Tingog.com

Lacson made a fierce and rebuking statement against the The Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) with regards to its announcement that it had frozen around P1.21 billion in transactions during the 2007 Philippine Midterm Election. Although I share his concern that it may be used as a way to exert political pressure, I am not going to be too quick to waive all those transactions as free from suspicion. Lacson certainly can’t possibly think that all of these transactions were legal or at least don’t merit an investigation, does he?

Lacson is one of the principal authors of Republic Act 9160 [the Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA) of 2001].

“Although the AMLC has the power to do that (freeze the accounts), may I remind it of the provision in the law that safeguards it against being used as a tool for political persecution during or after the election period,” Lacson said.

He also added that, “no case for money laundering may be filed against and no assets shall be frozen, attached or forfeited, to the prejudice of a candidate for an electoral office during an election period.”

“I advise Aquino to review the law and take the necessary steps to correct this mistake of freezing these accounts. It is quite understandable for transactions to exceed the P500,000 threshold during an election period due to the campaign funding requirements of candidates,” Lacson said.

“Aside from being possibly used by the government as a tool for political harassment, it is quite understandable for transactions to exceed the P500,000 threshold during an election period due to campaign funding requirements of candidates,” Lacson said.

“Imagine the negative setback and implication it (freezing) would create for that candidate, especially if he is from the opposition.”

And Lacson continued with his statement that the AMLC should focus on transactions outside that of the elections, “If he does that correctly, I am sure they will net the real money launderers.”

But, I’m not so sure about this emphasis on excluding these transactions. I’m sure there are provisions in the act, to have the freeze lifted within a week or so, if the AMLC cannot prove that these transactions were not suspicious. But to declare the entire election as a sort of “happy hour” for money laundering does not make sense to me. It will set precedent in the future, when elections do occur, as a laundering time zone, in which it will be alright to participate in these transactions, just because the laws are relaxed during this time period.

You have to remember that the election season does not take a vacation for crime, including money laundering, and if we make this a haven for criminals then the the AMLC is not being utilized to its full capacity. Some of these freezes may lead to the investigation of illegal campaign activities, and even shed some light as to who may have overspent, chose not to report, but instead used illegal means to transact these funds.

Lacson, being a candidate for the chairman position of The Blue Ribbon Committee, should not be so quick to chide the AMLC, but maybe look as to how to improve the bill, so that political use of it won’t be that easy to pursue. Remember, the true essence of the bill is to investigate money laundering.