Olongapo prosecutor faces disbarment The city prosecutor of Olongapo City is now in hot water and facing possible disbarment for dismissing the complaint filed against an official of the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC) who was accused of releasing the details of the foreign currency deposit of a Malaysian national in violation of Republic Act 6426 or the Foreign Currency Deposit Act of the Philippines. Last July 23, 2012, complainant Khoo Boo Boon filed @ criminal complaint before the Olongapo City Prosecutor's Office charging Atty. Raissa Katrina Marie G. Ballesteros, Counsel and Compliance officer of HSBC Philippines for disclosing to the court his foreign currency deposit despite the strict prohibition of Section 8 of RA 6426 that pertains to the secrecy of foreign currency deposit. ‘The case against Ballesteros stemmed from an order issued by the Regional Trial Court of Olongapo City, acting as a "rehabilitation court” as regards the corporate rehabilitation of Legend Intemational Resorts Lid. (LIRL). The court directed several banks to disclose to the court the assets of LIRL and those held in trust by its officers. The Philippine banks that received the order complied but limited their disclosure to the deposits in the name of LIRL. ‘But HSBC, through Atty. Ballesteros, went beyond that. it disclosed even the dollar deposits in the personal account of Mr. Khoo who has been maintaining that account long before he was employed by LIRL,” said his lawyer, Atty. Angeline ifurung, Khoo, thru Hfurung, has filed a petition for review with the Department of Justice (DOJ) over the junking of his complaint against Ballesteros by Olongapo City Prosecutor Emile Fe delos Santos, Khoo sued Ballesteros for violating RA 6426, specifically Section 8, which states that foreign currency deposits are “absolutely confidential in nature” and can only be disclosed BeAccording to delos Santos, she dismissed the complaint “for the reason that the disclosure... was merely pursuant to a Court Order. Art. 11 of the Revised Penal Code... clearly provides that a person who acts in the fulfilment of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or offices does not incur any criminal liability.” Khoo had aiso filed a separate administrative case against Ballesteros before the OSi (Office of Special investigation) of the Bangko Sentral ng Plipinas (BSP) where it found a prima facie case to charge Ballesteros with violation of Section 56.2 of RA No 8791 in relation to Section 37 of RA 7653 for her unauthorized disclosure of US dollar deposit of complainant.” Again, despite this ruling, delos Santos stood pat on her decision ciearing Ballesteros when Khoo fled a motion for reconsideration. ction 8 of RA 6426 figured prominently during the impeachment trial of then Chief Justice Renato Corona where the Supreme Court, in observance of the law’s provision issued a temporary restraining order (TRO} to stop the Senate Impeachment Court from. prying into Corona’s foreign currency deposit with Philippine Savings Bank. Murung said her client finally decided to sue delos Santos after having consulted numerous lawyers as well as compliance officers of several banks. She added that they are also readying a disbarment case against the prosecutor. ‘This (delos Santos decision) is ridiculous. What the law prohibits is the very act being used to justify the transgression of the iaw. The law tells the banks not to disclose dollar deposits of their clients despite a court order. And here comes Prosecutor deios Santos telling us that banks may disclose if there is a court order. “It is 2 basic principle in criminal law that obedience to an unlawful order is not a valid defense,” Hfurung pointed out in the appeal she submitted to the DOJ Additional Info August 23, 2014 Published in Provincial 5) Subscribe to this RSS feed