Estrada Impeachment January 10, 2001 Transcripts

JANUARY 10, 2001

AT 2:00 P.M., THE HONORABLE CHIEF JUSTICE HILARIO G. DAVIDE, JR., PRESIDING OFFICER, CALLED THE RESUMPTION OF THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL TO ORDER.

THE SERGEANT AT ARMS (MR. LEONARDO LOPEZ). Please remain standing for the entrance of the Honorable Senate President Judge Aquilino Q. Pimentel, Jr. and the Honorable Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER (CHIEF JUSTICE DAVIDE). The trial of the impeachment of His Excellency, the President of the Republic of the Philippines, is resumed.

The Honorable Senate President Judge Aquilino Q. Pimentel, Jr. will lead us in prayer.

PRAYER

THE SENATE PRESIDENT (SEN. PIMENTEL).

Dear Lord.

Bless the Presiding Officer so that his rulings in this impeachment trial will be right, fair and just in our search for the truth.

Bless the Senator Judges so that we will seek to establish only the truth in a fair and just manner.

Bless the counsel for both parties so that they shall elicit the truth from their witnesses without guile or partisanship.

Bless the witnesses so that they shall tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Bless the secretariat so that they may facilitate our collective search for the truth with efficiency, accuracy and dedication.

Bless the audience here inside the Senate Session Hall and those who are witnessing the proceedings in their homes, offices or places of recreation so that they will be a little more appreciative of the rule of law that we are trying to uphold in our search for the truth.

Bless the demonstrators for or against the President so that they will be a little less dogmatic about the infallibility of their positions and restrain themselves from inflicting physical harm on those who may not agree with them or committing spiritual violence by rashly judging the Senator Judges even before the final verdict is in.

Bless the security officers so that they will not need to use force, but reason, to maintain law and order in the premises of the Impeachment Court.

Bless the media so that they will report only the truth regarding the impeachment proceedings.

And finally, bless the President and our people so that whatever may be the verdict of this Impeachment Court, they will accept it with good sense and good humor and the republic and its democratic institutions will, thereby, come out of the impeachment trial in good shape, in good stead, and in good grace.

All this we ask in the name of Jesus, Our Lord. Amen.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Thank you, Mr. Senate President.

Please be seated. The Sergeant at Arms shall now make the proclamation.

THE SERGEANT AT ARMS. All persons are commanded to keep silent on pain of imprisonment while the Senate is sitting for the trial on the Articles of Impeachment against Joseph Ejercito Estrada, President of the Philippines.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Secretary is directed to call the case.

THE SENATE SECRETARY. Impeachment Case No. 001 2000, entitled, In the Matter of the Impeachment of His Excellency Joseph Ejercito Estrada, President of the Philippines, for Bribery, Graft and Corruption, Betrayal of Public Trust and Culpable Violation of the Constitution.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Majority Leader.

THE MAJORITY LEADER (SEN. TATAD). Mr. Chief Justice, may we advise the Members of the Court that the Journal of Monday, January 8, 2001 will be distributed shortly. May we invite them to examine the same so that we can seek its approval before we move for a recess.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Majority Leader again.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. And now may I invite the parties to this trial to enter anew their appearance.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The parties are directed.

The Honorable Senator-Judge Biazon.

SEN. BIAZON. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.

Before we start, I wish to make a manifestation.

Mr. Chief Justice, as I listened to a radio program this morning, I was listening to, effectively, a parallel and mock trial that is now going on, replica of what is now going on these halls. I listened to the commentators grilling interviewees, interviewees consisting of officers of the court , witnesses and other personalities that has something to do with the proceedings, Mr. Chief Justice. The interview disguises what I think, Mr. Chief Justice, as a mock trial. Consider this, Mr. Chief Justice, that some officers of the Court were being interviewed, some witnesses whether they have been already called to these proceedings or currently still on the witness stand or even potential witnesses, discussing testimonial evidences, discussing documentary evidences and giving an evaluation of these evidences without the benefit of these statements being delivered under oath.

Now, Mr. Chief Justice, there had been questions answered in these television programs, in these radio programs that had been ruled against by the Court as not to be allowed to be entered into the record. And yet these very same questions are answered out there. Now, should these concern us, Mr. Chief Justice?

I would say, yes, Mr. Chief Justice, because these mock trials out there in television talk shows, in radio programs, are molding the public opinion out there. And these public opinions are translated into mass rallies and mass actions designed definitely to influence or an attempt to influence the verdict, the collective or individual verdict of the Members of the Court.

Now, Mr. Chief Justice, I have nothing against commentators, columnists, hosts of television programs discussing these proceedings. But if they are participated by all officers of the Court from the panels of defense and the prosecution panels and if they are participated in by witnesses, discussing and evaluating testimonial evidences that are now under the cognizance of the Court or evidences yet to be presented, Mr. Chief Justice, the question then is, is this proceeding covered by the rules on sub judice? I am not asking, Mr. Chief Justice, that this should cover the media, but I think, Mr. Chief Justice, it must cover the Members of the Court, especially the officers of the Court.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes, Your Honor, this is really a matter of one, a collective privilege. But it would be best that this should be taken up in an executive session. So, may I suggest that we shall have an executive session and, therefore, would request for a longer break later on, and so we can resolve the issue during the session, executive session and announce later on the results of the executive session of the Court.

SEN. BIAZON. Yes, Mr. Chief Justice. I think that we should really have to address this issue because it is making a mockery of this procedure when everybody out there are trying to be either defense counsel or prosecutor, and sometimes they even try to be the judge themselves.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. We will consider all the parameters of the issue, Your Honor, during an executive session.

SEN. BIAZON. I, therefore, submit, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Thank you very much.

The Honorable Senator Judge Cayetano.

SEN. CAYETANO. Mr. Chief Justice, may I be allowed to rise on a matter of personal privilege?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Can we give you five minutes, Your Honor, for the matter of privilege?

SEN. CAYETANO. I am sorry, Mr. Chief Justice, but I think it may take a little bit longer. But I will not task the Impeachment Court, because this is something to do with my role here as Senator Judge, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the Rules of the Senate… (Consulting)

Okay. Since the Rules of the Senate has been adopted as part of Resolution Number 68, His Honor may rise on it, a question of privilege.

SEN. CAYETANO. Thank you.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Majority Leader first.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. Mr. Chief Justice, before our colleague proceeds, since he is rising on a matter of personal privilege as a Senator Judge, perhaps the best place for him is here among the judges rather than on the side of the prosecution.

SEN. CAYETANO. I would rather prefer that I have a podium, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. But, Your Honor, just for the record, that podium is for the prosecution.

SEN. CAYETANO. Well, I can turn it on because I have certain papers to hold. That’s the only reason. Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes. You may proceed.

SEN. CAYETANO. I have seen some Senator Judge stand up here.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. You may proceed.

SEN. CAYETANO. What’s the matter with the Majority Leader? What’s wrong with my standing here? I am not speaking for the prosecution, I am speaking for myself.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Your Honor may proceed.

SEN. CAYETANO. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.

Before the start of the impeachment trial, the Erap demolition crew sent to the editors of some newspapers documents about my investment in BW shares. This was about a week before the Impeachment Court started hearing the impeachment against the President. One newspaper saw fit to print the report. Immediately, I responded. And in fairness to that newspaper, the response was given almost the same prominence as the initial report. I thought that was the end of it.

About two weeks ago during our break, Mr. Chief Justice, I was reliably informed as usual by friends in Malacañang that the Presidential Management Staff (PMS) through somebody close to the President was preparing a criminal case of Plunder against the said representation for having bought and sold BW shares. I waited for this criminal suit. It never came, never materialized probably because, Mr. Chief Justice, the Erap demolition crew felt that they could not find a legal justification for it.

Today, Mr. Chief Justice, Mr. Dante Tan, the principal accused in several cases filed by the Department of Justice and now the central figure in Article III of the impeachment complaint, together with President Ejercito alias Jose Velarde per testimony of Mrs. Clarissa Ocampo told DZMM upon prompting by Ted Failon, a known supporter of President Erap that he, Mr. Dante Tan, sold me four million shares of BW and made a whooping P70 million.

Mr. President, Mr. Chief Justice, these are all lies. I bought three million shares not four and made only much less than the amount Mr. Tan reported, as I said in my response to the newspaper inquiry because if I was part and knew the inside trading activity of Mr. Tan, I would be now richer by 300 million. But I shall prove this matter in due time, Mr. Chief Justice. Mr. Tan also said that I paid him only during the Senate investigation is also a blatant and malicious lie. That I issued a postdated check is correct, Mr. Chief Justice, because of the amount involved in the purchase, but that was delivered long before the Senate Committee on Banks started its investigation.

Mr. President, Mr. Chief Justice, I have been a regular player and an active one in the stock market. My portfolio of stocks is open to the public. It consists, among others, of shares in PLDT, Meralco, ABS-CBN, San Miguel, Benpres, Piltel, C & P Homes, Seafront, Vulcan, Swift, Alaska Milk, Fil-Estate Investment Corp., Ayala Land, Ayala Corp, Philweb, among others. There is nothing irregular about my purchase of BW shares because I am an active player. The fact that I made some money in it is only a coincidence, Mr. Chief Justice. In fact, right now, in all the shares I mentioned, I am incurring a paper loss of several million pesos because this market is down.

Mr. Chief Justice, the SEC nor the investigative committee by the PSE testified to by Mr. Almadro yesterday did not find anything wrong in my investment in BW shares. Only the malicious minds of the Erap boys with clear agenda of demolishing the opposition in general, and in particular, this representation, are digging up this matter again. But I won’t be silenced, that’s for sure, Mr. Chief Justice. I shall perform my duties as Senator-Judge, as God’s public servant and that of the people. I have been advised by my colleagues that there are unsigned press releases and unsigned affidavit supposedly released in the name of Dante Tan accusing me of plunder and even having robbed him of P50 million.

Mr. Chief Justice, I owe it to my family and those who believe in me and elected me. If Mr. Tan can prove this, I will resign from the Senate as much as I hope the President will resign from the presidency if the cases against him are proven.

Finally, I ask my esteemed colleagues in the defense, not that I accuse you of having anything to do with this, to call on Mr. Tan to the witness stand so I can confront him. I also ask that you call the President, President Ejercito Estrada alias Jose Velarde, if you believe Mrs. Clarissa Ocampo’s testimony to the stand so I can likewise ask him about this matter because I know that he is the one behind this black propaganda against me, Mr. Chief Justice, because I refused to help him, to help him intervene in a more serious case than BW, and I speak of the Vizconde murder trial case. He asked me to help, and there is now Judge Amelita Tolentino, and I hope you are listening to me, and Mr. Zuño, the principal prosecutor, the Chief State Prosecutor. They will testify to the role of the President in trying to intervene and, in fact, intervened in this case.

I only ask my colleagues in the defense that very simple request so that justice be done to me and to my family. I can ask for no less from the defense. After all, we are all here to ensure that justice is done no matter what happen.

Kaya ang pakiusap ko po sa inyo ay tawagin lamang ninyo si Mr. Tan at si Pangulong Estrada para po siya ay matanong natin tungkol dito at kung bakit si Pangulong Estrada ang nagsasampa nitong kasong ito sa akin na wala namang kinalaman sapagkat alam ko po na siya ay nakialam sa kaso ni Webb na gusto niyang ma acquit itong mga taong ito at hindi ko siya pinagbigyan.

Maraming salamat po.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Thank you, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. What’s the pleasure of Atty. Daza?

MR. DAZA. Well, the gentleman, Senator Judge addressed some remarks to the defense counsel. And may we respond, if it is permitted by the Presiding Officer.

SEN. CAYETANO. Yes, I requested, Mr. Chief Justice, …

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Would you allow…

SEN. CAYETANO. …only on two matters.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes.

SEN. CAYETANO. That Mr. Tan be called to the witness stand and that the President likewise be called to the witness stand.

MR. DAZA. Mr. Chief Justice, the lawyers of the defense panel were retained by the President to defend him in this historic trial. We proceed on this case in defense of the President in the best lights that we can command within our limited skills and talents. We realize the deep predicament of the Senator Judge. We sympathize with the travails that perhaps he is undergoing. But, Mr. Chief Justice, here and now, we would like to put on record that we will conduct the defense of the President in the manner that we choose to as lawyers of the President. We shall not, Mr. Chief Justice, be dictated on or influenced by anyone, whether in this Court or outside, on the manner by which we shall proceed or the manner by which we shall conduct the defense of the President.

Mr. Chief Justice, I was once a legislator, although not a senator, of a co equal branch of this government, the House of Representatives. Without, at this moment, even saying that the issues raised by the gentleman are not material to this trial because it is the President who is being tried, not Senator Rene Cayetano, if I may suggest, Mr. Chief Justice, perhaps the gentleman might want to bring the matter up in the Senate, within the proceedings of the Senate so that either he or his colleagues might want to have the issues he raised, might want to, perhaps, give him the due process opportunity to clear his name, if he can, before the Senate, more properly the Ethics Committee of that august body.

Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Let’s now proceed.

SEN. CAYETANO. Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes, the Honorable Senator Judge Cayetano.

SEN. CAYETANO. Obviously, the defense would not like to cooperate with the simple request of this Senator Judge. It is true, I am not on trial here, it’s the President, Mr. Chief Justice. But whenever the reputation, and honesty and sincerity of a Senator Judge, I think that is the concern of this Impeachment Trial Court. In fact, no less than, in one of our in fact, in our last caucuses, no less than the Senate President bewails the attempt to influence, to threaten, to intimidate, to even, in any way, harass any Member of the Senate. This was a matter of record that the Senate President said. So, maybe I am not on trial here, but I believe this is the forum. But, in any event, I have sought a very simple request, I heard the defense counsel and I thank them for refusing this request.

Thank you.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. We shall now continue with the appearances of counsel.

The Majority Leader.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. Before we do that, Mr. Chief Justice, while our colleague was speaking and defense counsel, Daza, was speaking, we could hear the intrusion of sound from outside. May we request the Sergeant-at-Arms to make sure that the volume of disturbance is reduced.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. He is already there, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. Thank you very much.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Appearances of counsel na.

The Honorable Senator-Judge Sotto.

SEN. SOTTO. With your indulgence, Mr. Chief Justice, I would just like to ask the Senate President and the leadership of the Senate if, in fact, that the… inasmuch as the Rules of the Senate are enforced, is it possible for the point of personal privilege of the Senator-Judge Cayetano be referred to the Senate, because if we would like to interpellate or to further be enlightened by the points that he raised, out of delicadeza, we would not like to bring it now, but in the Senate proceedings, if it would be possible. So, is it possible, Mr. Senate President, that we refer this to the Senate proper, so that it can be reflected in the records and we may be able to be further enlightened on the issues that were raised.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate President is recognized. The query is addressed to him.

SEN. CAYETANO. Mr. Senate President.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. Mr. Chief Justice, may we allow Senator Cayetano to…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes, Senator Cayetano.

SEN. CAYETANO. I thank the gentleman, my colleague, Senator Sotto, but I believe this is the forum by which if anyone seeks to ask question, I would not really mind, although I note that those that have spoken on a matter of privilege before me were never asked questions, but if Mr. Sotto seeks to ask me any question, I’m willing to answer it here but not anywhere else because this expose’ against me, malicious and blatantly lie, blatantly wrong, intended to harass and intimidate and coerce me, one way or the other, to act as a senator-judge has something to do with my role here, not as a senator, but as a senator-judge. So, I believe, Mr. Senate President, although I know that the good Senator Sotto had a good intent, nevertheless, if any question will have to be asked, it has to be here, in the floor of the Impeachment Court.

Thank you, Mr. Senate President.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate President.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. Mr. Chief Justice, in the light of the manifestations of both Senator Sotto and Senator Cayetano, it is the suggestion of the Chair that the matter be noted; the privilege speech of Senator Cayetano be inserted in the records and taken notice of by the Chamber.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Since the privilege speech was recorded, it falls part of the record of the Impeachment Court.

So, we shall now proceed with the appearances of counsel.

The Majority Leader.

REP. GONZALEZ. The same appearance, Mr. Chief Justice, for the prosecution. We are ready.

