|
By Jomar Canlas, Reporter
THE Supreme Court (SC) has limited the power of
the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) in conducting an inquiry
into the bank deposits of individuals.
This was after the High Court junked the
petition of the AMLC asking that it be allowed to conduct a bank
inquiry into the deposits of the officials involved in the
controversial Ninoy Aquino International Airport-Philippine
International Airport Terminals Corp. (NAIA-Piatco) controversy.
In a 38-page decision penned by Associate
Justice Dante Tinga, the SC’s Second Division ruled that while
Section 11 of Republic Act 9160, or the Anti-Money Laundering Act
allows inquiry into bank deposits, it cannot be done ex parte or
without the consent or involvement of the parties involved.
In this case, the person whose bank accounts are
involved must be allowed first to explain and dispute the conduct of
the said bank inquiry.
Other justices who concurred in the ruling are
Magistrates Leonardo Quisumbing, Alicia Austria-Martinez, Conchita
Carpio-Morales and Presbitero Velasco.
In its decision, the court recognizes AMLC’s
power under R.A. 9160 to conduct the inquiry on bank deposits
without judicial order if it finds probable cause that the deposits
are involved in kidnapping, illegal drugs, murder and similar
crimes.
Ex parte inquiry of bank deposits is also
allowed in freeze order cases under Section 10 of the same law.
The case at bar involves an inquiry into the
bank accounts of former Department of Transportations and
Communications (DOTC) Secretary Pantaleon Alvarez and the wife of
Piatco official Cheng Yong, Lilia Cheng.
The High Tribunal ruled that they are not
covered for their alleged violations do not involve any of the
defined heinous crimes.
”… if indeed the legislature had intended to
authorize ex parte proceedings for the issuance of the bank inquiry
order, then it could have easily expressed such intent in the law,
as it did with the freeze order under Section 10,” the ruling
says.
The SC noted that people’s privacy concerning
their bank deposits under Republic Act 1405, or the Bank Secrecy Act
of 1955 must remain protected. The 1987 Constitution duly protects
one’s privacy.
The AMLC petition to inquire into bank deposits
covered by Section 11 of R.A. 9160 would amount to amending the Bank
Secrecy Law that would result to legislation that is not within
their powers.
The SC held that AMLC’s remedy is for Congress
to amend the law, and “the courts are inhibited from such a
construction by the cardinal rule that a law should be interpreted
with a view to upholding, rather than destroying, it [the acts of
Congress.
|
