from the PCGG head on his verdict on my suggested legal strategy—whether it is valid or trash. I respectfully seek the Cabinet Cluster’s help in obtaining the PCGG head’s reaction to my suggestion.
As a non-lawyer, I will leave to patriotic and concerned members of the Philippine legal profession—including those in the Cabinet Cluster on Good Governance and Anti-Corruption—the authoritative determination of the validity or fallacy of whatever will be the PCGG head’s verdict on my suggested legal strategy.
The Cabinet Cluster on Good Governance and Anti-Corruption has to realize that its silence, or lack of visible action, on the unanswered crucial questions/issues emailed to the PCGG head, copy furnished to the Cabinet Cluster, undermines the touted “daang matuwid” of the PNoy administration.
For your attention and appropriate action.
MARCELO L. TECSON
A Concerned Citizen
San Miguel, Bulacan
April 2, 2013
No comments:
Post a Comment