MR. DAZA. For the defense, the same appearances. Ready.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Majority Leader.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. We are now on the trial proper. Upon conclusion of yesterday’s proceedings, Atty. Ruben Almadro was on the witness stand on cross-examination. The Court may now call Atty. Almadro to the witness stand for the continuation of the cross-examination under the same oath. The principal and assisting examining counsel are private prosecutors Hernando Perez and Chona Dimayuga, respectively; and the principal and assisting cross-examining counsel are Atty. Raul Daza and Atty. Jose Flaminiano, respectively.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Call witness, Atty. Ruben Almadro, to the witness stand.

And in the meantime, while he is being fetched, the Chair would like to inquire from the prosecution who are the other witnesses who are to testify this afternoon in addition to Atty. Almadro.

REP. GONZALEZ. Mr. Chief Justice, former Stock Exchange President Yulo will testify, and if there is time, a newspaperman, Mr. Perez, will testify.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes. Any other witness?

REP. GONZALEZ. Well, if there’s still time, maybe Miss Mary Ann Corpuz.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The main purpose is to enforce the rule on exclusion of witnesses.

REP. GONZALEZ. Mr. Yasay have…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. So if you have any other witness.

REP. GONZALEZ. Mr. Yasay and Mary Ann Corpuz.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Where are they now?

REP. GONZALEZ. I do not…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. We should try to find out where they are precisely to enforce the rule on exclusion of witnesses. Unlike what happened yesterday. If these witnesses are around, they are instructed to get out and to proceed to the holding room.

REP. GONZALEZ. They are not inside this hall.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sergeant-at-Arms is also directed to ensure that the monitoring device or listening device in the holding room shall be shut off.

So Atty. Daza, the witness is yours now.

MR. DAZA. With the permission of the Court.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. You may proceed.

MR. DAZA. Yesterday, Atty. Almadro, you said that your investigation was conducted confidentially and that your investigation was conducted without inviting or asking witnesses just like in a formal investigation. Do I recall correctly?

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Mr. Dante Tan was never invited by you during your investigation to come before you and explain and to air his side.

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Just to be sure, at no time from January 1999 up to February 2000 when you completed the report, did you ask Mr. Dante Tan or representative to explain his side to your group?

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. I have had a chance last night to go over the report, 69 pages and some of the exhibits. I cannot pretend to have gone over the exhibits and annexes totalling 475 pages but I noticed that in the findings portion and the recommendations portion of that 69-page report you dealt on BW and particularly on Mr. Dante Tan and the transactions of himself and his group.

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

MR. PEREZ. Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes, Atty. Perez.

MR. PEREZ. Whenever there is a reference to the report, may we request that the witness be allowed to look over the report referred to?

MR. DAZA. Yes, that’s acceptable to us but that seemed to me that the witness is quite conversant with the report. But if that’s what counsel desires, we would accede to that.

MR. PEREZ. That’s the usual practice, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Make the report, already marked as exhibit, available to the witness at any given time.

MR. DAZA. No, not because it is the usual practice but that it is a matter that lies in the discretion first of the witness and then the Court.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Just make it available so we will save the time of the Court.

MR. DAZA. You remember the… I cannot keep track with the exhibit marks but, do you recall the exhibit mark on that report, Atty. Almadro?

MR. ALMADRO. I cannot recall, unfortunately, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. The report is marked Exhibit “MMMMMMM”.

Incidentally, Mr. Chief Justice, I looked up the dictionary this morning because we have been laboring with sextuple,…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Quintuple.

MR. DAZA. Quintuple, and we’ll probably be getting to something like nonaple. The dictionary says that the synonym is simply to say sixfold, sevenfold, eightfold, ninefold, tenfold. Perhaps, if the Presiding Officer might allow…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. That will be, that will be a very good suggestion, except for the fact that we have been marking all exhibits in that manner.

MR. DAZA. I would now refer to …

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. So you can probably have an understanding with the counsel, with the witness, and the prosecution that whenever you say “M-7”, just like, just like…

MR. DAZA. Just like in Algebra…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. This M-7 means “7Ms”

MR. DAZA. Just like saying M to the 7th degree in Mathematics, perhaps. I’ll just say “M7”, would that be acceptable to counsel?

MR. PEREZ. Your Honor, perhaps, it would be better to call it 7Ms because there is an exhibit M-7.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. 7Ms?

MR. DAZA. 7Ms would be acceptable, 7Ls. We agree. We agree.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. For as long as we will not be confused later on with exhibits for the defense, because these are all in numbers. So it may be 7-M. It may be confused with 7-M for the prosecution. Just mention the exhibit number as marked.

MR. DAZA. Atty. Almadro, I’d like to show you the original of Exhibit 7Ms and this is the 69-page report that I mentioned in my last question. You recognize that, don’t you?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. About three-fourths of the findings and recommendations here involved Mr. Dante Tan, would you agree? More or less? We can not count the number of words but I went through it and I estimated that. Would you agree with that estimate?

MR. ALMADRO. Three-fourths may not be an accurate estimate, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. In percentage, in fractions?

MR. ALMADRO. Perhaps, you can say it is a majority but not three-fourths.

MR. DAZA. A majority of the findings and recommendations involved Mr. Dante Tan himself?

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. I suppose that early on, even before you crafted this report, Exhibit 7Ms, you became aware that you saw some culpability, some liability under the Revised Securities Act in regard to your evaluation of the transactions engaged in by Mr. Dante Tan and his associates, don’t you?

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA I shall ask my next question in point of time. When you started looking in the transactions of BW, particularly of Mr. Dante Tan and his associates in January, did you become aware of any possible violations of the law?

MR. ALMADRO. Your Honor, we started looking at the transactions in May, l999, Your Honor, not January.

MR. DAZA. Is it not a fact that yesterday, in the course of the cross-examination, you said that you began looking in fact to the transactions on BW shares from January of l999?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, we did but we did the actual review starting in May. We went back to the records in January, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right.

MR. ALMADRO. That is a more accurate statement.

MR. DAZA. I’m not going to quarrel with you on that. Five months wouldn’t really make much of a difference in the investigation. By June, did you not become aware from your interpretation of the transactions that Mr. Tan might have violated laws?

MR. ALMADRO. We had no conclusions yet in June, Your Honor. In fact, the first report of the Market Surveillance Department came out on July 5, l999, if I can recall the dates correctly, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. So by July, you have become aware of what you might consider possible violations of the law on the part of Mr. Tan.

MR. ALMADRO. The Market Surveillance Department reported that there could be possible insider trading and price manipulation.

MR. DAZA. O, as a lawyer and as the head of an investigating group and in your role, as what you said, was something like a prosecutor, did you not consider it fair to call in Mr. Tan to explain his side in regard to these transactions that you began to see if he is lying?

MR. ALMADRO. Our rules do not require us to call parties outside of the members of the Stock Exchange, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. I suppose that if I ask you the question in regard to transactions in August, in September, October, November, December, to the end of 1999, your answer would be the same in the sense that you did not call in Mr. Tan to explain his side because the rules of the PSE and the rules of the CSG, which you headed, did not permit it.

MR. ALMADRO. Not only that, Your Honor. We had no jurisdiction over Mr. Dante Tan.

MR. DAZA. And yet, Atty. Almadro, in spite of the fact that you had no jurisdiction over Mr. Tan, and that’s the reason why, according to you, you never called him in, even in the interest of fairness. You imputed violations of the law and wrongdoings against Mr. Tan to a point where you even testified you felt that there was a prima facie case against him for such violations, is that correct?

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor, because the elements of price manipulation were present in all of the data and records which we uncovered from the various brokers of the Stock Exchange, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. No. My question to you is whether Your answer to my question is that you did not call him in simply because you felt that the rules of the PSE did not allow you. Meaning that you did not even consider basic considerations of fairness as a lawyer…

MR. ALMADRO. That is not correct, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. … in imputing wrongdoings against Mr. Tan. That is my question.

MR. ALMADRO. That is not correct, Your Honor. I beg to disagree.

MR. DAZA. Would you please correct me if I’m wrong.

MR. ALMADRO. In fact the question of due process is treated in Page 16 of our report.

MR. DAZA. Yes, I saw that.

MR. ALMADRO. Up to Page 17, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Will you please read that for the record so that the Senator Judges could hear that.

MR. ALMADRO. Page 16. This is on the question of due process, and I quote:

“It has been suggested that we conducted our investigation and came up with this investigation report in violation of the right to due process of the different parties involved in the BW transactions.

“In particular, some quarters have questioned how we can possibly come up with findings and conclusions pertaining to the issuer, BW, and the market players like Dante Tan and the rest without giving them the opportunity to be heard.

“To them we say this investigation is not accusatory nor adversarial but merely fact finding in character. It partakes of the nature of a quasi accusatory proceeding only as against member brokers over whom the Exchange has disciplinary jurisdiction.

“In this regard, all member brokers concerned were given the chance to be heard informally during the examination of their books and records and formally by asking them to explain their side on transactions we felt were questionable.

“Thus we sent letters to several brokers listed here asking them to explain their side in what appeared to be wash sales.

“We also asked again a list of brokers to explain their side in what we felt were over the counter transactions.

“The Exchange has no disciplinary jurisdiction over BW although it has a right to impose fines and penalties on the company including the ultimate sanction of delisting for violation of the listing agreement and the listing and the disclosure rules. This power to impose fines and penalties is a consequence of the contractual relations between BW and the Exchange as defined under the listing agreement which outlines the rights and obligations of the parties.

“More importantly, under the listings and disclosure rules, this power may be exercised by the Exchange only through the Listings Committee pursuant to the recommendations of the Listings and Disclosures Group.”

In other words, whatever findings we may have against BW for violations of the Listing Agreement and/or the Listing and Disclosure Rules will have to be referred to the Listings and Disclosures Group. It is at this stage that the company will have all the opportunity to be heard. As for Dante Tan and the rest, they will similarly have all the chance to explain their side once the results of our investigation insofar as it relates to possible violations of the Revised Securities Act over which only the SEC has jurisdiction are reviewed, evaluated and acted upon by the Commission.

Our role is merely to report what we believe are possible violations warranting further SEC action based on our appraisal of the facts gathered during our investigation.

Thank you.

MR. DAZA. Well, there are just two words there that I wanted you to focus on. “Not accusatory against Mr. Dante Tan.” As a lawyer, you know what “accusatory” means. You imputed wrongdoings and violations of the Revised Securities Act by this report and yet you say that your report was not accusatory?

MR. PEREZ. Your Honor…

MR. DAZA. Then you insist on that explanation…

MR. ALMADRO. Yes.

MR. DAZA. …Atty. Almadro?

MR. PEREZ. Your Honor, Your Honor…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yeah, what’s the of pleasure of Atty. Perez?

MR. PEREZ. I withdraw the objection.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. There is objection, yeah.

MR. PEREZ. May I caution the witness not to answer right away?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The witness is advised accordingly.

MR. DAZA. Just to be sure.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a pending question?

MR. DAZA. No, no.

MR. PEREZ. It has already been answered, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. I am beginning to ask a question of the witness. Just to be sure of my recollection of your testimony yesterday, you sent a copy of this report, “MMMMMMM” to the Securities and Exchange Commission, did you not?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. And of your own knowledge, is it not a fact that this report triggered some investigation on the part of the Securities and Exchange Commission against Mr. Tan, isn’t it?

MR. ALMADRO. On the contrary, Your Honor, there was even a temporary restraining order and subsequently an injunction issued by the Court in Pasig disallowing the SEC from using this report as a basis for their investigation.

MR. DAZA. All right. But later on, they conducted…

MR. ALMADRO. In other words, Your Honor, they conducted their own investigation.

MR. DAZA. Well, that’s what I was saying. That this report regardless of that interim period when injunction was pending eventually triggered an investigation by the SEC which resulted in turn with the SEC filing a complaint with the Department of Justice.

MR. PEREZ. That was already answered, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Witness may answer.

MR. ALMADRO. That is not correct, Your Honor. When we started our investigation, we were the only ones conducting the investigation in May. But in September 30, the SEC started to do its own investigation. In other words, our report did not trigger their investigation. They were already conducting their investigation as early as September 1999.

MR. DAZA. No. You said that you started your investigation in May, is it not?

MR. ALMADRO. That’s correct.

MR. DAZA. All right. And that in the course of your investigation, you are now saying that the SEC initiated its own investigation.

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Is it not that after you finished the report, Exhibit “MMMMMMM”, which you said was not implemented by the Business Conduct and Ethics Committee, you sent the report to the SEC?

MR. ALMADRO. That’s correct, Your Honor, but even when we were doing this report, the SEC never ceased its own investigation. They conducted a parallel investigation to the PSE’s investigation.

MR. DAZA. Atty. Almadro, Chairman Yasay would subsequently testify after you. Did you not know for a fact that on several occasions, Chairman Yasay said that either they could not proceed or renew their investigation because SEC was waiting for the results of your investigation. Did you not know that for a fact?

MR. ALMADRO. I do not know that for a fact. What I know is that even as they did not conduct a full blown investigation, they never really ceased their own investigation which started in September 1999.

MR. DAZA. Did you not at any time during the year 1999 while conducting an investigation make any statement to the effect that since you were investigating, SEC should await the results of your investigation?

MR. ALMADRO. That was the ideal situation but it never happened. In fact…

MR. DAZA. But you said…

MR. ALMADRO. There were several exchanges between the Exchange and the SEC precisely because we felt that we should be given the first crack at investigating this case. But at the same time, they were conducting their own investigation.

MR. DAZA. We’ll, in short, Atty. Almadro, your position, your personal position was that SEC should await the results of your investigation, is it not?

MR. ALMADRO. That was my position.

MR. DAZA. And several times you made that position public – through the press, isn’t it?

MR. ALMADRO. I cannot recall exactly if I made that public. But, I am very sure that I discussed this with some of the officials of the SEC, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. We’ll leave that, we’ll leave that area.

Before you worked with the PSE, did you ever work with a stock brokerage, IB Gutierrez Securities?

MR. ALMADRO. The name you gave is not correct, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Why is it not correct?

MR. ALMADRO. I worked with IB Jimenez Securities, Incorporated.

MR. DAZA. IB Jimenez?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. I stand corrected. IB Jimenez Securities.

That’s the same brokerage where Mr. Jose Luis Yulo also worked before he joined the PSE, is that correct?

MR. ALMADRO. I do not know, Your Honor. I never had the occasion to work at IB Jimenez with Mr. Yulo there also.

MR. DAZA. Did not Mr. Jose Luis Yulo, of your own knowledge, ever work with that same brokerage?

MR. ALMADRO. Of my own knowledge, he did not.

MR. DAZA. Do you know Mr. Wilson Sy?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Wilson Sy and you worked at about the same time with Jimenez Securities, did you not?

MR. ALMADRO. That is not correct, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. When did he work with Jimenez Securities Incorporated?

MR. ALMADRO. I do not know, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Are you saying that you never were acquainted with him in IB Jimenez Securities at all?

MR. ALMADRO. Never , Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. From IB Jimenez Securities, where did you get employed? Did you work with the PSE from there?

MR. ALMADRO. I recall, Your Honor, that I worked – I was the President of IB Jimenez for about two years and then I resigned my position and shortly thereafter – I cannot recall the exact dates, that was when I joined the PSE, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. I see. Is it not a fact that you joined the PSE at the time when Mr. Wilson Sy was an officer of the PSE?

MR. ALMADRO. I joined the PSE at that time when Mr. Wilson Sy was the chairman of the Exchange, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. He was the third chairman of the Exchange, wasn’t he?

MR. ALMADRO. I am not sure if he was the third chairman, but he was the chairman at that time, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. Was it at about the same time that Mr. Jose Luis Yulo also joined the PSE, that is, when Mr. Wilson Sy was chairman of the PSE?

MR. ALMADRO. We joined – Mr. Yulo and myself joined the Stock Exchange at about the same time.

MR. DAZA. During the incumbency of Mr. Wilson Sy as chairman.

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. After you resigned on March 7 last year from the PSE, did you go into the private practice of law?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. After you left the PSE and went into the private practice of law, did you engage in specialized practice of stock trading and stock brokerage or was it general practice?

MR. ALMADRO. No, Your Honor. In fact, I wanted to forget about the stock market and the Stock Exchange.

MR. DAZA. All right. You wanted to forget, you said, stock trading and the PSE.

MR. ALMADRO. That’s correct. Instead, I wanted to form a group that would act as a private stock watch of the Stock Exchange and not be involved anymore with the Exchange itself.

