TO EFFECTIVELY transfer the pieces of property of former military comptroller Maj. Gen. Carlos Garcia to the state from 10 government and private agencies, the Sandiganbayan “categorically” assumed that Garcia has indeed committed plunder, a court resolution showed.
In the five-page resolution dated August 11, 2010, the anti-graft court identified the pieces of property belonging to Garcia as “ill-gotten in character” in order to resolve the conflict that arose during the turnover of Garcia’s selected assets to the state as part of a plea bargaining agreement.
After Garcia “executed the requisite Deeds of Conveyance” of the pieces of property enumerated in the plea bargaining agreement, the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) posed a condition that first seemed as a hurdle in the process of turnover.
“The [BIR] made a stand that the transaction cannot be exempt from the payment of the applicable taxes unless a categorical declaration is made by the court that the [pieces of property] involved are ill-gotten,” the resolution read.
In effect, the bureau’s stand necessitated a court order from the Sandiganbayan, which the anti-graft court resolved by declaring that the Garcia assets were “ill-gotten in character.”
“The court categorically emphasizes that the real and personal [pieces of property] covered by the Deeds of Conveyance executed by accused Garcia are all ill-gotten, which must be reverted to the government at the earliest time,” the resolution also read.
“And while they may not necessarily be adjudged guilty of the same offenses due to the plea bargaining agreement entered into with the prosecution, there is no gainsaying that the [pieces of property] subject in favor of the government are of an ill-gotten character,” the resolution said.
Considered in the plea bargaining agreement are Garcia’s assets valued at P135.43 million that must be turned over to the state.
Others include 11 transfer certificates of title in Iloilo, Guimaras, Batangas and Baguio and P4.4-million worth of vehicles.
Critics of the plea bargain said that the deal was lopsided since Garcia allegedly plundered over P300 million but will return only half of it.
After declaring that Garcia’s assets were tarnished with crime, the Sandiganbayan ordered 10 agencies to abide by the resolution in order “to effectuate fully the provision of the Deeds of Conveyance [of Garcia and to] . . . obviate any further hindrance to the reversion of the ill-gotten [pieces of property].”
The 10 agencies are BIR; Land Transportation Office (LTO); the Registers of Deeds and Offices of the Assessors of Iloilo, Guimaras, Batangas and Baguio; the Land Bank of the Philippines; Bank of the Philippine Islands (BPI); Banco de Oro; Planters Development Bank; Air Material Wing Savings and Loan Association; and the Armed Forces and Police Savings and Loan Association Inc. (AFPSLAI).
Turnover started
The existence of the August 11 resolution surfaced when LTO-Western Visayas Region filed a motion before the court on November 30, requesting a copy since they cannot transfer the vehicles to the state without one.
A month later, the Office of the Special Prosecutor ascertained in a December 28 manifestation that they already received copies of the certificates of registration of four cars from the transport office.
Garcia apparently turned over a Toyota Rav 4 (FEV 498), a Mitsubishi L300 (FDZ 582), a Hondo Civic (FEC 134) and a Honda CRV (FEH 275) in the name of the state, the manifestation showed.
It noted that the receipt of the documents was in relation to the August 11 court resolution.
Other agencies instructed in the resolution followed suit in the turnover process: AFPSLAI turned over P10.02 million; the Land Bank placed P7.31 million and $759,083.34 under the state’s name; and BPI handed over to the Office of the Ombudsman P51,499.34 and $56,225.16.
Letter to Amlac
Twelve days after the Sandiganbayan issued the August 11 resolution, the Office of the Ombudsman asked the Anti-Money Laundering Council (Amlac) to take “appropriate steps” to lift the freeze order on Garcia’s assets.
In a two-page correspondence dated August 23, 2010, Special Prosecutor Wendell Barreras-Sulit told Amlac that since the Sandiganbayan has issued the August 11 resolution, the anti-money laundering secretariat must also follow the order.
Sulit said that the Garcia assets covered by the Sandiganbayan resolution were almost the same ones that were included in a petition for forfeiture of assets that Amlac filed with the Regional Trial Court of Manila.
She added that the Sandiganbayan has issued an order “not only to protect but already to transfer the assets” to the state.
The August 11 resolution came three months after the anti-graft court approved the plea bargaining agreement in a May 4, 2010 resolution.
Both resolutions were kept away from media’s view.
On the logbook of the Legal Division of the Sandiganbayan, the custodian of original Sandiganbayan decisions and resolutions, the last Garcia-related resolution was dated January 7, 2010, where the court junked Garcia’s motion to post bail on the ground that the evidence against him can stand and put him behind bars.
But on December 16, 2010, Garcia, as part of the plea bargaining agreement, pleaded guilty to direct bribery and facilitating money laundering.
The next day, he filed an urgent motion to post bail and posted bail worth P60,000 as well, without the necessary hearing.
On December 18, he walked free on temporary liberty.
