Euro generals probe to include De la Paz’s millionaire friend

http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=765531&publicationSubCategoryId=63

By Michael Punongbayan (The Philippine Star) Updated January 07, 2012 12:00 AM

MANILA, Philippines – The Office of the Ombudsman’s new investigation on the so-called Euro generals case will also focus on the possible filing of criminal cases against the millionaire friend of former Philippine National Police (PNP) comptroller Eliseo de la Paz.

Tyrone Ng Areola, the businessman who claimed in a Senate investigation that he gave De la Paz 45,000 euros to buy an expensive Roger Dubois wristwatch in Vienna, Austria, will be probed for possible violation of Central Bank laws.

Assistant Special Prosecutor III Jeofferson Toribio said De la Paz’s friend should be included in the new probe, along with other delegates to the 77th Interpol General Assembly trip in October 2008.

Toribio recommended that further preliminary investigation be conducted to determine the exact amount of money and currency brought out of the Philippines by De la Paz and his wife Maria Fe “and the participation and/or liability, if any, of the other PNP delegates to Russia.”

He said Areola, along with Evita Caringal and Ahmad Galwash Waja as manager of Felisa Sakaluran Enterprise, should be probed for possible violation of Banko Sentral Ng Pilipinas Circular No. 507 in relation to Section 36 of Republic Act 7653 or the New Central Bank Act.

The law “penalizes any person who brings into or takes out of the Philippines foreign currency in excess of $10,000 and fails to declare the same in writing.”

During the Senate investigation into the Euro generals case in November 2008, Areola said he gave 45,000 euros to De la Paz after learning that he was going to make a side trip to Vienna, Austria where the wristwatch is on sale.

At Shremetyevo International Airport in Moscow, Russia, De la Paz and his wife were barred from leaving after being caught carrying 105,000 euros or P6.9 million in cash.

The Office of the Ombudsman conducted an investigation into the incident and initially, after a fact-finding probe, recommended the filing of graft and other criminal charges against ranking officials of the PNP including former Director General Avelino Razon Jr.

But after preliminary investigation, the anti-graft agency only ordered the filing of charges against De la Paz and his wife.

SC acts quickly and then sleeps

SC acts quickly and then sleeps
AMADO P. MACASAET

http://www.malaya.com.ph/08112010/columnbusi1.html

‘It cannot happen that the Court acts quickly when it so pleases and does not move at all when doing so does not please the magistrates.’

IT did not take the Supreme Court that much time to deny for “lack of merit” the motion of the heirs of Severino Manotok to require the Court of Appeals to furnish the Manotoks a copy of the 219-page report of its findings on the land case with the heirs of Homer Barque.

The resolution was passed on May 4.

The lawyers of the Manotoks filed a second motion for reconsideration within the 15-day reglamentary period. Up to this time, the motion has not been acted upon.

In insisting that the litigants in the case are entitled to a copy of the CA report, former Supreme Court Justice Florentino P. Feliciano, counsel of the Manotoks, told the High Court there is a law that states that “upon filing of the report, the parties shall be notified by the clerk, and they shall be allowed ten days within which to signify grounds of objections to the findings of the report, if they so desire.

“Objections to the report based upon grounds which were available to the parties during the proceedings before the commissioner, other than objections to the findings and conclusions therein set forth, shall not be considered by the Court unless they were made before the commissioner.”

The decision to deny the motion for lack of merit does not seem to sit well with this provision of the law.

But the Supreme Court saw it another way.

Now, a second motion has not been acted upon and appears to be sleeping the sleep of the dead.

It cannot happen that the Court acts quickly when it so pleases and does not move at all when doing so does not please the magistrates.

The judicial reconstitution case was earlier decided in favor of the heirs of Severino Manotok by the Land Registration Commission. The LRA reversed its ruling on appeal by the heirs of Homer Barque.

The Manotoks elevated the case to the Court of Appeals which initially ruled in favor of the Manotoks. But in a joint resolution by two divisions, the CA reversed its earlier decision in favor of the heirs of Homer Barque.

The Manotoks went to the Supreme Court on Appeal. The High Court ruled in favor of the heirs of Homer Barque and denied with finality a second motion for reconsideration.

However, retired Justice Feliciano convinced the Court to act en banc.

After brief orals, the Supreme Court decided to remand case to the Court of Appeals for investigation of facts and presumably applicable laws.

Subsequently, the CA submitted its 219-page report which the Supreme Court must now consider or resolve.

The first mistake in this case was the violation of a law that states that judicial reconstitution is an original and exclusive function of the Regional Trial Court.

It started with the Land Registration Commission which rendered a decision in favor of the heirs of Severino Manotok. The decision was reversed on appeal.

The Manotoks filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals which also sustained the Manotoks in a joint resolution by two of its divisions.

