Philip Morris, Fortune Tobacco in 'marriage of equals''

By Ricky Carandang, ABS-CBN News

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/business/02/25/10/philip-morris-fortune-tobacco-marriage-equals

His brother Harry offered an explanation.

"The problem in any business decision is not 100% purely that you’re looking at the market share, but you’re also looking for other, rofitability and efficiency, the way how management...the way that you carry, you know, the professional management of the company. So the reason we’re entering to this one is surely not just one factor but many other factor that we’re thinking a multiple effect that which would achieve you a lot of cost saving which is a waste, I mean to say this can be, nobody make it just a waste, but because of this synergy, you can save a lot of this thing of the waste," said Harry in the press conference announcing the new joint venture.

But many observers say there's more to this deal than meets the eye. Among the Chinese business elite, there has been consistent talk of Tan's poor health and the problems of succession.

Tan has been involved in a very public dispute with his brother Mariano Taneligan, who until recent years, was his most trusted consiglieri.

Mariano has even threatened to testify against Lucio in the Marcos wealth cases.

Mariano was expected to run the Tan empire until the lines of succession between his numerous children became more clear.

But so far, family disputes have prevented a clear succession. With the succession unclear, and with his health reportedly failing, Tan seems to have opted to gradually sell his tobacco business.

Neither Harry Tan nor Philip Morris's Chris Nelson would address the issue directly.

"It’s not fair to speculate so it’s conceivable. But frankly speaking, we’re not looking at that. What we’re looking at is that they offer, as I said, expertise in the domestic business. I think we bring skill set for international, and we look forward to marrying that together," said Nelson.

But Harry did admit that if they sell out, they would be required to offer their shares in PMFTC to Philip Morris.

"So far, we are happy with what, you know, just like marriage, 50-50. Whatever the property, the earnings. And we’re not even thinking of divorce. Today is just our marriage day. Hopefully you will recommend the question that we are going to divorce – I buy you out or you buy me out," Tan said.

http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view/20110325-327652/Rays-of-light

Get Real
Rays of light
By Solita Collas-Monsod
Philippine Daily Inquirer

First Posted 23:21:00 03/25/2011
Filed Under: Judiciary (system of justice)

THAT FULL-PAGE ad taken out in this newspaper entitled “SO THAT THE PCGG AND OSG (and others) MAY HAVE THE FACTS RIGHT ON WHY THE PRESENTATION OF THEIR TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE ON THE LUCIO TAN ILL-GOTTEN WEALTH CASE WAS TERMINATED BY THE SANDIGANBAYAN ON APRIL 23,2009” by Estelito P. Mendoza and Associates (lawyers for Lucio Tan) is an indication, from where I sit, that the actions of the new and revitalized Presidential Commission on Good Government may be starting to hit a nerve.

The reader will recall that I wrote last week that the PCGG/OSG had filed a motion with the Sandiganbayan for the justices hearing Civil Case 0005 to inhibit themselves because of their “manifest partiality and bias in favor of the powerful interests impleaded in this case (which) glaring inequity substantially eroded the Republic’s faith that this case would be resolved in accordance with law, justice and equity.”

The powerful interests adverted to is, of course, Lucio Tan who has so far managed to win all the cases filed against him, whether it be government agencies (i.e., the BIR) or his labor unions (the flight attendants’ union did win its case against him in the Supreme Court, won in Tan’s first motion for reconsideration, and then lost the second). For that matter, Tan has somehow managed to get his way with Congress as well. And let’s face it, Presidents, too, although so far P-Noy seems to have been able to resist his blandishments (it is my understanding that P-Noy himself refused any campaign contributions from Tan, but it has also been alleged that the latter managed to course it through some members of the Samar group).

It should not escape anyone’s notice that while the title of the ad refers to the April 23, 2009 open-court order of the Sandiganbayan terminating the prosecution’s presentation of testimonial evidence, what it reproduced is the July 20, 2009 Sandiganbayan resolution denying the motion for reconsideration filed by the PCGG/OSG. That is because the April 23 order was an oral one, and it is clear as a bell that it was done in a rush, with only the weakest attempts at justification, because the anti-graft court, presumably at the urging of Mendoza, was trying to stave off the possibility of Mariano Tanenglian (Lucio Tan’s brother) turning state witness. Whether or not a written order followed the oral one, I do not know. But even if there was one, the fact that Mendoza did not use that but preferred to reproduce a resolution handed down three months later is in itself very telling: they needed additional time to marshal the arguments necessary to justify the order of April 23.