MR. DAZA. All right. Will you please tell the Court whether at any time after you left the PSE, you had any personal contact with Mr. Dante Tan?

MR. ALMADRO. No, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Do you know Mr. Nelson Ty?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. How long have you known him?

MR. ALMADRO. Ten years perhaps.

MR. DAZA. You know Mr. Carlos Sy?

MR. ALMADRO. No, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Have you ever met Mr. Carlos Sy?

MR. ALMADRO. No, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Have you not, at any time since you resigned on March 7 last year, met with Nelson Ty, your friend?

MR. ALMADRO. I meet with Mr. Nelson Ty every now and then. He is my friend, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. You meet You mean, every meeting regularly since you resigned?

MR. ALMADRO. Not regularly, but every now and then. He is not only my friend, he is a client, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. He is a client.

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Did he not, at any time, discuss with you the matter of Mr. Dante Tan in regard to the BW shares?

MR. ALMADRO. No, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Have you not ever, from March 7 last year when you resigned until today, met with Mr. Nelson Ty and Mr. Carlos Sy, the two of them?

MR. ALMADRO. No, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. You’re saying that you say, “never” and you’re sure of that answer?

MR. ALMADRO. I’m sure, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. Yesterday, you testified lengthily in regard to what you said were certain manipulative devices involved in the trading of BW shares. One of these, if I’m not mistaken, was what you what’s called, was known usually as wash sale.

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. And you said that wash sale is a device whereby the same person buys shares and sell shares or sell shares and buy shares at about the same time or, possibly, within the same day in order to create artificial activity.

MR. ALMADRO. Technically, a wash sale is defined as effecting a transaction in any security which does not result in a change in beneficial ownership.

MR. DAZA. Regardless of the time …

MR. ALMADRO. There could be two parties there could be two different parties, but for as long as they represent the same beneficial interest, that is still a wash sale, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Regardless of the time expanse between the sale and the buy or the buy and sell.

MR. ALMADRO. Of course, the transaction has to match.

MR. DAZA. Within the same day?

MR. ALMADRO. Of course, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. Have you heard of what’s known as day-trade?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. Would you please explain to the Court what day-trade is?

MR. ALMADRO. Well, day-trade refers to trading by some investors where they buy shares for the day and before the day ends, also sells the shares, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Or vice versa.

MR. ALMADRO. Vice versa.

MR. DAZA. And that is not wash sale?

MR. ALMADRO. That is not wash sale, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right.

MR. ALMADRO. For as long as the sale, the purchase and sale results in a change in beneficial ownership, that is not a wash sale. But if the purchase and sale does not result in a change in beneficial ownership and especially if it is done for the purpose of creating a false or misleading appearance of active trading in the market for that share, then that is a wash sale, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. When a person, during the day, sells shares and, later in the day, buys shares or vice versa, are you saying that that mere act alone is nixed for a wash sale?

MR. ALMADRO. Of course not, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. So, in other words, it is the intent, it is the manipulative intent that distinguishes a wash sale from a day-trade, is it not?

MR. ALMADRO. A wash sale, as a criminal act under the Revised Securities Code, must have the essential element of manipulative intent. However, in the Revised in the RSE Rules which applies to member-brokers, manipulative intent is not necessary. This is found in RSE Rule XXII 7, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right.

MR. ALMADRO. For as long as the broker effects a transaction that does not result in a change in beneficial ownership, the rule does not say that you have to have manipulative intent. The broker is liable for wash sale under the Rules of the Exchange, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. Now, you’re saying, nevertheless, that manipulative intent is an element which distinguishes day-trade, is it not?

MR. ALMADRO. A wash sale, as a criminal act under the Revised Securities Code, must have the essential element of manipulative intent. However, in the RSE Rules which applies to member brokers, manipulative intent is not necessary. This is found in RSE Rule XXII 7, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right.

MR. ALMADRO. For as long as the broker effects a transaction that does not result in a change in beneficial ownership, the Rule does not say that you have to have manipulative intent, the broker is liable for wash sale under the Rules of the Exchange, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Now, you are saying, nevertheless, that manipulative intent is an element which distinguishes day-trade from wash sale. Or are you saying that even without manipulative intent, there can be a wash sale in violation of law.

MR. ALMADRO. Your Honor, your comparison between a day-trade and a wash sale is a bit misplaced, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Well, would you please put it in the right place?

MR. ALMADRO. Because a day-trade is simply buying shares. For example, you buy shares when the market opens and before the market closes you sell the shares. This presupposes two different transactions. You buy the shares from another party and when you sell it another party gets it. Wash sale occurs when you buy the share and the other party that sells it is also either you or somebody who is your dummy. You represent the same beneficial interest.

MR. DAZA. All right. Now, Atty. Almadro, supposing this morning I buy 1,000 A shares and then before the trading closes, I sell the same shares.

MR. ALMADRO. When you buy 1,000 A shares when the market opens, that share will be matched with the selling order so the transaction is closed. Then there is no wash sale, if the other party is a different party.

MR. DAZA. Well, how can you then, in that kind of an example, say that there can be a wash sale. If I sell the shares, for instance, as I said, 1,000 shares in the morning, I sell the shares to you and then later in the day I buy the same shares from you does that make it a wash sale?

MR. ALMADRO. It is not a wash sale. But what happened in this case, Your Honor, was that Mr. Dante Tan and his associates sold shares which they themselves bought. It is not the case where I sold shares, somebody it is different if you sell shares and somebody buys it and then you buy another set of shares later in the day and somebody sells it, that is matched with the transaction. What happened here was they sold and the party that bought was also the same party. So, that is really a wash sale.

MR. DAZA. Within the same day?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes.

MR. DAZA. All right. Can you point to the exhibit where you said you document that, you documented that it is Mr. Tan and associates who sold shares and then Mr. Tan and associates buy the shares later buy the shares?

And I would like you to keep in mind the example that I gave where I sold you shares and I buy back from you the same shares within the same day.

MR. ALMADRO. I would like to refer to Exhibit “LLLLLLL 29″, Your Honor. We used this to illustrate a wash sale which happened on March 29, 1999. In this case, Your Honor, as the illustration shows, Mr. Dante Tan sold 750,000 shares at 2.60 at the same time he bought 750 shares using PNB Securities, and the selling and the buying matched. So, that is clearly a wash sale, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. That exactly is the same situation that I illustrated to you where within the same day I sold you shares and I buy back the shares from you the same day.

MR. ALMADRO. That is different, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Well, your diagram “LLLLLLL” show that.

MR. ALMADRO. This is a simultaneous transaction. The buy and the sell occurred at the same time and they were matched on the board at the same time, on the floor at the same time.

MR. DAZA. Are you saying that simply because they occurred at the same hour that this was a wash sale?

MR. PEREZ. Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. What is the objection?

MR. PEREZ. The counsel is already arguing with the witness. The witness had already explained that in case of a wash sale there is no transfer of beneficial ownership.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes.

MR. PEREZ. Whereas in the example being given by the counsel…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is sustained. It’s argumentative.

MR. PEREZ. Thank you, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. Is it not a fact, Atty. Almadro, that whenever there is a sale or a buy, the broker charges the client, the beneficial owner, some fee?

MR. ALMADRO. There is a fee, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Same fee, right?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Now, in this particular case illustrated in Exhibit “LLLLLLL”, when the sale was made, the broker charged?

MR. ALMADRO. The selling broker charge his fees, of course, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. And when the buy was made, the buying broker also had a charge?

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. I notice from Exhibit “LLLLLLL” that the diagram contains what I interpret as a computer?

MR. ALMADRO. The computer system at the Stock Exchange, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. This represents the electronic transfer device that is a part of the program of the computers of the PSE?

MR. ALMADRO. That is true, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. Can the electronic transfer device that shows on the screen of the PSE put up the transactions “buy and sell” or “sell and buy” within the same minute of the time?

MR. ALMADRO. Of course, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. In other words, the “buy and sell” for this particular day – March 29, 1999 – would show the time exactly to the minute?

MR. ALMADRO. There is a record of that, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. There’s a record of that, and exactly to the second?

MR. ALMADRO. I am not sure, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. My impression from your report, Exhibit “MMMMMMM” is that you seem to have focused on the transactions involving the BW shares during the period May-October.

MR. ALMADRO. Pardon me, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. My reading of your report, Exhibit “MMMMMMM” tells me that you focused on the transactions involving the BW shares during the period from May to October. That was the main focus, is that correct?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. Your report was issued on February 11, 2000.

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Did you look at all the BW transactions after October 11 down to February 11, 2000 — October 11, 1999 when the price was at its peak to February 11, 2000?

MR. ALMADRO. We looked at the transaction up to the end of December 1999 only, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right.

MR. ALMADRO. But it took us a while to finish the report that’s why we were able to submit it only on February 11, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. And you said yesterday that after October 11, 1999, the price of BW shares plummeted.

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Have you heard of “private placements”?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Will you please explain to the Court what “private placements” are?

MR. ALMADRO. The “private placements” referred to in our report, Your Honor, are transactions crossed on the board by one of the brokerage, PCCI Securities. In these private placements, the seller was Mr. Dante Tan and the buyers were various clients who agreed to lock up their shares for a specific period. What appeared on the trading floor as the transaction price was the market price of the share. But the actual transaction was done at a lower price, Your Honor.

Therefore, these private placements resulted in two things: One, it created the impression that the shares were selling at a high price when they were, in fact, being sold at a low price; secondly, these private placements with lockup in effect squeezed the shares, BW shares out the market, artificially dictating its price, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. What I was asking you to explain to the Court was what private placements are. I was not asking you to explain any particular private placement.

Would you like to go back to the question and answer that?

MR. ALMADRO. Because the private placements that is relevant to our report is the private placements I just explained, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. No, I am not asking you that. I am asking you for the information of the Court and for my education what private placements are just like what wash sales are, just like what day-trade is. Could you be able to explain that?

MR. ALMADRO. Private placements are purchase and sale of shares which are negotiated privately outside of the Exchange, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. But these transactions are on the board, isn’t it?

MR. ALMADRO. Technically they should not be on the board.

MR. DAZA. But they are on the board nevertheless.

MR. ALMADRO. In this particular case they were on the board, Your Honor. They were crossed on the board but the price reflected on the board was not the actual price at which the transaction took place, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. I don’t have that in mind but that’s all right if that’s your answer. I was asking that previous question because I wanted to ask you this question.

Did you not become aware during the process of your investigation, about the fact, if ever, that Mr. Dante Tan in the later part of 1999, made private placements to buy a total of 31.5 million BW shares at the time when the price was somewhere in the 90s?

MR. ALMADRO. May I beg the counsel to repeat the question, please?

MR. DAZA. My question is, during the course of your investigation, and you investigated from May to December of 1999, did you not become aware that Mr. Dante Tan and asso¬ciates entered into what’s known as private placements to acquire, to buy shares totalling 31.5 million shares at the time when the price was, in the ’90s, about 100 or over 100?

MR. ALMADRO. Your Honor, the premise is wrong. Mr. Dante Tan under the private placements was the one who sold the shares. He did not buy the shares, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Ah, you are saying that instead of buying shares via private placement totalling 31.5 million in the later part of the year, he sold, he did not buy.

MR. ALMADRO. Your Honor, Mr. Dante Tan from my recol¬lection, sold a total of about 122 million shares using private placements, Your Honor, during the period June up to perhaps October, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Now, I’ll be more specific in my question to you. Did you not, in the course of your investigation, become aware of a private placement transaction between Wealth Securities and PCCI Securities in September involving pur¬chase by Mr. Tan and associates broker of five million shares of BW?

MR. ALMADRO. That is not correct, Your Honor. The private placements totalling 31,500,000 was transacted not only in September but, I think, starting in August and the buyer was not Wealth Securities but Ms. Janet Que and her associates, Your Honor. Wealth Securities was merely a settling broker. It was neither a buying nor a selling broker, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Are you saying that despite the placements, this particular private placement that I mentioned to you did not occur at all?

MR. ALMADRO. They took place, Your Honor, over a period of time.

MR. DAZA. Well, in particular …

MR. ALMADRO. They did not take place at one time, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right, in particular, or over a period of time, in other words, from August going towards the end of the year.

MR. ALMADRO. From August perhaps up to October, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. From August to October.

MR. ALMADRO. And …

MR. DAZA. Totalling 31.5 million shares.

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor …

MR. DAZA. … via different brokers?

MR. ALMADRO. … but they were not the private placements of Wealth Securities if that’s what you are driving at, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Will you please, I’m sorry, please speak a little slowly. I didn’t understand.

MR. ALMADRO. These private placements which you re¬ferred to, totalling 31,500,000, were not the private placements of Wealth Securities. These were shares bought by Janet Que and other clients of Wealth which were crossed on the board by PCCI. In other words, the buying and the selling broker was PCCI. Since these clients were, in fact, clients of Wealth, Wealth merely acted as a settling broker, Your Honor. It was not involved in the transaction itself, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. In other words, you are saying for short that this transaction of 5 million shares that I referred to between Wealth and PCCI was not a buy by Mr. Tan and his associates?

MR. ALMADRO. No, Your Honor. It was… In all private placements, Mr. Tan was the seller. He was never the buyer.

MR. DAZA. All right, I’m just asking you, I’m just asking you.

What about a transaction of one million five hundred BW shares between Wealth and PCCI? Was this not a private placement for a buy by Mr. Tan and his associates?

MR. ALMADRO. Again, Your Honor, if it’s a private placement by Mr. Dante Tan, Mr. Dante Tan is the seller, he is not the buyer. And the buyer was not Wealth, it was it were some clients of Wealth, but not Wealth itself, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right, I’ll go back to that, I’ll go back to that.

This was a private placement, in other words, where Mr. Tan sold under a lockup agreement?

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. Would you please explain to the Court then what a “lockup agreement” is?

MR. ALMADRO. Well…

MR. DAZA. Or shall I ask you or I’d rather ask you the question: Is it not that in simple words a lockup agreement is that I sell my shares to you at a certain price but you agree that you will not dispose or sell the shares within a certain period of time?

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. A usual lockup agreement is where also it’s provided that to ensure that you don’t lose money, when the price of the share gets to a certain specific amount that so you would not lose money, the lockup would be rescinded and that you’d be free to sell the shares nevertheless?

MR. ALMADRO. That was the lockup agreement entered into by the parties in this case, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. Now, were you not aware that shares totalling 31.5 million were involved in several placement, private placement arrangements under a lockup period?

MR. ALMADRO. I was aware that there were 122 million shares under a private placement with lockup agreement, Your Honor, not only 31.5.

MR. DAZA. All right. But I’m talking about the 31.5 million that you said you became aware of from about September August or September to the end towards October, that particular period of time?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right, we are talking about that, Atty. Almadro.

All right. Now, is it not a fact that in regard to this particular shares totalling 31.5 million, because the price of the share went down to a price that was agreed on between Mr. Tan and associates and the buyers that the lockup was rescinded and that therefore Mr. Tan and associates were forced to sell their shares?

MR. ALMADRO. I am not aware of that, Your Honor. The lockup agreement between Mr. Dante Tan and some of his clients were confidential. We did not know about the exact agreements, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. If you did not know, I am not going to ask you more questions on that and let’s go to other points.

Have you ever heard of a device in the stock market called margin line?

MR. ALMADRO. Margin line.

MR. DAZA. Margin lines. Have you heard of that?

MR. ALMADRO. Were…

MR. DAZA. Have you heard of margin line accounts?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. Would you please explain what margin line accounts are?

MR. ALMADRO. Well, a margin line account is an account where a client of a broker is allowed to trade using only a certain percentage of the actual value of the shares he has with the client. In other words, he is given a margin within which to trade, Your Honor. For example, if the shares with the broker is only 15 million, he can be allowed to trade up to 100 million, for example, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. It’s a kind of credit line …

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. … that the customer has with the broker, isn’t it?

MR. ALMADRO. It is a credit line, in effect, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. This is normal in the stock market, is it not?

MR. ALMADRO. Well, it is allowed, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. It is allowed.

MR. ALMADRO. But it is up to the brokers whether or not they should give margin lines to their clients, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. All right. So that the more margin lines a person has with brokers, the more stocks he could engage in by way of trading through the brokers?

