22 DECEMBER 2000 AND 02 JANUARY 2001
BEFORE THE PHILIPPINE SENATE
(SITTING AS THE IMPEACHMENT COURT)
News $ Views
Law &
Jurisprudence
Administrative
Issuances
Trust Products
& Practice
MR. BAUTISTA: Your Honor, we will object. There is no testimony that the witness herself did the typing.
SEN. ENRILE: I'm asking if she knows.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: The witness identified the document and therefore she could be asked - -
MR. BAUTISTA: We submit, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: -- for clarification.
SEN. ENRILE: She is a party to this document.
MR. BAUTISTA: We submit, Your Honor.
SEN. ENRILE: She's responsible for every word that is written in this document as a party to this document. So the objection is meaningless. Go ahead, please.
MS. OCAMPO: I recall that there was only one typewriter that was used because this is a highly confidential account. Therefore, the typewriter of my secretary had to be used.
x x x x x
SEN. ENRILE: Ms. Ocampo, when you went to Malacanang to have this document Investment Management Agreement signed, did you check whether there was a Velarde, Jose Velarde, living in Malacanang?
MS. OCAMPO: I did'nt know that it was Jose Velarde because when I went there, I was not told who was actually going to sign and who the principal was.
SEN. ENRILE: All right. In the notarial acknowledgment, this document was supposed to be signed in Makati. Why was it signed in Malacanang?
MR. BAUTISTA: May we request the Senator-Judge to identify the particular document?
SEN. ENRILE: We are talking of one document, Exhibit "UUU". I would like the objections not to be counted with my time.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: That will not be counted, Your Honor. Even the answer will not be counted against the five minutes.
SEN. ENRILE: And also the intervals, Mr. Chief Justice.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: If it is the interval between the questions that will be counted against you.
MS. OCAMPO: I cannot answer the technical side. But the point is, what was important to us is, that this was signed on February 4, 2000.
SEN. ENRILE: All right. But supposedly in Makati.
MS. OCAMPO: No. Actually, the secretary typed it because it was automatic for her to just type "Makati". I did not anymore change it. But what was important is that the document was signed on February 4. If you will note on the first page, there was no date on the document. So we just used this date on the notarization portion as the date of the document.
SEN. ENRILE: If indeed, as your story goes, the President signed this document and he signed the name "Joseph Ejercito Estrada" and given the fact that you refer to a certain Savings Account/Current Account No. 0160-62501-5 supposedly in the name of "Jose Velarde", would you have authenticated this document?
MR. BAUTISTA: Objection. The question is misleading.
SEN. ENRILE: No, it's not misleading.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: The witness may answer. The objection is overruled.
MS. OCAMPO: Number one, if he signed "Joseph Ejercito Estrada," I would have called the Chairman, Mr. Go, because the Debit/Credit Authority is "Jose Velarde". So I cannot tell now whether that is the same person. Then I will have to wait for his instructions. I cannot say now whether I will authenticate because I do not know whether I would have proceeded.
SEN. ENRILE: So, when he signed "Jose Velarde", you did not authenticate, in fact, you said, "Nagulat ako!"
MS. OCAMPO: Yes, Sir.
SEN. ENRILE: "I could not believe it that he signed "Jose Velarde." And yet you say, if he signed "Joseph Ejercito Estrata," you would not have allowed it. Which is which?
MS. OCAMPO: Because, as I said, on December 22nd, that the Debit/Credit Authority was in an envelope, okay, and I opened that envelope only after all the investment management agreements were signed. So when I saw that it was consistent "Jose Velarde", then I proceeded with the transaction. But....
SEN. ENRILE: Why did you not authenticate it?
MS. OCAMPO: Because that is not his real name.
SEN. ENRILE: Oh. Is that so? But that, according to you - but according to you, that is the real name of the account mentioned in the letter to Bagsit.
MS. OCAMPO: The trust transaction is just an offshot, is actually the leg, the last leg of the account.
SEN. ENRILE: But this is not a trust transaction.
MS. OCAMPO: This is a ...
SEN. ENRILE: I asked you, this is an agency agreement?
MS. OCAMPO: This is an agency. It is under the trust. It is under the trust. It's under the duties of the Trust Department to handle agency arrangements.
SEN. ENRILE: Is this covered by a special resolution of the Board of Directors of Equitable PCI Bank?
MS. OCAMPO: Which one, Sir?
SEN. ENRILE: This IMA, Investment Management Agreement, since this is outside the trust powers and authority of the bank?
MS. OCAMPO: The agency is part of the duties of the trust.
SEN. ENRILE: Can you show us a specific provision to that effect?