Even then, I still am not buying their position. The partiality was manifest, and the explanatory note of Mendoza and Associates gives it away. Notice, dear reader, what Mendoza says: “The termination was not only justified but belated. The case has been pending since July 17, 1987, or now for nearly TWENTY-FOUR YEARS” (emphasis theirs).

And yet, when the Sandiganbayan talks about the “antecedent facts,” it starts with 2005, rather than 1987. And the reason becomes clear, when one sees the timeline (as provided to me generously by Catalino Generillo, who was hired by Haydee Yorac and whose judgment I will take over that of 10 Agnes Devanaderas).

So why did the Sandiganbayan start with 2005? Well because, dear reader, the delay between 1987 and 2005 was due to the collective efforts of the defendants, including Lucio Tan—dilatory tactics, including motions to dismiss, motions for bill of particulars, motions to suspend proceedings (even before the start of the formal trial). For example, it took Lucio Tan almost three years (March 1990) to file his answer to the initial complaint of the PCGG, and would you believe another nine years to answer the PCGG’s amended complaint? On the other hand, of the 17 postponements requested by the government, as cited by the court, only three are fully attributable to the government per the PCGG tally, while the rest were due to valid reasons, i.e., circumstances beyond its control.

Indeed, if the Sandiganbayan had taken cognizance of those defendant-caused delays, rather than just the prosecution-caused delays, there would clearly be no basis whatsoever to chafe at the delays they attribute to the prosecution, much less to terminate arbitrarily (justification three months later, as noted above) its presentation of evidence, in effect denying the latter the opportunity to fully present its case. How’s that for loading the cards against the good guys?

But lo and behold, it seems that some rays of light are appearing in what was heretofore a very dark horizon. The same day that the full-page Mendoza ad appeared in the Inquirer two days ago, the Sandiganbayan granted, in open court, the government’s motion to adduce additional evidence, and gave it an eight-month window to do so, the clock starting immediately.

Did the court change its mind because of the March 15 PCGG/OSG motion for the justices to inhibit themselves? One cannot tell. But in researching for this column, I came upon a report regarding a 2010 ruling by the Supreme Court (with Martin Villarama as ponente) that the Sandiganbayan (Second Division) committed grave abuse of discretion when it denied a PCGG plea to reopen a case for presentation of additional evidence.

The Villarama decision stated that the Sandiganbayan’s refusal would result in “miscarriage of justice”; and that, aside from this, the Sandiganbayan flouted EO 14, Series of 1986 issued by President Cory Aquino (when her word was law) that technical rules of procedure and evidence shall not be strictly applied to cases involving ill-gotten wealth.

This news report is a stark contrast to the deafening silence of media regarding the probe initiated by House Resolution No. 1559. Sponsored a year ago by cause-oriented representatives from various party-list sectors, House Resolution No. ...1559 reads:

Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

FOURTEENTH CONGRESS
Third Regular Session

HOUSE RESOLUTION No. 1559 (filed January 18, 2010)

Introduced by Bayan Muna Rep. Satur C. Ocampo, Gabriela Women's Party Rep. Liza L. Maza, Anakpawis Rep. Rafael V. Mariano, Kabataan Rep. Raymond V. Palatino, Bayan Muna Rep. Teodoro A. Casiño, Gabriela Women's Party Rep. Luzviminda C. Ilagan, Anakpawis Rep. Joel B. Maglunsod, and Bayan Muna Rep. Neri J. Colmenares

A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE COMMITTEE ON GOOD GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY TO CONDUCT AN IMMEDIATE INQUIRY ON THE SPECIFIC MEASURES, AND INADEQUACIES THEREOF, TAKEN BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, THE OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL, THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, THE PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ON GOOD GOVERNMENT, THE PRESIDENTIAL ANTI-GRAFT COMMISSION, THE BUREAU OF INTERNAL REVENUE, AND THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT OF ILOCOS SUR IN RESPONSE TO THE ALLEGED TAX EVASION AND FOUL PRACTICES OF MULTI-BILLIONAIRE BUSINESSMAN LUCIO TAN AS EXPOSED BY WHISTLEBLOWER ELPIDIO QUE

Whereas, a concerned citizen named Elpidio Que, who is a resident of Vigan, Ilocos Sur and a former regional sales manager of one of the companies owned by businessman Lucio Tan, has repeatedly called the attention of the Department of Justice (DoJ), the Office of the Ombudsman, the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission (PAGC), the local government of Ilocos Sur, members of the press and members of Congress, among others, to the allegedly atrocious tax evasion schemes, amounting to hundreds of billions of pesos, and other foul business practices allegedly committed by Tan;