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. And this would explain why a person would be able to deal with more stocks by having more brokers, is it not, because of the incentives or the margin line accounts, is it not?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, in a way, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. I couldn’t see a signature on the report, Exhibit “MMMMMMM”. Oh, this is the — This portion marked as Exhibit “MMMMMMM-6”, this is your signature, is that it?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Let me ask you a few questions, and I would like to focus on these questions.

Was it the first time that you met with the President on February 14, 2000?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Was it the first time that you ever had a conversation with the President?

MR. ALMADRO. With President Estrada?

MR. DAZA. Yes.

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. On your oath as a lawyer, as an officer of the court and on your oath as a witness, did President Estrada ever contact you at anytime during your investigation regarding the subject matter of investigation?

MR. ALMADRO. No, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. Again, on your oath as a lawyer and as an officer of the court and as a witness, in the course of your investigation, did you ever allow yourself to be influenced by any person, whether in government or outside government?

MR. ALMADRO. Never, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. No further questions, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Redirect? We will change the procedure a little bit. We will ask first if there is a redirect before the Members of the Court may ask questions. For the reason that after the Members of the Court shall have asked the question, then we then request for a redirect on the basis of the questions and answers given by Members of the Court. So, we shall have a redirect first.

The Honorable Senator Guingona.

I’m asking if there is a redirect. Do you have a redirect, Atty. Perez?

MR. PEREZ. Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. You may proceed with your redirect.

MR. PEREZ. With the permission of the Honorable Chief Justice and the Honorable Senator-Judges.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. You may proceed.

MR. PEREZ. Mr. Witness, you were asked extensively about private placements with a lockup period. Could you tell us who resorted to this practice in relation to BW shares?

MR. ALMADRO. It was Dante Tan, Your Honor.

MR. PEREZ. And what is the consequence of the use of private placements with a lockup period in this case?

MR. ALMADRO. It has two consequences which are both misleading to the market, Your Honor. Number one, these private placements were crossed on the board and the price reflected was the price for that day of the share, Your Honor. However, the actual price at which the shares were paid was different, was very much lower than the price reflected on the trading floor, Your Honor. In other words, these private placements which totalled about 120 million tended to show that BW shares were selling at a high price when they were, in fact, selling at a low price. So, that is misleading.

Secondly, because of these private placements with lockup, Your Honor, BW shares were squeezed out of the market. We found out that Mr. Dante Tan resorted to these private placements sometime after he unloaded his shares in June when he earned 820 million, when he started trying to corner the market. To be able to corner the market, he had to squeeze the shares out of the market. So, he resorted these private placements, Your Honor.

MR. PEREZ. Is that considered as manipulative?

MR. ALMADRO. As far as we are concerned, Your Honor, it is manipulative because we all know under the law of supply and demand that when there is no supply and there is demand for the shares, the price will naturally go up. So, this increase in price is artificial, and it is price manipulation, Your Honor.

MR. PEREZ. And did it, in fact, result to the increase in price of BW shares?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. PEREZ. You were also asked about margin trading. Could you tell this Honorable Court if there are limitations to margin trading or margin line?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor, there are limitations found in the rules.

MR. PEREZ. Could you tell us what these limitations are, if you remember?

MR. ALMADRO. I cannot recall the exact figures anymore, Your Honor, because I’ve been away from the Exchange for quite a while but if — the rules are very clear. We can just read them if the rules are available, Your Honor.

MR. PEREZ. Are the limitations contained in the Securities Act?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor, and they are also contained in the RSE Rules, Your Honor.

MR. PEREZ. That will be all of the witness, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. A recross, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Recross?

MR. DAZA. Recross on the redirect. During the redirect, in reference to private placements with lockup arrangements, you said and I quote, you said: “We consider these as some kind of a violation.” Now, by we, do you mean your group and yourself, the CSG, as stated in the report?

MR. ALMADRO. The CSG, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. That’s your group which you led?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. DAZA. That’s all.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair will now recognize the Honorable Senator-Judge Guingona, after that the Honorable Senator-Judge Coseteng, then the Honorable Judge Legarda-Leviste, the Honorable Judge Sergio Osmeña III.

The Honorable Senator Guingona may now proceed.

SEN. GUINGONA. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.

Mr. Almadro, you went to Malacañang on February 14 with Mr. Jose Luis Yulo.

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

SEN. GUINGONA. With the report?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. GUINGONA. And the President did not thank you for the work which you have done?

MR. ALMADRO. I cannot recall him thanking us for the work we did, Your Honor.

SEN. GUINGONA. Did he not say that he would have his staff study the recommendations contained in your report?

MR. ALMADRO. No, Your Honor, he did not say that.

SEN. GUINGONA. You also stated that Mr. Yulo said, “Mabigat ito ho. Dapat hindi palampasin ito.”

MR. ALMADRO. What Mr. Yulo said was, “Masyado hong garapal ang ginawa nila. Hindi ho dapat palampasin.”

SEN. GUINGONA. Did not the President say, “’Yan na nga. Sa aking administrasyon walang kamag-anak, walang kaibigan, walang kumpadre.”?

MR. ALMADRO. He did not say that, Your Honor.

SEN. GUINGONA. Instead, the President said, “Akala ko ba naayos na si Mr. Yasay ni Mr. Dante Tan?”

MR. ALMADRO. What he said was, Dante Tan told him na “inayos na niya si Mr. Yasay,” Your Honor.

SEN. GUINGONA. With a sign of a round figure?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. GUINGONA. Thank you. That’s all.

MR. ALMADRO. Thank you, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Thank you.

The Honorable Senator-Judge Coseteng.

SEN. COSETENG. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.

Earlier, you mentioned, Atty. Almadro, that your investigation covered the period January ’99 to December ’99, is that correct?

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

SEN. COSETENG. And as of January ’99, the volume was 224.8 million shares, is that correct?

MR. ALMADRO. The volume in January 1999 was about 224 million, Your Honor.

SEN. COSETENG. So, it’s correct?

MR. ALMADRO. (Nodding.)

SEN. COSETENG. What was the volume in May of 1998?

MR. ALMADRO. I do not know that, Your Honor.

SEN. COSETENG. Because we have statistics that came from Technistock, how credible is that Technistock?

MR. ALMADRO. I have not dealt with Technistock personally, Your Honor. I cannot vouch for the credibility of Technistock, Your Honor.

SEN. COSETENG. So, you are saying that Technistock is not at all used as reference?

MR. ALMADRO. In our – in the CSG, we have not used Technistock, Your Honor.

SEN. COSETENG. And in the PSE?

MR. ALMADRO. I don’t know, Your Honor. But as far as CSG is concerned, we have not used Technistock, Your Honor.

SEN. COSETENG. In May of ’98, the volume was 17.6 million, went up to 42 million in July of ’98, went up to 205 million in November of ’98, and 240 million in December of ’98. From 17.6 million, it went up to 240 million in seven months. And your department was supposed to be monitoring, what did you do about it?

MR. ALMADRO. We monitored that, Your Honor.

SEN. COSETENG. And you did not find any unusual movement from May ’98 to December of ’98?

MR. ALMADRO. We did not find anything unusual, Your Honor.

SEN. COSETENG. From 17.6 million, it went to 240.3 million and there was nothing unusual?

MR. ALMADRO. That is not the only factor we consider when we say that something is unusual, Your Honor.

SEN. COSETENG. Okay. Next question is, earlier there was mention of a 31 million shares movement supposedly by Wealth Securities having purchased from PCCI, is that correct?

MR. ALMADRO. That is not correct, Your Honor. Wealth never purchased private placements from PCCI, Your Honor.

SEN. COSETENG. We have letters that were identified by Mr. Wilson Sy as his own when the Committee on Banks held the hearings dated September 3, 13, 17, 20, 21, etcetera, and other documents referring to this — practically the same transaction from August 16, ’99 to October 7, ’99 for 31.5 million amounting to 788 million, was this included in your report?

MR. ALMADRO. That is part of the preliminary report, Your Honor.

SEN. COSETENG. Was this included in the report that you submitted to the Senate?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The witness may answer the question.

MR. ALMADRO. That is part, Your Honor.

SEN. COSETENG. Can you point it out to us in the report?

MR. ALMADRO. The preliminary report is part of the records of the Senate and that is part of the preliminary report, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Time is off, Your Honor. The Honorable Senator-Judge Legarda-Leviste.

SEN. LEGARDA-LEVISTE. Thank you. With the permission of the Honorable Chief Justice, I would just like to propound a few questions to Atty. Almadro.

Is the big volume transaction relating to BW covered by real transactions or manipulative ones like wash sale, kiting, etcetera?

MR. ALMADRO. We discovered that they were covered by manipulative transactions, Your Honor.

SEN. LEGARDA LEVISTE. What kind of manipulative transactions were these, Attorney Almadro?

MR. ALMADRO. Wash sales, match orders, private placements…

SEN. LEGARDA LEVISTE. Yes, you mentioned about private placements and in the cross examination a few minutes earlier, you spoke of private placements of Mr. Dante Tan. Do you have any document showing the price at which Mr. Tan bought these shares?

MR. ALMADRO. Mr. Dante Tan sold shares in private placements, Your Honor. He sold shares at various prices, Your Honor, various prices.

SEN. LEGARDA LEVISTE. Do you have documents that show in the exhibits the rates at which he sold these shares?

MR. ALMADRO. There is an exhibit, Your Honor, attached in the preliminary report that shows the price levels at which some of these private placements were made, Your Honor.

MR. PEREZ. Your Honor, may I be permitted to approach him and hand him the…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. I am sorry I don’t think that would be proper.

MR. PEREZ. Very well then, because he was pointing to some documents here.

SEN. LEGARDA LEVISTE. Yes, I just wanted to know whether you have these documents showing the rate or the price at which Mr. Tan sold these shares.

MR. ALMADRO. That, we have, Your Honor.

SEN. LEGARDA LEVISTE. That’s correct. Also, in yesterday’s cross examination, if I am not mistaken, it was mentioned that you, in your studies which you conducted, had relied on the computers or information of the PSE which only showed the names of the brokers. However, is it not correct that you had access actually to the books of each of the brokers involved in the manipulative transactions. And because of this, you were able to trace the transactions of these brokers pointing to Dante Tan and the alleged manipulative transactions. Is that correct?

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

SEN. LEGARDA LEVISTE. So, you were not just relying on the computers of the PSE but because you had access to the books, in the transactions of these?

MR. ALMADRO. After we got a record of the questionable transactions, we asked the brokers who the beneficial owners of the transactions were.

SEN. LEGARDA LEVISTE. Yes.

MR. ALMADRO. And that is why we were able to discover who were the parties responsible for the manipulation, Your Honor.

SEN. LEGARDA LEVISTE. Also, you were saying that you and former PSE President Yulo explained to the President your findings about existing SEC rules violations by Mr. Tan and the President tried to defend, according to your words, Dante Tan by saying that he is a victim rather than the culprit.

Could you summarize President Estrada’s arguments or reasoning why Dante Tan is a victim rather than the culprit in BW?

MR. ALMADRO. He was saying that Dante Tan was buying shares at a high price and he kept on buying even as the shares were going down. He never unloaded his shares that’s why he lost a lot of money and that is why he could not be a manipulator, and he kept repeating this line, Your Honor.

SEN. LEGARDA LEVISTE. Was this being said as a statement of fact or trying to side or trying to convince you for something?

MR. ALMADRO. Well, obviously he was stating this because this was told to him by Mr. Dante Tan. He could not have said this on his own.

SEN. LEGARDA LEVISTE. My last question is, since I have two seconds to go do you have any… Can I just finish my question?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Just finish the question.

SEN. LEGARDA LEVISTE. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.

Do you have any documents, any proof, any link that the President had benefitted from the benefits which Mr. Dante Tan had acquired for these alleged manipulative transactions?

MR. ALMADRO. No, Your Honor.

SEN. LEGARDA LEVISTE. Thank you.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Thank you, too.

The Honorable Senator Judge Sergio Osmeña, III.

SEN. OSMEÑA (S). Attorney Almadro, you studied the books, ‘no?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, sir.

SEN. OSMEÑA (S). You had access to the books of BW? You had access to the profit and loss statements for the years leading up to 1999, the statement of assets and liabilities.

MR. ALMADRO. They submit these financial statements because these are required by the Stock Exchange, Your Honor.

SEN. OSMEÑA (S). All right. So, therefore, do you remember in your Page 7 L 18, the income the revenues reported by BW for six months this is half a year ending 1998 was only P74?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. OSMEÑA (S). And their expenses amounted to P1,054,000 more or less? And they already had previous year’s deficit of about P29 million?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor, that is found in the financial statement, Your Honor.

SEN. OSMEÑA (S). And then one year later, on June 30, as of June 30, 1999, they reported revenues for six whole months in the amount of P3,481.

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. OSMEÑA (S). But their general and administrative expenses had risen fourfold, from one million to roughly P4.1 million, that’s in six months only?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. OSMEÑA (S). And their net loss for the six months had risen also fourfold from 1 million to P4.1 million?

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

SEN. OSMEÑA (S). Now, does that sound like a company that will go from 78 centavos to P110?

MR. ALMADRO. That’s really very strange, Your Honor, because even as the book value of the share were actually decreasing, the price of the shares were increasing, Your Honor.

SEN. OSMEÑA (S). Now, Atty. Almadro, how many… what were the assets of BW in its books at that time? What were the total net assets?

MR. ALMADRO. At that time, the only asset reported by BW was their property at Tagaytay.

SEN. OSMEÑA (S). And that was booked at how much?

MR. ALMADRO. I think they booked it at around 437 million.

SEN. OSMEÑA (S). Yes, I saw that, 437 million. That was their only asset on the books?

MR. ALMADRO. That was their only asset.

SEN. OSMEÑA (S). And they had no income?

MR. ALMADRO. They had no income.

SEN. OSMEÑA (S). Now, precisely, how would the market price shares…how many outstanding shares did they have issued?

MR. ALMADRO. At that time, they had 450 million outstanding shares, Your Honor.

SEN. OSMEÑA (S). So, roughly, the market shouldn’t have priced it more than… if it were book value P1 per share or about 450 million shares?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor. But because of the deficit, they should have… the book value should have been around 80 centavos only, Your Honor.

SEN. OSMEÑA (S). Right. And that is what it is trading at today.

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. OSMEÑA (S). Now, how were they able to pump up the value to P100? What did they say to the public?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Your two minutes is …

SEN. OSMEÑA (S). You may answer.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Finish the answer, finish the answer.

MR. ALMADRO. There were misleading disclosures which were… which appeared in the media, Your Honor. And together with these misleading disclosures, there were manipulative schemes done by Dante Tan and his associates. And this is how the price of BW artificially increased, Your Honor.

SEN. OSMEÑA (S). Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Honorable Senator Judge Biazon first, then the Honorable Senator Judge Juan Ponce Enrile.

SEN. BIAZON. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.

Mr. Witness, what’s the purpose of the … what is the purpose or task of the Compliance and Surveillance Group as an arm of the PSE?

MR. ALMADRO. To ensure that trading in the stock market is fair, efficient and transparent and to ensure that all member brokers comply with all the rules of the Exchange, Your Honor.

SEN. BIAZON. You conduct investigations?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. BIAZON. What would initiate the conduct of investigations?

MR. ALMADRO. We conduct investigations whenever there are complaints by investors, whenever the market shows sign of unusual activity as what happened in this case, Your Honor.

SEN. BIAZON. Yes. And the result of the investigation is for the consumption of the PSE?

MR. ALMADRO. The results of the investigation insofar as they affect the member brokers, is for the consumption of the PSE, Your Honor.

SEN. BIAZON. Only?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. BIAZON. Yes. And thus, as a result of these investigations, does PSE possess authority to impose sanctions?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor, on its member brokers, Your Honor.

SEN. BIAZON. What would be the sanctions that may be imposed?

MR. ALMADRO. Fines up to expulsion from the Exchange, for an extreme case, let’s say, of price manipulations, such as wash sale, Your Honor.

SEN. BIAZON. In the event that the result of investigations points to the possibility of criminal acts being committed, what would be the disposition of your investigation?

MR. ALMADRO. We refer this to the SEC because it is the SEC that has jurisdiction over the criminal aspect of the Revised Securities Act, Your Honor.

