THE 2019 Corruption Perception Index was issued by Berlin-based Transparency international in January. The result was not good. It showed that the Philippines is now ranked at 113th out of 180 countries compared with 99th in 2018.
In fact, over the past 10 years, we were lowest (134th) in 2009, then made an improvement to 84th halfway through the Aquino administration, but have suffered a slow but steady slide since then.
Presidential spokesman Salvador Panelo says that President Duterte’s hands are tied by the due process clause in the Constitution. He is referring to Article III (Bill of Rights) Section 1 which says: “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.”
Due process is meant to protect people from oppressive governments. It does not make it difficult for those responsible for ensuring that corrupt officials are brought to justice.
After all, the cleanest countries, New Zealand and Denmark, also have due process. The difference between New Zealand and the Philippines is that a corrupt official in New Zealand is highly likely to be caught, whereas his counterpart in the Philippines is relatively unlikely to be apprehended.
We have a family member who has been deprived of liberty for more than two years without due process. She is in good company. Sen Leila de Lima is similarly unconstitutionally incarcerated.
***
What to do?
If the Philippines wishes to be perceived as less corrupt than it is at present, the components of due process need to be more effective so that the guilty ones are brought to book and those who are not guilty are not harassed.
Four years ago, $81 million was stolen from Bangladesh Bank’s account at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and transferred to Rizal Commercial Banking Corp. (RCBC).
RCBC chose to scapegoat former RCBC Jupiter Street branch Manager Maia Deguito, and she was sentenced to between 32 years to 56 years in jail on eight counts of money laundering. There was no evidence that she attempted to, or actually profited from, money laundering. Part of the low international regard for Philippine probity is that it is not clear that the appropriate people were caught and punished. Deguito’s case is currently on appeal.
There was a public Senate inquiry into the RCBC ‘cyberheist’ in which only $15 million out of $81 million was recovered. This was because a casino junket operator, Kam Sin Wong, returned the money to Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP).
The other $66 million remains unaccounted for. The facile excuse given is that it disappeared into casinos.
At the Senate inquiry, Philrem, a company that transferred some money from US dollars to Philippine pesos, were represented by its co-owner Salud Bautista. Although her manner at the inquiry was unsatisfactory, the Department of Justice (DOJ) originally dismissed all charges against Philrem.
Until recently.
On Dec 12, 2019, almost four years after the robbery, DOJ undersecretary Adrian Ferdinand Sugay reversed the ruling that dismissed the charges against Philrem.
If the case ever comes to trial, it may shed light as to what really happened.
Hopefully, more charges will be filed because those who obtained, between them, $66 million (P3.3 billion) have not been caught. It is the lack of effectiveness of the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC), the BSP, and DOJ that causes the robbers to be successful and that the Philippines is perceived to be seriously corrupt country.
We can do better./PN