MS. OCAMPO: Now?
MR. BAUTISTA: We object, Your Honor. I think the question calls...
SEN. ENRILE: May I request, Mr. Chief Justice -
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: Objection overruled. The witness may answer.
SEN. ENRILE: -- that the people who are talking in the --
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: Yes.
SEN. ENRILE: -- gallery be excluded from the Court?
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: The audience is requested to observe the rules as prescribed by the Impeachment Court to preserve the dignity of the Court.
MS. OCAMPO: Sir, the trust regulations that's 1065. I understand that the Investment Management Rules are under 1411.
SEN. ENRILE: All right.
MS. OCAMPO: But we don't have it now.
SEN. ENRILE: Incidentally, were you subpoenaed to come and testify here?
MR. POBLADOR: We object, Your Honor, on the ground of irrelevance and immateriality.
SEN. ENRILE: I just want to find out.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: The witness may answer. Objection overruled.
MS. OCAMPO: I was not subpoenaed.
SEN. ENRILE: You were not. Have you ever been a visitor of this place before before you became a witness?
MS. OCAMPO: No, Your Honor.
SEN. ENRILE: Were you the subject of a subpoena duces tecum, or rather the documents you brought to this hearing, were they subject of a subpoena duces tecum?
MR. POBLADOR: Same objection, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: Objection overruled. The witness may answer.
MS. OCAMPO: I don't really know whether... I'm not a lawyer, so we brought the documents because I understand it is part already. Because the subpoena covers all of the transactions of the account and the trust account.
SEN. ENRILE: What subpoena? What subpoena?
Anyway, were you clothed with a written instruction by the Board of Directors of Equitable PCI Bank to be a witness here and to bring the documents that you brought as a part of your testimony here?
MR. POBLADOR: We object also, Your Honor, on the ground of immateriallity.
SEN. ENRILE: It s material, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: Objection overruled. The witness may answer.
MS. OCAMPO: There is a board resolution, Sir.
SEN. ENRILE: May we have a copy of that board resolution.
MS. OCAMPO: Yes, we will give you a copy.
SEN. ENRILE: Who were the members of the Board who authorized you to come here and testify in this proceeding and to bring the documents that you brought here?
MS. OCAMPO: At that time, Mr. Go was still the chairman. So, Mr. Go, Mr. Vergara and all the other members of the Board. They were present.
SEN. ENRILE: That will be all, Mr. Chief Justice.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: Thank you, Your Honor.
The chair now recognizes the honorable Senator-Judge Guingona for five minutes.
SEN. GUINGONA: Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.
Madam Witness, is it true that the Defense Counsels or any one of them contacted you before December 22 of the year 2000?
MR. FLAMINIANO: Mr. Chief Justice, we have to object to the question as being....
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: On what ground?
MR. FLAMINIANO: It was not part of the offer of testimony of the witness.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: The objection is overruled. The witness may answer.
MS. OCAMPO: The Defense Counsel, Your Honor, did not contact me before December 22.
SEN. GUINGONA: So, there was no Defense Counsel who contacted you?
MS. OCAMPO: No, Your Honor.
SEN. GUINGONA: May we now go to Exhibit "XXX"?
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: Tripe "X". You may now go ahead.
SEN. GUINGONA: This Exhibit "XXX" is a letter signed by Jose Velarde, is it not?
MS. OCAMPO: Yes, Your Honor.
SEN. GUINGONA: Is it one of the documents that you already identified as having been signed by President Joseph Estrada?
MS. OCAMPO: Yes, Your Honor.
SEN. GUINGONA: All right. It refers to an authorization, does it not?
MS. OCAMPO: Yes, Your Honor.
SEN. GUINGONA: It refers to an authorization to debit his account?
MS. OCAMPO: Yes, Your Honor.
SEN. GUINGONA: Savings Account and Current Account No. 0160-62501-5, maintained with the branch in Equitable PCI?
MS. OCAMPO: Yes, Your Honor.
SEN. GUINGONA: All right. Authorizing the transfer of P500 million to credit the same to his trust account. Is that correct?
MS. OCAMPO: Yes, Your Honor.
SEN. GUINGONA: Did these savings account and current account exist in that branch in your bank in the year 1999?
MS. OCAMPO: On the basis of this document, this was given to me by the branch, so it exists.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: What's the answer of the witness?
MS. OCAMPO: Yes, it exists.
SEN. GUINGONA: So, it was already existing in 1999?
MS. OCAMPO: Existing in 1999.
SEN. GUINGONA: Thank you very much.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: No further question, Your Honor?
| TOP | HOME | Page 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 |
< | > |