SEN. BIAZON. Yes. Why then were you or did you and Mr. Yulo go to the President to present your investigation?

MR. ALMADRO. It was Mr. Yulo who arranged that meeting. He just told me that we have to go to Malacañang, Your Honor.

SEN. BIAZON. For what purpose?

MR. ALMADRO. He told me that he wanted to show a copy of the results of the investigation and for us to personally explain the results to the President as a matter of courtesy before the results of the investigation became public, Your Honor.

SEN. BIAZON. Again, what was the objective of this you and Mr. Yulo showing and explaining the results of the investigation?

MR. ALMADRO. As already stated, Your Honor, Mr. Yulo told me that he wanted to show this report and the results, explain to the President personally as a matter of courtesy before the results became public, Your Honor.

SEN. BIAZON. In your investigation reports, there are other names other than Dante Tan?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. BIAZON. … Dante Tan.

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. BIAZON. All right. Now, what was the focus of interest in your presentation to the President? Was it all the names there or are the interest focused on one specific individual?

MR. ALMADRO. Well, the presentation focused on what we found in our investigation and our investigation found that Mr. Dante Tan was liable for price manipulation and that is how our presentation was presented to the President, Your Honor.

SEN. BIAZON. Was that presentation to the President had or did that presentation to the President had an objective of eventually referring your results of investigation to the SEC?

MR. ALMADRO. No, Your Honor, because the SEC would be officially furnished a copy of the report after the BCEC acted on it within the Stock Exchange, Your Honor.

SEN. BIAZON. Yes. But then, I was still wondering why a purely private entity, such as the PSE, would be submitting or explaining this the report of the no, the result of the investigation to the President if you did not have the objective of eventually presenting it to the SEC that could take the official actions on it.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Your time is now over, Your Honor.

SEN. BIAZON. Yes. May I ask…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The witness may answer the question.

MR. ALMADRO. Like I said, Your Honor, Mr. Yulo told me that we were submitting the report and explaining the results as a matter of courtesy to the President, Your Honor.

SEN. BIAZON. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Thank you.

The Honorable Yes, the Majority Leader.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. May I intervene. It’s time for our regular first break. But to allow the Members of the Court to deliberate, in caucus, on the matter raised earlier by Senator Judge Biazon, I suggest that we extend our break by another 30 minutes. So, I move for a 45 minute break.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Forty five minutes break. That would mean we have to come back at 4:30.

SEN. DRILON. Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes, the Honorable Judge Drilon.

SEN. DRILON. I was just wondering if how many more of our colleagues would ask questions on the witness.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes.

SEN. DRILON. I can only see Senator Enrile.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. And the Honorable Jaworski and the Honorable Roco. We have three more.

SEN. DRILON. If we can just finish with this witness before we go on the break so that…

THE MAJORITY LEADER. At the pleasure of the Court. There are a lot more, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yeah. Yeah. Honasan and Miriam Santiago.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. There are many.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. We have many yet.

SEN. DRILON. Maybe another 10 minutes, Your Honor, so that we can…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. We can, probably, finish two more before we go on break on the first break.

The Chair would now recognize the Honorable Judge Enrile.

SEN. ENRILE. Salamat po.

Ginoong Almadro, ano po ba ang negosyo ni Janette Que, kung alam ninyo?

MR. ALMADRO. Hindi ko po alam, Your Honor.

SEN. ENRILE. Hindi ba siya empleyado lamang ng Wealth Securities?

MR. ALMADRO. Hindi po siya empleyado ng Wealth Securities, Your Honor.

SEN. ENRILE. Ang balita ko po ay isang empleyado lang siya, trader ng Wealth Securities. Paano kaya makabili ng 31,500,000 shares worth P788,700,000 ang isang trader na kagaya ni Janette Que?

MR. ALMADRO. Your Honor, ‘yong aming imbistigasyon po tungkol diyan showed that si Janette Que po ay hindi po siya connected sa Wealth as a trader.

SEN. ENRILE. Ah, ganoon.

MR. ALMADRO. Siya po ay isang kliyente ng Wealth. At ‘yon pong 31.5 million na ‘yan na sinasabi po ninyo na private placements, hindi lang po kay Janette Que ‘yan. Marami pong tao ‘yan. Kaya lang po…

SEN. ENRILE. Sino ‘yong mga tao na ‘yan kaya?

MR. ALMDRO. Nandidiyan po ‘yan sa…

SEN. ENRILE. Nasa report ba ninyo?

MR. ALMADRO. ‘Yong mga pangalan po, wala po diyan sa report.

SEN. ENRILE. Bakit hindi ninyo inilagay sa report?

MR. ALMADRO. Dahil po wala naman po kaming nakita na anomalous diyan sa transaction na iyan.

SEN. ENRILE. Hindi na bale. Saka na lang natin pag usapan ‘yan.

Ngayon, doon sa panahon na ‘yon ay itong BW shares ay masyadong umangat ang presyo, maraming rin palang mga kumpanya rin ang naging ganyan kagaya ng C and P Homes, 421 percent ang price change upwards. Itong Zeus Holdings, 340 percent. Itong PetroPhils, 364 percent; Balabac Resources, 318 percent. Marami dito, mayroon sigurong mahigit labindalawang kumpanya during the same period in 1999, beginning October 1999, and then May, June, July and November of that year. Bakit hindi ninyo inimbestiga itong mga kumpanyang ito? Bakit ‘yung BW lang ang inimbestiga ninyo?

MR. ALMADRO. ‘Yung iba po diyan inimbestiga po namin.

SEN. ENRILE. E anong resulta? May price manipulation din?

MR. ALMADRO. Wala po kaming nakita. Ang katotohanan po niyan, ang iba po diyan we conducted an initial investigation but the Market Surveillance Department reported that there was a…

SEN. ENRILE. Alin dito ang inimbestiga ninyo?

MR. ALMADRO. Hindi ko na po…

SEN. ENRILE. C&P Homes.

MR. ALMADRO. Hindi ko na po masigurado lahat.

SEN. ENRILE. Zeus Holdings?

MR. ALMADRO. Hindi ko na po matiyak kung ano ‘yung mga eksakto pong mga kumpanya, but I’m sure that some of those we investigated, Your Honor.

SEN. ENRILE. Salamat po. Talagang matiyaga pala kayo.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Thank you. The Honorable Senator-Judge Jaworski.

SEN. JAWORSKI. Thank you, Your Honor.

Well, just for some enlightenment. Is lockup transaction illegal?

MR. ALMADRO. They are not illegal per se, Your Honor.

SEN. JAWORSKI. How about done through transactions?

MR. ALMADRO. They are not illegal per se.

SEN. JAWORSKI. So, would you say that there is indeed a flaw in our security laws, precisely one of the reasons that things of this nature happen?

MR. ALMADRO. In this particular case, Your Honor, done through transactions were used systematically as a means of manipulating the market to be able to effect wash sales and match orders, Your Honor. Although they are not illegal per se when used in the entire scheme of things, we thought that they were manipulative, Your Honor.

SEN. JAWORSKI. But would you say that if indeed we put together certain guidelines, it could be a more functional term?

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor. In fact, that is one of the recommendations of the report, Your Honor.

SEN. JAWORSKI. Well, it’s good that you mentioned your recommendation. Can you tell this Court why your recommendations was set aside or what happened to your recommendations?

MR. ALMADRO. They were never acted upon, Your Honor, because as I said, the events overtook the stock exchange and this report was never formally acted upon by the BCEC.

SEN. JAWORSKI. But did you have any early dialogues or meetings stating any direction that was focused towards the recommendations that you represented?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor. We had discussions with Mr. Yulo and some of the members of the BCEC about the recommendations but they were never officially taken up nor acted upon because events overtook the PSE, Your Honor.

SEN. JAWORSKI. Can you honestly say that that’s the only reason – those are the only reasons?

MR. ALMADRO. I do not – I do not…

SEN. JAWORSKI. No, what I mean is, you believe that these recommendations are good for the industry?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. JAWORSKI. But how come nobody seems to listen to your recommendations? Is it the only reason, events?

MR. ALMADRO. I’m sure, Your Honor, if the BCEC were able to handle this properly, then all of these recommendations would have been taken up and proper action would have been done by the Stock Exchange, Your Honor.

SEN. JAWORSKI. Well, and lastly, I was going to ask a similar question asked by Senator Enrile. And this Compliance and Surveillance Group, are they really qualified to monitor all the happenings in the stock market considering that there are so many stocks that are being transacted?

MR. ALMADRO. We tried our best to be able to discharge the function of the group, Your Honor.

SEN. JAWORSKI. Well, thank you, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Thank you very much.

The Honorable Senator-Judge Roco.

SEN. ROCO. Mr. Chief Justice.

Ito panglinaw lang, panglinaw lang. Ano ba ‘yung stock market?

MR. ALMADRO. Ang stock market po, ito po ‘yung lugar kung saan ‘yung mga kumpanya na gustong maging public ay nagpapalista upang puwedeng mag-transaksyon sa kanilang mga shares, puwedeng magbenta at puwede ring bumili kung nakalista na ‘yung kumpanya na ‘yun. Parang merkado po ito. Parang it’s a market place …

SEN. ROCO. Parang palengke.

MR. ALMADRO. … except that the product is shares of stock of publicly listed companies.

SEN. ROCO. So kung umangat ang isang kumpanya, makikinabang ka naman sa kayamanan nila? Ganoon ba?

MR. ALMADRO. Makikinabang dahil kikita po ng dibidendo. Puwede ka rin pong makinabang dahil kung tumaas ang presyo ng share, nabili mo ng mababa, pag ibinenta mo ng mataas, kumita ka ng kaunti.

SEN. ROCO. Kung bumagsak, lugi ka rin?

MR. ALMADRO. Kung bumagsak, lugi ka.

SEN. ROCO. Kaya importante na alam ng lahat kung ano ang transaksiyon? Ganoon ba iyon?

MR. ALMADRO. Opo. Opo, Your Honor.

SEN. ROCO. O, ano naman itong sinasabi mong “insider trading”?

MR. ALMADRO. Iyung “insider trading”, ito po iyung nagbenta ka o bumili ka ng shares ng isang kumpanya dahil may nalalaman ka sa kumpanya na iyon na hindi alam ng publiko.

SEN. ROCO. Ah.

MR. ALMADRO. Dahil kaya ka may alam tungkol sa mga bagay na ito because you are an insider. Kung baga batang klub ka, ‘no? Mayroon kang alam tungkol sa kumpanya pero hindi alam ng iba dahil ikaw ay presidente, corporate secretary, ikaw ay abogado, ikaw ay accountant o kaya ikaw ay controlling na shareholder.

SEN. ROCO. May alam ka na dapat ibigay sa lahat, pero hindi mo sinabi para ikaw lang ang makinabang, ganoon ba?

MR. ALMADRO. Opo, Your Honor.

SEN. ROCO. Masama nga naman ano?

Ngayon, ano naman itong “wash sale”?

MR. ALMADRO. Ito po iyung bentahang moro moro. Nagbenta ako, ako rin ang bumili. ‘Yung nakakakita, naloloko. Akala nila may totoong bentahan, iyun pala wala. So, moro moro.

SEN. ROCO. Napataas ang presyo?

MR. ALMADRO. Opo, Your Honor.

SEN. ROCO. Aba’y so nagbenta ka, nakinabang ka?

MR. ALMADRO. Opo, Your Honor.

SEN. ROCO. Hindi dahil sa negosyo ng korporasyon, kundi dahil nilinlang mo ang tao, ganoon ba?

MR. ALMADRO. Opo, Your Honor.

SEN. ROCO. Aba’y masama nga naman ano?

Eto. Ano naman ang lockup? Aba’y akala ko ang lockup iyung nape preso eh.

MR. ALMADRO. Eto po iyung ibinenta ko sa iyo iyung share, pumayag ka na bilhin, pero pumayag ka rin na hindi mo pa ibebenta sa loob ng ipagpalagay natin, isang buwan, dalawang buwan o tatlong buwan.

SEN. ROCO. Anong masama niyan?

MR. ALMADRO. Ang masama nuon, pagka ginawa ko iyun, mauubos iyong share sa merkado dahil mababawasan iyung available shares for trading. Dahil kung halimbawa ang available shares is 100 million, ibinenta ko sa iyo 50 million, ang sabi ko, “O, ibenta ko sa iyo pero huwag mong galawin iyan sa loob ng dalawang buwan.”

So sa loob ng dalawang buwan, ang ma tre trade na lang ay 50 million shares. So na squeeze mo iyung shares sa merkado.

SEN. ROCO. Para pala kung sa palengke, itinago iyung mga gulay kaya magmahal.

MR. ALMADRO. Parang hoarding.

SEN. ROCO. Nagmahal ang gulay?

MR. ALMADRO. Opo.

SEN. ROCO. Aba’y masama rin nga, ano?

At pag pinagtakpan ang masasamang iyan, iyun ang ipinagbabawal ng batas?

MR. ALMADRO. Opo, Your Honor.

SEN. ROCO. O, iyun lang po. Sapagkat sa palagay ko’y nakatulog iyung nanonood sa iyo.

Maraming salamat.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Honorable Senator Judge Aquino-Oreta.

SEN. AQUINO-ORETA. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.

Attorney Almadro, duon po sa cross examination kahapon, you characterized the meeting with Mr. Perfecto Yasay and Mr. Dante Tan in your presence and that of Mr. Yulo noong November 26, 1999 to be improper. Is it …

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. AQUINO-ORETA. Is that correct?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. AQUINO-ORETA. And despite this, you did not publicly denounce the impropriety committed by Mr. Yasay?

MR. ALMADRO. I did not, Your Honor.

SEN. AQUINO-ORETA. Oh, you did not. And February 14 of this year, you went Or, last year, was it last year, or this year you went to Malacañang?

MR. ALMADRO. Last year, Your Honor.

SEN. AQUINO-ORETA. Last year, you went to Malacañang with Mr. Yulo and can you tell us what transpired? I mean to say, did your testimony yesterday, did you give us your full … what happened, what transpired in Malacañang or would you want to add a little more?

MR. ALMADRO. That is substantially what happened, Your Honor.

SEN. AQUINO-ORETA. All of it?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. AQUINO-ORETA. And in that meeting, did the President instruct you to change your report to favor Mr. Tan?

MR. ALMADRO. No, Your Honor.

SEN. AQUINO-ORETA. He did not?

MR. ALMADRO. He could not have done that because the report was already finalized.

SEN. AQUINO-ORETA. Yes, but he did not ask you in one way or another to please, you know, favor Mr. Tan … Mr. Dante …

MR. ALMADRO. No, he did not.

SEN. AQUINO-ORETA. He did not.

MR. ALMADRO. He did not, Your Honor.

SEN. AQUINO-ORETA. Thank you, Mr. … ah, Atty. Almadro.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Honorable Senator John Osmeña.

SEN. OSMEÑA (J). Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.

Attorney Almadro, in page 2 of your report, you say that the authority of your office is to police and discipline the ranks of the brokers-traders, is that not correct?

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

SEN. OSMENA (J). And in page 3 of your report you state that you received a directive from Director Elizabeth Martin directing you on September 30, 1999, to look into the unusual trading that was taking place with BW and Armstrong shares, is that not correct?

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

SEN. OSMENA (J). Okay, that is correct.

Now, your chart here which is your Exhibit “LLLLLLL-23” shows that there was already some very sharp changes in the prices of shares. In May there was a change of 178 percent , and in June, 107 percent. Now, why did you wait from June until September? Why did you wait for a directive to come to you to look into this since your job was to be a policeman of the Exchange? Why were you sleeping on your job?

MR. ALMADRO. Your Honor, we started investigating in May, Your Honor, not September. The first directive of the SEC came in September. But when they gave us the directive, we were already in the thick of the investigation, Your Honor. We started our investigation in May.

SEN. OSMENA (J). If you started in May, how long did it take you to determine that the price of the share went from 3.95 to 11 in the month of May? One day? One hour? How long did it take you to determine?

MR. ALMADRO. This price shown in the table, Your Honor, is price at the start of the month and at the end of the month.

SEN. OSMENA (J). Well, then therefore at the end of the month you must have known that there was a 178 percent increase, is that not correct?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. OSMENA (J). And you did nothing about it, is that not correct?

MR. ALMADRO. And that is precisely why we conducted the investigation, Your Honor.