The Supreme Court reversed the decision and declared that the title(s) of the Manotoks are “sham and spurious”.

This has been the subject of an intense battle of documents between the Manotoks and the heirs of Homer Barque represented by Teresita Barque.

Apart from asking the Supreme Court to require the CA to furnish the litigants a copy of the report, the heirs of Severino Manotok are also asking the High Tribunal for a hearing on oral argument which they say “will best ensure an interactive deliberation upon the novel issues and legal implications arising from the ‘remand’ proceedings at the Court of Appeals many of which were neither pleaded nor addressed in the original administrative reconstitution proceedings that were the only subject of this case on review.”

Yet, the Supreme Court dismissed the motion to require the CA to furnish copies of its report to the litigants “for lack of merit.”

What else could have more merit than the very meat of the controversy? That is not the way the Supreme Court sees it.

The case has horrendous ramifications in reconstituting land titles in terms of facts and applicable laws.

It will be recalled that the heirs of Homer Barque moved for reconstitution of the 34-hectare prime property in Quezon City, long in possession of the heirs of Severino Manotok, only some years after the records, particularly original copies of land titles, burned in a fire hit the office of the Register of Deeds in Quezon City.

The Manotoks have submitted in evidence a copy of the deed of conveyance certified as true and correct by the National Archives.

The deed, issued by the Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources on December 7, 1932, states “I, acting director of the bureau of lands, acting for and on behalf of the Government of the Philippine Islands, in consideration of TWO THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED SIXTY THREE PESOS (P2,363.00), receipt hereof is acknowledged, do hereby grant and convey to Severino Manotok, Filipino, of legal age, married to Maria Ramos … and his heirs and assigns, Lot No. 823 of the Piedad Friar Lands estate…”

The document was signed by Jose P. Dans, acting director of the bureau of lands.

How the courts accepted the claim of the heirs of Homer Barque that the title of the Manotoks is “sham and spurious” without destroying or rendering invalid the deed of conveyance is a subject of unkind speculations in many quarters, particularly those who have who have reconstitution cases pending in the Courts.

And now comes the Supreme Court denying the request of the Manotoks to have copies of the report of the Court of Appeals to which the case was remanded “for lack of merit.”

The Court has no obligation to explain its decision since right or wrong, the ruling becomes part of the law of the land. But in this case, it would benefit the Court in terms of enhancing its reputation if this case can be resolved with transparency and fairness which is always assumed of the Court but does not always happen.

There is more than meets the eye in the Manotok case in terms of its ramifications over judicial reconstitution of titles.

Dispute over Piedad estate continues

Again, the scammer Teresita Barque-Hernandez is still trying to get away with land-grabbing and not even paying the court for any filing-fees. Only stupid people would believe her outrageous lies that she only knew about a multi-billion peso property when her father died and therefore she has never ever set foot on the property which she claims she owns. Again, it is outrageous that Teresita Barque-Hernandez’s sister burned the tax-receipts which are the only proof that they are paying taxes on the property. What a scam! What is the connection of businessman Cedric Lee to this land scam?

http://www.malaya.com.ph/11162009/metro4.html

Dispute over Piedad estate continues

<!–

By Peter J.G. Tabingo

–>A DAUGHTER of the late businessman Homer Barque testified over the weekend at the Court of Appeals that the disputed 34-hectare parcel of land in Rizal, known as the Piedad estate, has been with their family since 1975.

Lot 823, nestled in Culiat, Capitol Hills, Old Balara and the posh Ayala Heights in Quezon City, is covered by TCT No. 210177 issued to Barque. The lot’s value is now pegged at P3.4-billion.

Aside from the Barques, the heirs of Severino Manotok are also claiming the land.

The dispute between the two claimants was spawned by a fire in June 1988 that gutted the office of the Register of Deeds in Quezon City, which prompted the Manotoks to apply for the administrative reconstitution of the titles. The heirs of Barque did not oppose the application for administrative reconstitution and a reconstituted title was issued in 1991.

During cross examination last Friday, Teresita Barque-Hernandez told justices that the subject property was purchased by her father from a business associate named Emiliano Setosta out of his retirement funds and proceeds from their bus line business.

Hernandez admitted to Manotok counsel Roberto San Juan that she had no personal knowledge about the details of the property or its existence until 1991 when the Barque patriarch requested her shortly before he died to redeem the title from her grandmother Felicia Ventura.

San Juan who alleged that the certificate of title in Hernandez’s possession was spurious questioned why the Barque children never learned of or cared about the property until that time. He pointed out that Hernandez never visited the place even after her father’s death in 1991.

He also got Hernandez to admit that the Barques had no copies of any tax declaration receipts for the property. Hernandez said her younger sister Estrellita “who is already at the age of reason,” had burned the tax receipts.

