Lacson: Intent of AMLA on political harassment only for election season

Make this your preferred source to get more updates from this publisher on Google.

Senator-Judge Panfilo “Ping” Lacson on Tuesday said that the legislative intent of the provision on the prohibitions against political harassment under the Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA) is solely meant for the election period.

Lacson made the clarification during his interjection on the 34th day of the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte, as he posed questions to Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) Executive Director Ronel Buenaventura, a witness presented by the House prosecution panel.

“I was here in 2001 when we passed [Republic Act] 9160. This amendment was introduced by the late senator Nene Pimentel, because at that time, we were in the opposition. So ang intent nito, doon lang sa election period na hindi mako-cover ng batas lahat ng kandidato,” he said.

(The intent of this was only for the election period when the law cannot cover all candidates.)

“‘Yun ang intent, hindi ‘yung harassment per se or harassment in the general sense of the word. So if we go back and review the transcript, doon lang limited ‘yun,” he added.

(That's the intent, not the harassment per se or harassment in the general sense of the word. So if we go back and review the transcript, it's limited to that.)

The veteran lawmaker was referring to Section 16 of AMLA, which states that the Act “shall not be used for political prosecution or harassment or as an instrument to hamper competition in trade and commerce.”

The same section of the law also provided 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.”

During the trial on Monday, defense counsel Mark Vinluan asked Buenaventura if he agrees that any data or information from the AMLC must not be used for political prosecution or harassment.

“All I can answer, Your Honor, is what’s provided in the law. As you mentioned it, the Act or the AMLA shall not be used for political prosecution or harassment,” Buenaventura answered.

Vinluan then asked the witness if the same wisdom of the law was the reason why there was a provision on confidentiality.

Buenaventura said he has no personal knowledge on the matter.

The defense lawyer also repeatedly underscored Section 8A of the AMLA which provides that the AMLC and its secretariat should securely protect information received or processed and shall not reveal in any manner any information known to them by reason of their office.

As such, Vinulan said, "the law prohibits the disclosure in any manner of confidential information including those submitted by the banks and other covered persons to the AMLC" and that this prohibition "extends to the members of the media which are here today for the purpose of broadcasting these proceedings to the general public."

When the trial began on Tuesday, Vinluan apologized to the senator-judges over his remarks during the cross examination, wherein he repeatedly pointed out that disclosure of bank transactions could mean jail time for all those who will use the information. — BM, GMA News