SEN. OSMENA (J). Did you make your report? I mean, it doesn’t make too much time to determine the change between 3.95 and 11?.

MR. ALMADRO. We started conducting the investigation.

SEN. OSMENA (J). You started, I heard that. Did you do anything about it?

MR. ALMADRO. We started monitoring the price of BW and looking at the market of BW starting May when we noticed that there was an unusual price and volume movement, Your Honor.

SEN. OSMENA (J). My question is, did you do anything about it?

MR. ALMADRO. That is what we did, Your Honor. And we started looking behind the transactions to find out who were the beneficial owners of the transactions, Your Honor.

SEN. OSMENA (J). And then in June it went from 13.25 to 27.50, you did not do anything about it?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Your time, Your Honor.

MR. ALMADRO. We were already in the thick of the investigation, Your Honor.

SEN. OSMENA (J). I run out of time, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Thank you. The Honorable Senator-Judge Honasan. After that, the …

SEN. HONASAN. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. … the Honorable Senator-Judge Santiago. And then finally, the Honorable Senator-Judge Flavier.

SEN. HONASAN. Atty. Almadro, iyong kaalaman ko po tungkol sa stock market ay halos pareho lang noong mga mamamayan, ‘no, kaya pakiusap lang po.

Noong July 1999 may preliminary report na po kayo?

MR. ALMADRO. May preliminary report po iyong Market Surveillance Department.

SEN. HONASAN. At dito sa preliminary report, parang lumalabas na pinaglalaruan na iyong stock market?

MR. ALMADRO. Iyon po ang sinabi ng Market Surveillance Department.

SEN. HONASAN. Okay. Mayroon bang hakbang na ginawa para pigilin iyong pagbebentahan ng stock sa BW para pigilin iyong di-pangkaraniwan na pagtaas n’ung presyo?

MR. ALMADRO. Hindi naman po natin mapipigil ang trading sa stock market kasi po sa stock market mayroon kaming tinatawag na parang price limits ano, 50 percent up at saka 40 percent down. Kapag ang trading ay lumampas for that day sa 50 percent na price limit, the trading is frozen at that point. Pag kinabukasan tatanungin ng kumpanya kung may alam sila kung bakit tumaas ng ganoon iyong presyo. So, hangga’t hindi naman po nagbi-breach, hindi siya lumalampas doon sa limits na iyon, hindi ho natin puwedeng ipatigil ang trading of stocks.

SEN. HONASAN. Okay. Salamat po. May kapangyarihan ba, Atty. Almadro, iyong Philippine Stock Exchange na suspindihin o pigilin iyong trading? Iyon ang …

MR. ALMADRO. Mayroon po.

SEN. HONASAN. … para mapigilan iyong epekto nito doon sa mga in good faith na publiko?

MR. ALMADRO. Mayroon po.

SEN. HONASAN. So, mayroon po. Pero ginawa ho ba ito?

MR. ALMADRO. Dito po sa BW, I can recall that there were at least five trading halts on June 23, July 15, July 19, August 9, September 27 and October 14, Your Honor.

SEN. HONASAN. Okay. Salamat po. Huling katanungan po.

Noong magkita kayo ni Chairman Yasay, binanggit ninyo ba sa kanya na parang nagpahiwatig iyong Presidente na parang nasuhulan na siya, ni Mr. Dante Tan, noong magkita-kita kayo?

MR. ALMADRO. Kasi po itong nangyari po kay Pangulong Estrada, this happened in February po.

SEN. HONASAN. Okay.

MR. ALMADRO. Noong huli kaming nagkita ni Chairman Yasay when I was yet conducting the investigation this was still on November 26, 1999.

SEN. HONASAN. Maraming salamat po. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Honorable Senator Judge Miriam Defensor Santiago.

SEN. DEFENSOR SANTIAGO. Mr. Witness, your investigation report is highly extraordinary for its sheer, size and volume especially since it is accompanied by equally voluminous folders of exhibits and annexes. Still for clarification, I just want to repeat this issue. For the reasons you’ve already stated, the report has not been officially approved or accepted by the Philippine Stock Exchange, isn’t that so?

MR. ALMADRO. That is correct, Your Honor.

SEN. DEFENSOR SANTIAGO. Thank you. And you mentioned during your testimony that you submitted a copy of this report to then SEC Chairman Yasay. Has the SEC accepted or approved this report?

MR. ALMADRO. I do not know, Your Honor.

SEN. DEFENSOR SANTIAGO. You wouldn’t know. Therefore, the fact is, that this report notwithstanding its size, volume and possibly its inherent merits has not been accepted or approved either by the government agency, SEC or by the Philippine Stock Exchange.

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. DEFENSOR SANTIAGO. Thank you.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. What do you mean by “yes?”

SEN. DEFENSOR SANTIAGO. Has not been.

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, it has not been accepted officially and has not been acted upon officially by both the Philippine Stock Exchange and the Securities and Exchange Commission, Your Honor.

SEN. DEFENSOR SANTIAGO. Senator Tatad who is the Chairman of the Senate Compliance and Security Group with respect to grammar insists that the answer should be “No, it was not.”

I will now go on to another point. You said that when you had a meeting in Malacañang with the President, the President claimed that Dante Tan was presenting the argument that he was not the manipulator but, in fact, the victim of these incidents. Did you make any effort to find out if Mr. Tan’s claim was true that he lost millions, if not, billions of pesos? Did your group make any effort to conduct an investigation on the claim of Mr. Tan, considering that it was no less than the President of the country who was relaying this claim that Mr. Tan had lost millions, possibly billions on the stock exchange?

MR. ALMADRO. We had already completed the investigation by then, Your Honor.

SEN. DEFENSOR SANTIAGO. By that time?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. DEFENSOR SANTIAGO. And after you had completed the investigation and received this message or this statement from the President, you no longer took any initiative to investigate what is claimed to be another anomaly in the stock exchange?

MR. ALMADRO. No, Your Honor.

SEN. DEFENSOR SANTIAGO. No, you did not. At the time you finalized your report, what was the price of BW shares?

MR. ALMADRO. February 11, 2000, I am not sure, Your Honor, but I think it was trading around perhaps between P10 and P20, Your Honor. I am not very sure.

SEN. DEFENSOR SANTIAGO. Did you investigate… After the report had been finalized and released, did you investigate or attempt to find out if Mr. Tan kept buying BW shares after the price was already falling down?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. DEFENSOR SANTIAGO. And what was the result of your investigation?

MR. ALMADRO. He continued buying shares but these were wash sale transactions.

SEN. DEFENSOR SANTIAGO. That is your finding, of course.

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. DEFENSOR SANTIAGO. It has not been officially accepted by any superior agency whether public or private.

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. DEFENSOR SANTIAGO. So please, just for emphasis. Mr. Tan kept buying shares even after the prices had plummeted in the stock exchange.

MR. ALMADRO. Your Honor, he kept buying but this cannot be considered real purchases.

SEN. DEFENSOR SANTIAGO. In your view.

MR. ALMADRO. Because these were wash sales, Your Honor.

SEN. DEFENSOR SANTIAGO. As expressed in your report that has not been accepted by the PSE by the Philippine Stock Exhange.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Your time, Your Honor, is over.

SEN. DEFENSOR SANTIAGO. Yes, Mr. Chief Justice. I was just finishing the sentence. Thank you.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Honorable Senator Judge Juan Flavier. And after that, the Senate President.

SEN. FLAVIER. Mr. Chief Justice, just a few small questions to complete my limited knowledge.

You mentioned that your recommendations were not acted upon because events overtook the happenings, is that a correct understanding?

MR. ALMADRO. Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. FLAVIER. And this would refer to the fact that you resigned from the Surveillance Committee?

MR. ALMADRO. We resigned and thereafter the SEC stripped the PSE off its self regulatory organization status.

SEN. FLAVIER. I see. Does it also refer to the fact that there was a change of leadership in the PSE?

MR. ALMADRO. The change in leadership came subsequently but that was not the proximate cause of why they were not able to act on our report, Your Honor.

SEN. FLAVIER. But wouldn’t the institution have some memory of sorts because nakakapanghinayang na mayroon kayong mga recommendations that are supposed to improve the system and have not been acted upon. Would you elaborate on that?

MR. ALMADRO. I would not be able to know at this point, Your Honor, whether, in fact, they acted upon some of the recommendations notwithstanding the fact that they did not act on this report officially. They might have taken this into consideration, Your Honor, but…

SEN. FLAVIER. Finally, did anybody force you to implicate Dante Tan?

MR. ALMADRO. Nobody, Your Honor.

SEN. FLAVIER. Thank you.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair now recognizes the Honorable Senator-Judge Sotto.

SEN. SOTTO. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice. Atty. Almadro, are you the same Almadro who ran for a congressional seat in Biliran against Congressman Gerry Espina?

MR. ALMADRO. In 1998, yes, Your Honor.

SEN. SOTTO. Ah, I see. Okay. I would just like to be clarified about the impression that you got on the President’s sign. Iyong pagkakasenyas niya, pagsabi niya nung — exact words na sinabi n’yo, eh.

MR. ALMADRO. Ang…

SEN. SOTTO. Sabi ni Dante Tan…

MR. ALMADRO. … sabi ni Dante Tan…

SEN. SOTTO. … inayos na niya si Yasay.

MR. ALMADRO. Iyang si Yasay, inayos na niya iyan.

SEN. SOTTO. Then he raised his hand with the… itong hintuturo at saka iyong hinlalaki magkasama at nakataas iyong mga daliri?

MR. ALMADRO. Opo, Your Honor.

SEN. SOTTO. Ang impression — ano po ang impression na nakuha ninyo?

MR. ALMADRO. Ang impression na nakuha ko is sinasabi niya na sinuhulan ni Dante Tan si Chairman Yasay.

SEN. SOTTO. Because itong sign na ito sa inyo ay…

MR. ALMADRO. Pera.

SEN. SOTTO. … pera?

MR. ALMADRO. Opo.

SEN. SOTTO. Are you not involved in any sports activities, Mr. Almadro, Atty. Almadro?

MR. ALMADRO. I play golf every once in a while, I jog every once in a while also.

SEN. SOTTO. So, you would not have thought otherwise like — I would like to look at your frame of mind because in the international sign language, in sports, in practical shooting, in scuba diving, and in some military operations or moves, this sign means “Okay.” Pag ginanyan sa baba, iyan ang pera, hindi ba? Pag dito, could be “okay”.

MR. ALMADRO. Hindi ko po alam, pero po iyong sinabi po ni President Estrada in the context of what he said…

SEN. SOTTO. Inayos na.

MR. ALMADRO. … at saka iyong sign niya ay maliwanag po na ang ibig niyang sabihin ay sinuhulan diumano ni Dante Tan si Chairman Yasay.

SEN. SOTTO. But, of course, that is your impression. He did not say anything that would say except that sign that is an international sign or a sports sign or a military sign, “Okay”.

MR. ALMADRO. Iyon pong sinabi niya na inayos na si Yasay, tapos may kasamang ganoon…

SEN. SOTTO. The impression you got.

MR. ALMADRO. Pagka-pinagsama n’yo po iyong “inayos” at saka may pera ay isa lang po ang ibig sabihin noon. Inayos dahil may pera. Ibig sabihin, sinuhulan po.

SEN. SOTTO. Pero wala siyang sinabing “pera”?

MR. ALMADRO. Wala po.

SEN. SOTTO. Sinabi niya “Inayos na”?

MR. ALMADRO. Hindi na po kailangang sabihin dahil minuwestra na po niya na may pera.

SEN. SOTTO. In other words, that is your impression?

MR. ALMADRO. Opo.

`SEN. SOTTO. But there could be other impressions that could mean na in-okay na, inayos na? Sa ibang tao, like most of the sportsmen or people in the military kasi sa kanila, pag binaba mo rito, iyan ang pera, at pag ganito, “okay”.

MR. ALMADRO. Hindi po.

SEN. SOTTO. Could that be possible, could that be possible? I am not saying that that is your frame of mind, that is your impression.

MR. ALMADRO. Well, that could be possible, but it is all very, very improbable in this particular case, Your Honor.

SEN. SOTTO. Okay. Thank you.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Okay. The Honorable Senator-Judge Cayetano before we will recognize the Senate President.

SEN. CAYETANO. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice. Mr. Almadro, I just want to get your impression. When you went to Malacañang, did you discuss with Mr. Yulo why you were going there?

MR. ALMADRO. Mr. Yulo told me that we were going there because he wanted to show a copy of the report to the President and explain the findings personally as a matter of courtesy before it became public, Your Honor.

SEN. CAYETANO. Sinabi ba ni Mr. Yulo sa iyo na may tumawag sa kanya sa Malacañang or was this a voluntary trip by Mr. Yulo and you to Malacañang?

MR. ALMADRO. Hindi ko po alam kung may tumawag sa kanya o voluntary po na pumunta siya basta iyon po ang sinabi niya sa akin na dahilan kung bakit kami pupunta sa Malacañang.

SEN. CAYETANO. Iyong conversation n’yo ay natanong na ni Sen. Sotto pero ang akin pong gustong malaman ay ano ho ang impression n’yo ayon sa mga pagkatanong ni Pangulo lalo na nga iyong senyas na sinabi n’yong ganito at naayos na si Yasay? Ano ang impression n’yo? Hindi iyong pagbibigay ng pera. Ano ang impression, kung mayroon kayo, na ibinibigay ng Pangulo sa inyo?

MR. ALMADRO. Ako’y nagulat. Hindi ko inaakala na ang isang Pangulo ng bansa ay magsasalita at magmu muwestra ng ganoong klase. Dahil sinasabi niya na isang kaibigan niya ay sinuhulan ng isang opisyal ng gobyerno at wala siyang ginawa upang ito’y pigilin, upang usigin kung sino man ang may kasalanan dahil ito po’y bribery po.

SEN. CAYETANO. Nagka impression ka ba dahil doon, ‘no?

MR. ALMADRO. Iyon po.

SEN. CAYETANO. No, no, hindi. Iyon ang impression mo?

MR. ALMADRO. Opo.

SEN. CAYETANO. Ang sunod na tanong ko. Nagka impression ka ba na pinagtatakpan niya si Dante Tan? Kung may impression ka?

MR. ALMADRO. Hindi naman po niya puwedeng pagtakpan na dahil mayroon na po kaming report. Ang impression ko po ay dinidipensahan niya si Dante Tan.

SEN. CAYETANO. Okay. Doon sa mga report ninyo, mayroon akong napansin na ano ang ibig sabihin noong “not covered by audit”?

MR. ALMADRO. Hindi po kasama sa tiningnan na mga libro.

SEN. CAYETANO. Bakit ganoon? Bilang isang eksperto sa Compliance and Surveillance na grupo, ‘no, ng PSE, bakit masasabi mong ang isang mga transaksyon ay hindi covered ng audit? Ano’ng mayroon…

MR. ALMADRO. Kung wala pong unusual na mga pangyayari at wala pong mga di pangkaraniwan na pangyayari na mga transaksyon, hindi na po kailangang oditin (audit).

SEN. CAYETANO. Kasi po napansin ko iyong transaksyon na CYC na ako po iyon ay nakalagay “not covered by audit.”

Maraming salamat po.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Thank you.

The Honorable Senate President.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. Mr. Almadro, a person who is not connected with the stock exchange traders, could he be liable for insider trading?

MR. ALMADRO. Opo.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. In the transactions entered into by Senator Cayetano, do you find anything unusual or wrong in those transactions?

MR. ALMADRO. Iyon pong transaksyon na sinasabi ni Senator Cayetano, hindi po namin iyan inimbestigahan dahil wala naman pong indikasyon na may anomalya po rito.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. While you were still with the Compliance and Surveillance Group of the PSE or after you had tendered your resignation from it, were you ever engaged by Mr. Dante Tan to help him out in any capacity?

MR. ALMADRO. Hindi po.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. Not as a lawyer?

MR. ALMADRO. Hindi po.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. So what was said over the television and radio this morning that you were paid 1.5 million, is that true?

MR. ALMADRO. Hindi po.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. Thank you, Mr. Almadro.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Majority Leader.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. Before the Majority Leader, Mr. Chief Justice, …

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes, the Honorable Senate President.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. May I just announce that our caucus will be at the Senate Lounge immediately as we take our break.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. Mr. Chief Justice, I am told that we may need a full hour to deliberate. So I move that we suspend for one hour.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. So until 5:18. Motion is approved.