The Manotoks, on the other hand, claimed that they have been religiously paying real estate taxes on the property from 1933 until the present.

The Manotoks’ lawyer claimed Hernandez’s failure to provide copies of the tax payments only proved that the Barques’ title is a forgery and that their proof of ownership is a sham.

The CA’s Special 15th Division is hearing the case after the Supreme Court issued a ruling on Dec. 18, 2008 restoring ownership of the parcel of land to the Manotoks.

In its December 2008 ruling, the SC remanded the 20-year-old land cases to the CA for further proceedings and reception of evidence, and turned down the arguments of the Barque heirs that raised factual issues in determining whether the Land Registration Administration had the authority to conduct administrative reconstitution proceedings.

The controversy in the Manotok-Barque land dispute is whether judicial reconstitution of title may be made administratively that ignores, if not violates, the law giving the RTC exclusive jurisdiction.

With this new ruling, the SC abandoned its First Division’s own Dec. 12, 2005 decision affirming the two rulings of the CA directing the Quezon City Register of Deeds to cancel the Manotok title, and ordering LRA to reconstitute the Barque title.–Evangeline C. de Vera

David Bunevacz vs Cedric Lee

 Is this the start of the David Bunevacz & Jessica Rodriguez vs Cedric Lee & Vina Morales tag-team match?

Cedric Lee is the boyfriend of Vina Morales who is the business “partner” supposedly of Jessica Rodriguez. Most likely, this partnership was just for money….

NBI summons 5 in Bunevacz manhandling case

By Tina Santos
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 18:41:00 01/12/2008

MANILA, Philippines — The National Bureau of Investigation has subpoenaed five people accused of manhandling former decathlete David Bunevacz last November.

Summoned to appear before the NBI on Monday were Tyrone Ong, Cedric Lee, Louie Kau, Chito Ho, and Dominique Sytini, all of West Greenhills, San Juan, and reportedly business partners of Bunevacz.

Lawyer Sixto Burgos Jr., chief of the NBI Anti-Kidnapping, Hijacking and Armed Robbery Division, said they issued last Tuesday subpoenas to the five accused.

“We’re inviting them to shed light on the matter. We’ve already heard David’s side, we have to hear the other side of the story as well,” Burgos said.

Bunevacz, former president of Beverly Hills 6750 Cosmetic Surgery and Skin Institute, a high-end beauty clinic on Ayala Avenue, Makati City, filed with the NBI last month a complaint of physical injuries against his business associates whom he accused of manhandling him.

Bunevacz alleged that his partners also forcibly took his Porsche, an expensive watch, and his cell phone.

The alleged manhandling happened sometime in November when Bunevacz was asked by some of his business associates to meet with them in the Greenhills area, the NBI said.

“He (Bunevacz) claimed that he was manhandled, they boxed his ears,” Sixto said, adding that the former athlete likewise requested the NBI to provide him with security.

The management of the aesthetic clinic has accused Bunevacz of misusing the firm’s funds amounting to millions of pesos.

According to Dr. Eduardo Santos, president of the beauty clinic, their lawyers have already sent a letter demanding Bunevacz to explain the alleged questionable transactions during his term as president.

These transactions allegedly include the downpayment for a BMW X-5, a vehicle not listed as a company asset; two checks payable to cash charged against legal expenses which were never received by the payee law firm; multiple travel expenses not related to Beverly Hills 6750 business; and payments to a Montessori school and a junior baseball organization that were never recorded in company books.

Vina Morales, Cedric Lee, Judy Lee, Jessica Rodriguez & David Bunevacz

Source: http://www.pep.ph/news/14227/Vina-Moraless-current-beau-spotted-in-an-event-with-ex-wife

Please click this article regarding the strange relationship of Vina Morales and Cedric Lee.

Here are the facts:

1. Cedric Lee, a businessman, is the boyfriend of Vina Morales.

2. Judy Lee, the ex-wife of Cedric Lee, is the business-partner of Jessica Rodriguez and David Bunevacz.

3. Vina Morales is the close friend of Jessica Rodriguez and David Bunevacz.

4.  Vina Morales and Judy Lee are connected to Cedric Lee obviously.

5. Cedric Lee is also connected to Jessica Rodriguez and David Bunevacz.

6. David and Jessica have a business (if it still exists) that deals with BEAUTY

7. It is one big happy family.

It is quite intriguing that Vina Morales and David Bunevacz were together in the Supreme Court En Banc hearing of the Heirs of Homer Barque and they actually sat on the side of the Heirs of Homer Barque.

Are they part of the Heirs of Homer Barque Land Scam?

Did they sell non-existent lots? Did they buy non-existent lots?

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.