Whereas, Que also reported to the said bodies certain instances wherein he observed key government officials acting inappropriately or not responding at all to his complaints;

Whereas, Que claims to have personal knowledge, documentary proof, as well as several colleagues who are likewise willing to testify under oath, revealing details of the tax evasion and foul practices allegedly committed by Tan;

Whereas, Solita Collas-Monsod, former Director-General of the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), has rigorously tackled in her columns in the Philippine Daily Inquirer and BusinessWorld Que's exposes, the intricate details surrounding Sandiganbayan Case No. 0005 or the government's case against Lucio Tan and the estate of Ferdinand Marcos, and the apparent hesitation of government agencies such as the PCGG, the Sandiganbayan, the Ombudsman and the DoJ to win the said case by rejecting a possible state witness, among many other instances of incompetence, plain inaction or even treason;

Whereas, Sandiganbayan Case No. 0005 involves the alleged illicit business relationship exclusively entered into by Ferdinand Marcos and Lucio Tan and involves an estimated P220 billion to P330 billion of assets which, in principle, now belongs to the government and the Filipino people;

Whereas, the offer of Mariano Tanenglian, Lucio Tan's younger brother, alleged right hand man for over 40 years and treasurer of Tan's corporations, to serve as state witness in exchange for criminal and civil immunity has been mysteriously rejected by the DoJ, OSG, and PCGG thereby casting doubt on the integrity of the said government bodies;

Whereas, Catalino Generillo, former PCGG lawyer who has documentary evidence and expertise on Sandiganbayan Case No. 0005, appears to have been wrongfully removed from the case due to his diligent performance of his duties;

Whereas, the Bureau of Internal Revenue appears to have failed in its role of collecting taxes and going after tax evaders, in this case, as alleged by Que, the biggest fish of all;

Whereas, in a time of worsening economic crisis, the said billions of pesos worth of assets, if indeed it belongs to government, must be recovered and allocated generously to provide for the Filipino people's basic needs and build the foundations for the country's genuine development;

Whereas, the Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability has jurisdiction over "all matters directly and principally relating to malfeasance, misfeasance and nonfeasance in office committed by officers and employees of the government and its political subdivisions and instrumentalities inclusive of investigations of any matter of public interest on its own initiative or upon order of the House";

Now therefore, be it resolved, as it is hereby resolved, that the Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability conduct an immediate inquiry on the specific measures, and inadequacies thereof, taken by the Department of Justice, the Office of the Solicitor General, the Office of the Ombudsman, the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission, the Bureau of Internal Revenue, and the local government of Ilocos Sur in response to the alleged tax evasion and foul practices of multi-billionaire businessman Lucio Tan as exposed by whistleblower Elpidio Que.

TO PARAPHRASE CHARLES LAMB, MONEY TALKS, BIG MONEY DOESN'T - IT HIRES A STAFF OF PR MEN.

QUO VADIS PINOY!

Allied Bank security chief insists top management banned Tan brother from entering family owned building

By KRIS BAYOS
March 19, 2009, 5:02pm

It was the top management of Lucio Tan’s bank in Makati City that has officially banned his younger brother from entering the family-owned corporation since January.

This is what Allied Banking Corporation’s security chief Christopher Dobles disclosed yesterday as he submitted his five-page counter affidavit to refute the charges of grave coercion filed against him and six security guards by Mariano Tanenglian.

Saying there is no basis for Tanenglian’s complaint, Dobles maintained that he is in no position to question the debarment instruction of the top management he received "sometime in January 2009."

"I did not find anything wrong with the instruction given to me. After all, the top management may very well bar any individual from entering the private premises of the bank. As an officer, I have no right to question who are being allowed entry into the center. I have no discretion to choose who should be granted access," Dobles said.

He, however, failed to name the top executives who ordered Tanenglian’s debarment or even produce the memorandum pertaining to the instruction.

Tanenglian’s complaint came after he was allegedly "forced, threatened and intimidated from entering" the car park of Allied Banking Corporation at the corner of Dela Rosa and Gallardo streets in Legaspi Village last February 4.

Despite being a stockholder, treasurer and member of the board of directors of the corporation since 1977, Tanenglian, then aboard a white Mercedes Benz (XPT 868), was blocked by allegedly heavily armed security guards who raised their firearms in a threatening and intimidating manner "as if they would not hesitate to use their firearms if we would proceed.