Excuse me. For a while. No more questions on the witness?

VOICES. No more.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. There being none, the witness may now be excused.

THE TRIAL WAS SUSPENDED AT 4:19 P.M.

THE TRIAL WAS RESUMED AT 5:26 P.M.

THE SERGEANT-AT-ARMS. Please all rise for the entrance of the Honorable Senate President-Judge Aquilino Q. Pimentel, Jr., and the Honorable Presiding Officer, Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Trial is now resumed. Next witness for the prosecution.

The Honorable Senator Drilon.

SEN. DRILON. Before we call the next witness, Chief, may I be authorized on a question of collective privilege and to ask this Court, through the Presiding Officer, that an order be issued requiring Atty. Sigfrid Fortun, Raymond Fortun, and Alfredo Villamor to show cause why they should not be punished for contempt. And after due hearing, that these respondents be meted out the appropriate penalty that this Court may find proper.

If Your Honors please, it will be recalled that on Monday, January 8, Atty. Fortun asked the witness Rodenas to identify Delia Rajas in the gallery. There was a representation that Delia Rajas was in the gallery. We all witnessed the incident and we all were confronted with the situation where, indeed, Delia Rajas was not in the audience. We submit, Your Honor, that the respondents’ conduct is violative of the code of professional responsibility particularly Canon 10 which requires that a lawyer – or provides that a lawyer owes candor, fairness and good faith to the Court and that the lawyer should volunteer to the Court any development of the case and thus help in the prompt disposition and avoid the time of the Court from being needlessly wasted.

Under our Code of Professional Ethics, a lawyer should not do any falsehood nor consent to the doing of any in court nor shall he mislead or allow the court to be misled by any artifice. He must conduct himself in all good fidelity and should not conceal the truth from the court, not to mislead the court no matter how demanding the duties of his client may be. The respondents, Your Honor, miserably failed in these duties. The respondents, in a malicious manner and with such – and in such conduct utterly lacking in candor, conspired to mislead and they, indeed, misled this honorable Tribunal during the January 8, 2001 impeachment trial into conducting a futile and pointless exercise.

We are submitting this motion in writing, Your Honor, and I have been joined by Senator Judge Renato Cayetano and Rodolfo Biazon in this motion.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. So, you have a written motion?

SEN. DRILON. We will submit our written motion within the next…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. In which case, we have to defer action on the motion…

SEN. DRILON. Yes.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. …until the filing of the formal charge or rather motion to cite them in contempt.

SEN. DRILON. Yes, in fact, we do realize that they must be given an opportunity to reply, Your Honor. We will be submitting this immediately.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Honorable Senator Judge Enrile.

SEN. ENRILE. Mr. Chief Justice, parliamentary inquiry.

Is a motion of this nature subject to a vote by this Chamber?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Action on the motion has been deferred until the filing of the formal motion to cite the Fortuns in contempt.

SEN. ENRILE. No, I just want to anticipate the question whether a motion like this being a motion, and I take it that the Rules of the Senate will apply on this motion, whether it is subject to a vote.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. It would be subject to a vote.

SEN. ENRILE. Thank you.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Even under the Rules of Court, it would be subject to a vote because this partakes of the nature of a collegial court.

The Honorable Senator Coseteng.

SEN. COSETENG. Mr. Chief Justice, just a parliamentary inquiry. May I know if an officer of the court is also liable for contempt if he insinuates that a Judge or a Senator Judge is not being truthful? I’m referring to the incident yesterday.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Assuming that fact to be true, then the officer of the court, meaning a lawyer both for prosecution or the defense may be held also in contempt. But there should be a formal motion also to that effect to give the respondent or the prospective respondent an opportunity to answer the motion.

SEN. COSETENG. If that is the situation, Mr. Chief Justice, then may I make the necessary motion as well. Because yesterday’s incident also goes to show that an officer of the court will not think twice in lying or in raising his voice to insinuate and insist even after the full explanation has been given that a member of the or a Senator Judge is not telling the truth.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes, Your Honor, that would be reserved for Your Honor. The motion may be filed at any appropriate time and then these motions, meaning the motions to be filed by the Honorable Senator Judge Drilon and Senator Judge Cayetano on the one hand and that of the Honorable Senator Judge Coseteng on the other, should be filed with the Secretary. And the Secretary shall distribute copies of these to all the Members of the Court. And, of course, copies of these should be furnished the prospective respondents, and we will have to act on this probably tomorrow afternoon if it is filed in the morning, not acting on the motion itself but the ruling will be to give the respondents enough time to answer thereto and set thereafter the hearing on the motion.

The Honorable Senator John Osmeña.

SEN. OSMEÑA (J). Mr. Chief Justice, just to refresh my memory, what was the name of the cook of Mrs. Ang who came out from the gallery, was it not Delia Rajas?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Delia Rajas.

SEN. OSMENA (J). Well… she was here yesterday. Thank you, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Make it of record.

The Majority Leader.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. Mr. Chief Justice, the prosecution is now prepared to present its next witness, Jose Luis Yulo.

Prosecutor Oscar Rodriguez will be the principal counsel assisted by examining counsel assisted by Marie Yuviengco. For the defense, Atty. Raul Daza and Atty. Jose Flaminiano will handle the witness.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. May I have again the name of the principal examining counsel.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. Prosecutor Oscar Rodriguez assisted by examining counsel, assisted by Marie Yuviengco.

For the defense, Raul Daza and… Atty. Raul Daza and Atty. Jose Flaminiano will handle the witness.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. May I have again the name of the principal examining counsel?

THE MAJORITY LEADER. Prosecutor Oscar Rodriguez, assisted by Atty. Marie Yuviengco.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yuviengco. Okay. Yes, what’s the pleasure of the Honorable Senator Judge Coseteng?

SEN. COSETENG. With the permission of the Chief Justice and the Court, may I make the manifestation that yesterday, this was the same Mr. Yulo that was present during the testimony while Mr. Almadro was testifying. And that we have in our possession now the tapes taken by the video camera operators that he, in fact, was present in the hall while Mr. Almadro was giving his testimony.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Where is the tape, Your Honor?

SEN. COSETENG. May I just ask for a few seconds to get it, Mr. Chief Justice?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yeah. If the tape is available, the Chair would request that it be placed under the custody of the Senate President.

SEN. COSETENG. Yes, Mr. Chief Justice. They went to the office upstairs to pick it up. Thank you.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Thank you.

REP. GONZALEZ. Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Honorable Prosecutor Raul Gonzalez.

REP. GONZALEZ. As lead prosecutor for Article III, I confirm the designation of Prosecutor Oscar Rodriguez to present this witness. But…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. And?

REP. GONZALEZ. And Atty. Marie Yuviengco as…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. … the assisting…

REP. GONZALEZ. … assisting prosecutor, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Thank you.

REP. GONZALEZ. Mr. Chief Justice, in connection with the manifestation of the distinguished Senator Judge, could the prosecution also be given a chance to view this tape?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. That can be viewed later.

REP. GONZALEZ. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Probably when the formal motion for … to cite the person concerned in contempt may be taken into account.

Who is the next witness, Prosecutor Rodriguez?

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Your Honor, we are calling on our next witness, Mr. Jose Luis “Nonoy” Yulo.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Call the witness. Where is he?

MR. FLAMINIANO. Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes, Atty. Flaminiano?

MR. FLAMINIANO. May we respectfully move for the exclusion of other prosecution witnesses. I understand Mr. Yasay is somewhere in the vicinity of this Session Hall.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. All other witnesses for the prosecution called to testify yesterday or today shall be excluded and they should be brought to the holding room.

REP. GONZALEZ. Mr. Chief Justice, all the witnesses are in the holding room.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. And the Sergeant at Arms is directed to find out if in the holding room, you have the television showing the… covering the trial or any other equipment or gadget which should enable those in the holding room to hear the proceedings. They should be completely excluded.

The Honorable Senator Coseteng.

SEN. COSETENG. Mr. Chief Justice, for the record, the tape is already here and I’d like to present it.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Then, may we request that let me see Atty. Villarama, would you kindly get it from the Honorable Coseteng for delivery to the Senate President for safekeeping.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. Mr. Chief Justice, may we request that the tape be turned over to the Secretary of the Senate.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The tape should be turned over to the Secretary then.

And before the witness is called for his oath, the Senate President would like to make some announcements as to the matters taken up during the break.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. Mr. Chief Justice, Members of the Court, an issue was raised by Senator Judge Biazon early at the start of the trial today, complaining that certain counsel and witnesses have been participating in talk shows and public forums, discussing the merits of the impeachment case. We would like, therefore, to issue an advisory to all counsels, both of the prosecution and of the defense, as well as to all witnesses, either already testifying or will be testifying in this impeachment trial to refrain from discussing the merits of the impeachment case before any public forum in accordance with the mid trial conference agreement that was reached by counsel of both parties on January 8 of the year 2001 at the Office of the Senate President.

That is the advisory, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Thank you, Your Honor.

Where is the witness now?

Swear in the witness, Mr. Secretary.

THE SECRETARY. Kindly raise your right hand and put your left hand on the Holy Bible and answer me.

You, Jose Luis Yulo, do swear that the evidence you shall give in the case now pending between the Philippines and Joseph Ejercito Estrada, President of the Philippines, shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so, help you God?

MR. YULO. I do.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Take your seat, Mr. Witness.

Prosecutor Rodriguez.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. With the kind permission of the Honorable Chief Justice and the Members of the Impeachment Court.

Mr. Witness, kindly state your name and other personal circumstances.

MR. YULO. I am Jose Luis Yulo, Jr. I am 53 years old, residing at 19 Don Jesus Boulevard. I’m a business executive. And I was formerly the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Philippine Stock Exchange, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. For a start, Mr. Witness. So, what is your educational background?

MR. YULO. I graduated college from the University of the Philippines as an entrance scholar. And I have a master in Business Management from AIM. And I also finished an advanced management course from Standford University in California, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. You said that you were formerly President and Chief Executive Officer of the Philippine Stock Exchange. For what period?

MR. YULO. I had a three year contract, Your Honor, from May of 1997 until April of the year 2000.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Can you tell us what other positions did you hold in conjunction with your being President and Chief Executive Officer of the Philippine Stock Exchange?

MR. YULO. There were several other subsidiaries and organizations, Your Honor that was that I was also an officer of. To summarize, I was the Chairman of the Security Clearing Corporation of the Philippines. I was also Vice Chairman and, eventually, Chairman of the Philippine Central Depository. I was also Chairman of the Philippine Stock Exchange Foundation and Chairman of the Capital Market Development Center, Inc. I also represented the Philippine Stock Exchange in the International Federation of Stock Exchanges based in Paris. And I also became the Chairman of the General Assembly of the East Asia Oceania Stock Exchange Federation in 1999. And also, in 1998, I was appointed by President Estrada as the Philippine business representative to the APEC Business Advisory Council, Mr. Chairman, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Thank you.

Mr. Chief Justice and Honorable Senator Judges. We are offering the testimony of this witness to prove:

Number one, that during the incumbency of this witness as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Philippine Stock Exchange, its Compliance and Surveillance Group or CSG conducted an investigation in the price manipulation and insider trading by Dante Tan and his associates regarding the BW Resources Corporation, one of the listed companies in the Philippine Stock Exchange.

Number two, that while the said investigation was ongoing, President Joseph Ejercito Estrada called the witness several times for the purpose of intervening in an independent investigation by the Philippine Stock Exchange, trying to influence the outcome thereof by keeping on reminding the witness that Mr. Dante Tan is a good friend who has helped him since he was a senator.

Number three, that after the conclusion of the said investigation by the Philippine Stock Exchange, a copy of the final report entitled, “Investigation Report on the BW Resources, Price Manipulation Insider Trading” was given to President Joseph Ejercito Estrada in Malacañang on February 14, 2000 by the witness, Mr. Yulo in the company of Ruben Almadro, then Vice President of the Philippine Stock Exchange and head of its Compliance and Surveillance Group which conducted the investigation; and that, in said meeting, the President tried anew to defend Dante Tan, showed displeasure and anger against then SEC Chairman Perfecto Yasay, Jr., by describing him to be, and I quote, “Hindi lalaking kausap at walanghiya” and even intimating that Yasay had been paid by Dante Tan to clear the latter.

May I now proceed, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. You may now proceed.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Witness, you stated that you used to be the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Philippine Stock Exchange, what is this Philippine Stock Exchange about?

MR. YULO. The Philippine Stock Exchange is similar to other stock exchanges in other country, Your Honor. It is a market for the trading, buying and selling, in effect, of equity shares and fixed income instruments like bonds and warrants of companies that are listed therein. It is, therefore, a place where companies can take money from the investing public for their capital requirements, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. As President and Chief Executive Officer of the Philippine Stock Exchange at that time, can you tell us what were your functions and responsibilities?

MR. YULO. Well, the functions of a President or Chief Executive Officer of an Exchange among others, Your Honor, is:

No. 1. You are the spokesman of the Exchange

No. 2. You are in charge of managing the personnel and the resources of the Exchange.

You are also in charge of executing policy directions and rules of the Exchange, and this was very unique to exchanges, Your Honor, under the Philippine Stock Exchange.

The President is also in charge of ensuring that all the personnel of the Exchange can perform their regulatory function in an independent manner.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. You mentioned likewise earlier that you held other positions in conjunction with your being President and Chief Executive Officer of the Philippine Stock Exchange with the following subsidiaries:

1. Securities Clearing Corporation. Do you remember having said that?

MR. YULO. Yes. Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Can you tell us in brief what is this Securities Clearing Corporation about?

MR. YULO. Well, the Securities Clearing Corporation, Your Honor, is a subsidiary of the Philippine Stock Exchange. It is 51 percent owned by the Exchange and the other owners are the clearing banks: Equiptable Bank and RCBC, who are also owners thereof, and Citibank is also an owner. The function of the clearing house is to act like a traffic regulator before cash and/or equity shares can exchange ownership to ensure that these exchanges are done on what we call DVP or a delivery versus payment or in Tagalog “kaliwaan”, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What about this Philippine Central Depository where you were a chairman?

MR. YULO. The Philippine Central Depository, as the name says, is a depository of all the equity shares that are actually traded in the Philippine Stock Exchange that have been demobilized, meaning, that the shares are no longer in paper certificates but are now in the computer form. It’s entered in the computer forms and the names of the participants thereto, i.e. brokers, and therefore the buying and selling and transferring of ownership of the shares are therefore done on a debit-credit basis on a computer form, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ito naman pong Capital Market Development Center, Incorporated na kung saan naging chairman din kayo, ano ho ba ito?

MR. FLAMINIANO. We have to object to this question, Your Honor, because we see no materiality to this question.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Preliminary, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Presiding Officer sees it merely as to qualify the witness on his knowledge about the stock market and any matter related thereto.

MR. FLAMINIANO. We submit, Mr. Chief Justice. We submit, sir.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The witness may answer.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ito hong Capital Marketing Development Center, Inc. …

MR. YULO. The Capital Market Development Center, Inc. is a research institution, Your Honor, that was set up in the later part of, I think, 1999 as a policy study group, Your Honor. And the members thereof are the Financial Executives of the Philippines, the Bankers Association of the Philippines and the Investment Houses Association of the Philippines. In effect, all the participants in the financial markets of the Philippines are part thereof, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Nasabi rin ho ninyo na kayo’y naging representante ng Philippine Stock Exchange sa International Federation of Stock Exchanges in Paris.

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ano ho ba ang naging gawain ninyo doon bilang representante ng ating bansa?

MR. FLAMINIANO. Immaterial, Mr. Chief Justice.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. With the same reason, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. All right. I think already answered.

MR. YULO. The International Federation of Stock Exchanges or in French it’s called the FIBV, Federacion Internationale de Bourse des Valeurs is an international organization of the world’s better known stock exhanges, Your Honor. At that time, there were about 51 members of stock exchanges worldwide and to qualify, you must have the proper computerized systems, the proper rules and regulations, you must be a self regulating organization and the country must have also acceptable rules and regulations and an acceptable Securities and Exchange Commission, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Nasabi rin ho ninyo na kayo’y na appoint ng ating mahal na Presidente nuong 1998, sa Philippine Business to APEC Business. Ano ho ba iyan?

