RCBC Accused of Suppressing Evidence in Money Laundering Case

Lopez, Allia M.
Date of Submission: 23 October 2020

03-1819-02208 Essay
3BSA-01 BS Accountancy
RCBC Accused of Suppressing Evidence in Money Laundering Case

(Research Essay)
On September 2019, RCBC was accused of suppressing evidence in the

money laundering case against some of its current and former officials. This is
considered as a serious act of crime that comes with major effects and punishment.
Considering that Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation (RCBC) is a trusted
commercial bank in the Philippines, this became a well-known and illustrious issue.
A prosecutor from Department of Justice (DOJ) and legal officers of the Anti-
Money Laundering Council (AMLC) Secretariat made the accusation. The prosecution
had wanted Liao to testify on the initial and final audit reports into the February 2016
$81 million Bangladesh Bank heist. But RCBC, who is not a party to this case, entered
its appearance exclusively to oppose the subpoena, claiming the audit reports
contained confidential information on accounts not involved in the bank heist (Navallo,
2019).
We all know that preventing someone to give essential statements necessary
for the good of the State to give justice on criminal proceedings is a clear act of
suppressing documentary evidence, showing that there is an intent to prejudice the
criminal proceedings against the accused. Therefore if the accusation against RCBC
is proven, it is a clear obstruction of justice.
The RCBS’s motion that the accounts should not be audited because it contains
confidential data was denied because the financial records that were subjected to
audit are exceptions to Bank Secrecy Law, therefore they are legally and rightfully
required to give the Anti-Money Laundering Council full access to these accounts. It
is clearly given that under the Bank Secrecy Law, bank deposits of whatever nature
including investments in government bonds are reflected to be unquestionably
confidential. So this means that Republic Act No. 1405 forbids the government and its
agencies, including the BIR, to look into bank accounts.
But of course, the law acknowledges instances where investigation into bank
deposits are permissible, when there is written authorization of approval of the
depositor, impeachment cases, upon order of a competent court where the money
deposited is the subject of litigation, lawsuit or criminal investigation, and cases
involving the Anti-Money Laundering Act.
Under court proceedings, the prosecution is tasked to prove the accused's guilt
beyond reasonable doubt. Because of this the actions of AMLC and authorities to
inquire and and investigate to the RCBC’s associated bank accounts in finding of
probable cause and formal criminal indictment (called an "Information") is just and
right.
According to Chapter 2 of the Criminal Code of the Philippines, Crimes
Affecting State Functions, Section 37, the action of RCBC is a clear obstruction of
justice. Because it typically committed:
A. Preventing witnesses from testifying in any criminal investigation proceeding
or from reporting the commission of any offense or the identity of any offender/s by
means of bribery, misrepresentation, deceit, intimidation, force or threats;
B. Altering, erasing, destroying, suppressing or concealing any paper, record,
document, or object, traces or prints, with intent to impair its verity, authenticity,
legibility, availability, or admissibility as evidence in a crime scene or in any
investigation of or official proceedings in, criminal cases, or to be used in the
investigation of, or official proceedings in, criminal cases.
But because Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation is an entity who served
the state for years and is helpful and essential for Philippine economy, the right penalty
is making the corporation pay the necessary fine for damages and or imprisonment to
authorities who are found guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Note that officers who is
proved responsible in suppressing evidences, shall also suffer perpetual
disqualification from holding public office.
This is really an interesting topic to learn from. This issue really helped me to
understand the link between Bank Secrecy Law, Obstruction of Justice and Anti-
Money Laundering Act. It became clear to me that some criminal organizations or
corrupt corporations are creating wide use of the opportunities offered by financial
havens, government provisions and offshore centers to launder criminal assets,
thereby creating obstructions to criminal investigations.

RCBC Accused of Suppressing Evidence in Money Laundering Case

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RCBC Accused of Suppressing Evidence in Money Laundering Case

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

RCBC Accused of Suppressing Evidence in Money Laundering Case

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lopez, Allia M.

Date of Submission: 23 October 2020

RCBC Accused of Suppressing Evidence in Money Laundering Case

On September 2019, RCBC was accused of suppressing evidence in the

You might also like