MR. YULO. There were three ho. Ganito ho iyun. Sa APEC economic community po, the governments are represented there, ‘no, the heads of State and the ministers of Finance and Trade.

On the business side, the private sector side, each country of APEC, member of APEC, is alloted three business representatives to be member of the APEC Business Advisory Council or ABAC or A-B-A-C. Doon ho sa ABAC na iyon, ang pinag u usapan ay all the businessmen of the member economies get together at least four times a year to discuss policy matters on the integration of the economies of APEC. And these decisions or agreements are then forwarded to heads of State for the governments then to discuss and, therefore, if policy matters will be issued, it can be issued. And the members of ABAC would report directly to the heads of State, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Nasabi ho ninyo na kayo ay Presidente at Chief Executive Officer ng PSE. Sino ho ang miyembro ng PSE.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Immaterial, Mr. Chief Justice.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Preliminary again, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. There is …

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. You are referring to the members now or during his time?

MR. RODRIGUEZ. Members during his time, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. And what would be the purpose of the question?

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Just to …

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. To further qualify him?

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Inform and further qualify, Your Honor, preparatory to my succeeding question with respect to the Philippine Stock Exchange.

MR. FLAMINIANO. From the answers given by the witness, he is overqualified as an expert on stock trading. He is an international figure in the field of stock trading.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. I think you can end the preliminaries and you can start now the main purpose of the presentation of this witness.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What is the relation of the Philippine Stock Exchange with the Securities and Exchange Commission, if any?

MR. YULO. Well, the Philippine Stock Exchange is a private organization, as it is in most APEC countries. However, the Securities and Exchange Commission is a government regulatory body that supervises all the operations of the stock exchange, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Now, the Philippine Stock Exchange, is it a private or a public entity?

MR. YULO. Well, the Philippine Stock Exchange is privately organized but it has quasi public interest, Your Honor, and this is the situation for all stock exchanges worldwide. It is a quasi public entity although they are mostly private, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Why do you say that it has a quasi public interest.

MR. YULO. Well, because the equity stock that is invested therein is open to the investing public. So anybody the general public whether you are poor, medium class or high class or international, you are allowed to buy and sell shares thereafter, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Do I understand that the Philippine Stock Exchange is composed of member-brokers?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor, who are also owners of the Exchange.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. I see. And you made mention earlier that there are listed companies in the Philippine Stock Exchange, is that correct?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Now, in 1997 up to the year 2000 when you were President and Chief Executive Officer of the PSE, can you recall some of these listed companies with the Philippine Stock Exchange?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Can you name some?

MR. YULO. They are all in the papers everyday, Your Honor, Metrobank, Equitable Bank, BPI, SM, BW.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Can you tell us in brief how the Philippine Stock Exchange operate, manage and control?

MR. FLAMINIANO. Immaterial, Mr. Chief Justice.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Very material, Your Honor.

SEN. ENRILE. Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. With the permission of the gentlemen, the Honorable Senator-Judge Enrile is recognized.

SEN. ENRILE. Mr. Chief Justice, this is House of Congress. We take judicial notice of all of these things. We write the laws that created all of these. We know this. These are no longer subject to proof. Why don’t we just go direct to the point so that we can finish this case? THE PRESIDING OFFICER. As a matter of fact, these points could have been the subject of stipulation.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. I will now go direct to the point, Your Honor. In fact, that question was going into that point.

Do you know this CSGS? What is this?

MR. FLAMINIANO. Already answered. The witness says it is the surveillance group of the PSE.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Compliance and Surveillance Group.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Compliance and Surveillance Group of the PSE.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Can you tell us what are the functions of the Compliance and Surveillance Group?

MR. YULO. There were three departments under that group, Your Honor. The first department is called the Market Surveillance Department. The second is called the Special Investigation Department. And the third is called the Compliance Audit Department, Your Honor.

And so with the name, what they really do is number one, they monitor and survey the prices of stocks and trading activities on a daily basis. They also perform a regular annual audit. And they also do special investigations and special audits, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Who was at that time the head of the Compliance and Surveillance group, if you know?

MR. YULO. Atty. Ruben Almadro, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Now, did you come to know if the BW Resources Corporation was one of the listed companies with the PSE at that time?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Now, if you know, can you tell us some of the stockholders of the BW Resources Corporation?

MR. YULO. I am not privy to all the details of it, Your Honor. But I knew , as everybody else knew that one of the main shareholders aside from the President was Dante Tan, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Had there been an instance or occasion when your attention as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Philippine Stock Exchange was called regarding the BW Resources Corporation?

MR. FLAMINIANO. Objection for lack of basis, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Overruled. Witness may answer.

MR. YULO. At the later part of 1999, sometime in July, and then later, I was informed by both Atty. Almadro and also of the Securities and Exchange Commission also, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What were you informed about BW Resources Corporation by Atty. Almadro?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor, that they were doing an investigation of BW.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Regarding what?

MR. YULO. Well, they were trying to find out– well, because at that time the prices of BW were fluctuating very widely so it was quite abnormal, so they were trying to find out whether the fluctuation of prices was caused by normal market forces or whether it was done because of insider trading and/or price manipulation and to find out the causes thereof, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Motion to strike, Mr. Chief Justice, for being hearsay.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. He was the President and Chief Executive Officer …

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. There was already an answer given. You’re asking to strike out the answer on the ground that it is hearsay?

MR. FLAMINIANO. Yes, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion is denied. He was talking to Almadro.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Now, as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Philippine Stock Exchange, do you have any control, any supervisory function over the CSG?

MR. YULO. I had direct control, Your Honor, because the CSG reported directly to me and per the by laws of the exchange all their reports should first be indorsed to me for my action. And I also had a veto power on the report and I could also send it back to the CSG for them to redo their work, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What about in connection with certain ongoing investigations, if any, are you given the necessary information in the course of the investigation?

MR. YULO. By the rules of the Exchange.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Leading, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. What is the objection?

MR. FLAMINIANO. Leading, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Sustained.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. We submit, Your Honor.

Now, as President, the Chief Executive Officer of the Philippine Stock Exchange, and while the investigation was ongoing, being conducted by the Compliance and Surveillance Group headed by Atty. Ruben Almadro in connection with the BW Resources Corporation, did you have any chance to receive calls or talk with any person, government official or persons in the corporate world regarding this investigation?

MR. FLAMINIANO. Very leading, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Witness may answer.

MR. YULO. I did talk to several government officials, Your Honor, I did get telephone calls, and I met personally several times with Chairman Perfecto Yasay at the Securities and Exchange Commission. I also had a meeting with the Central Bank Governor, Rafael Buenaventura about BW. I also met with the former Department of Finance Secretary, Edgardo Espiritu. And I also met with the new Secretary of Finance, Jose Pardo. And I also talked with the new BIR Commissioner, Dakila Fonacier on matters related to BW, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. You made mention that you received calls from among others, Mr. Yasay. Who is this Mr. Yasay?

MR. YULO. He was the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission at that time, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. The same Perfecto Yasay, Jr.?

MR. YULO. Yes.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Now, you mentioned that you received calls, so, do you recall when did you receive calls from Mr. Yasay in connection with this BW Resources Corporation investigations?

MR. YULO. In connection with BW, Your Honor, I received several calls because he wanted to meet and we ended up meeting, to my recollection about four times, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Can you tell us when was the first time?

MR. YULO. Well, the first time was when the prices of BW were swinging wildly and the exchange was in danger of some brokers not being able to come up with the cash to settle the trades of BW on settlement day, that was trading day plus four days. I was alarmed by this and so, I first called Chairman Yasay wanting an appointment to discuss the matter with him. And he…

REP. RODRIGUEZ. When was this?

MR. YULO. This was before October 15, because he called me back and he told me to meet October 15 for breakfast at his residence, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And did the meeting take place?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. On October 15, where was the meeting?

MR. YULO. At the residence of Chairman Yasay, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What happened in that meeting with Chairman Yasay?

MR. YULO. Well, I started to inform him of the difficult situation that was going on with the trading of BW shares because the values of trades were very high, that was going from 900 to maybe over a billion pesos a day and they had to be cleared or settled in cash by the fourth day, and the Philippine Stock Exchange did not have that kind of money in the event that some of the brokers could not come up with the cash. And so, I was informing him about this. And so, we were brainstorming on methods and ways by which we can control this, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And what did Mr. Yasay tell you in connection with that information you gave to him?

MR. YULO. Well, among the things we discussed, Your Honor, I told him that in our congresses or meetings with the International Federation of Stock Exchanges, we do benchmark with each other and compare different rules. And I said that it has come to my attention that the trading bandwidth of the Philippine Stock Exchange seems to be the widest bandwidth among other exchanges because our bandwidth was then a 50 percent uptick and a 40 percent downtick whereas other exchanges were averaged from 20 to 10 percent, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Now, you made mention of the trading bandwidth. Can you explain to us what this is all about?

MR. YULO. It is like a price freeze or a check valve, Your Honor. What it really means is that — Can I give an example?

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Yes.

MR. YULO. If, for example, the price of a stock closed yesterday at one peso and then, today, therefore, that stock will be allowed to trade and its prices to fluctuate up to a maximum of 50 percent up, meaning up to P1.50 or down not more than 40 percent which is P0.60 on a down. Whenever it crosses that check valve, then it will necessitate an action from the Exchange, basically two things: Number one, it will require that we now demand from the listed firm an explanation if they know any as to why the price of the stock is moving widely. And if they do not reply, then we will halt trading of the stock. This is done, Your Honor, to protect the interest of the investing public so that no insider trading can happen. So, the wider the fluctuation, the less the need to ask for public disclosures and the less the possibility of a trading halt.

REP . RODRIGUEZ. You made mention that in your dealings with the international people on stock market worldwide that we have the widest trading bandwidth, is that correct?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honsor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Mr. Chief Justice, we have to object to these questions. Apparently, we are trying to be an audience that is being lectured to by the witness on stock trading just in the same manner that Atty. Almadro was practically lecturing to us on the intricacies of stock trading. The offer of testimony refers to the investigation of BW Resources, then the President called Yulo several times, and a copy of the report of the BW investigation was given to the President. These are the offers of testimony, Mr. Chief Justice.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Our question is very material, Your Honor, Mr. Chief Justice.

MR. FLAMINIANO. We are dealing on so many collateral…

REP. RODRIGUEZ. As you will…

MR. FLAMINIANO. … facts, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. I think there is enough discussion on the matter. The prosecution can just proceed to the main objective of the offer. Remember that this witness, up to this time, merely corroborated the testimony of Almadro. So, you can move forward now on the meat of the issue.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Now, was that all that you talked with Mr. Yasay on October 15, 1999?

MR. YULO. Well, the meeting concluded by the Chairman agreeing that the trading bandwidth should be narrowed so that there will be less possibility for the prices to fluctuate, and that was all we discussed, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And you made mention earlier that you had several meetings with Mr. Yasay. When was the second time?

MR. YULO. The second time was on November 3rd, Your Honor, at the EDSA Shangri-La Hotel.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And what happened in that meeting?

MR. YULO. The meeting was called by the Chairman, and I brought along Atty. Almadro because he said he was going to talk about BW.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And you mean to say in that meeting you brought along with you Atty. Ruben Almadro?

MR. YULO. That’s correct, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What was the subject matter of the discussion in that meeting?

MR. YULO. Well, the Chairman, who called for the meeting, informed us that he is being pressured to give a report on BW tomorrow, the next day, November 4, and he was asking us, therefore, to turn over to him or to give him any kind of preliminary report that the PSE has.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Sinabi ho ninyo na sinabi ni Mr. Yasay na may nagpi-pressure sa kanya na mag-submit ng report.

MR. YULO. Sabi ho niya hinihingi na raw ng Presidente iyong report sa BW.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Sino po ang Presidente, kung alam ninyo, ang tinutukoy ni Mr. Yasay?

MR. YULO. Si President Estrada po.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Now, nang sabihin ni Mr. Yasay sa inyong dalawa ni Atty. Almadro iyan, ano ang inyong naging kasagutan?

MR. YULO. Hindi ho pumayag kami, lalo na si Atty. Almadro, at sinabi niya masyado yatang gahol ang panahon at hindi yata nararapat na kami ay magbigay ng report na hindi pa tapos.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At ano ang naging komento o kasagutan ni Chairman Yasay kung mayroon man?

MR. YULO. Well, namimilit pa rin ho siya at sinabi niya, kasi tense na tense ho siya noon, sabi niya, “Basta kailangan ko na’ng report n’yo. Magbigay na kayo. Kailangan na kailangan ng Malacañang iyan.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At ano ang naging kasagutan naman ninyo sa kanyang pagpipilit?

MR. YULO. Naghahanap ho ako ng anong compromise and so, sinabi ko sa kanya, “The only way that we can give you the report, Chairman, is if you write me a letter and you order me to turn over whatever I have because then I will have to follow you since you are my regulator.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At pumayag ba si Chairman Yasay sa condition ninyong iyon?

MR. YULO. Pumayag po at nagbigay ho siya ng order.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Kailan ho nagbigay ng order?

MR. YULO. Same day po.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Verbal or written?

MR. YULO. Written po.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Nakita ninyo iyong order na iyon?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Kung ipapakita ulit sa iyo iyong order na iyon ay makikilala ba ninyo?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Kung ipapakita ko po…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. You cannot be heard.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ipapakita ko po ang isang dokumento na may date na November 3, 1999 at pirmado ng isang Perfecto R. Yasay, Jr. at nabahagi bilang Annex “M” ng Exhibit “MMMMMMM 11″, paki tingnan lang po ninyo ito at sabihin kung ito ang tinutukoy ninyong dokumento na tinanggap ninyo kay Chairman Yasay noong araw na iyon?MR. YULO. This is the same document, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Sino ho ang tumanggap nitong sulat, order na ito na sinasabi ninyo?

MR. YULO. The letter was addressed directly to Atty. Almadro, Your Honor, and I was given a copy thereof.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Pagkatapos ho ninyong matanggap ito, ano’ng ginawa ninyo?

MR. YULO. Nag usap ho kami ni Atty. Almadro kung kaya niyang i deliver iyong hinihingi the next day. So he said, “I will look at it, I will try,” and so he talked to his staff to try to gather the documents, but on November 4, he could not do it because the documents were not in order yet and so shall I continue, Your Honor?

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ano ang nangyari noong hindi mai deliver noong November 4 iyong hinihingi ni Chairman Yasay?

MR. YULO. Tinawagan po ni Atty. Almadro si Chairman Yasay at sinabi po niya na hindi pa niya kayang ibigay dahil kulang ho ang panahon at humingi ho siya ng hanggang November 9 na para ibigay iyong hinihingi ho.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At nangyari ba iyong pangako ni Atty. Almadro noong November 9?

MR. YULO. Nangyari po.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ano ba ang nangyari noong November 9 in connection with that?

MR. YULO. Well, noong November 9 ho, bago ibigay ni Atty. Almadro iyong preliminary report ay nakipagkita kami, very briefly, with the chairman because I wanted to make sure na iyong pagkaintindi ko po noong nag usap kami the other time na sinabi ko rin kasi sa kanya na, pagka ba nag turn over na kami ng aming mga dokumento, ang ibig sabihin ba nito ay hindi na kami mag i imbestiga at ang SEC na lang dahil tinern (turn) over na namin sa inyo ang resulta? At ito ho ay kinumpirma ni Chairman Yasay at sinabi niya, “Siguro nga, dapat daw huwag na kayong mag imbestiga at kami na ang magpapatuloy. Anyway, ang SEC naman ay have more powers than you. So kung mahihirapan ka diyan ay kami na lang ang magpapatuloy.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At naibigay ba naman ninyo iyong so called preliminary report kay Chairman Yasay?

MR. YULO. Ibinigay po ni Atty. Almadro ng late afternoon of November 9, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ikaw, nakita mo ba iyong preliminary report na iyon?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor. I was also given a copy by Atty. Almadro.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ano ba iyong preliminary report na sinasabi mo na iyon?

MR. YULO. Ito po iyong preliminary report on the investigation of CSG on the BW Resources, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Normal ba sa functions ninyo at ng CSG na magbigay ng preliminary report sa kanilang mga iniimbestigahan?

MR. YULO. Hindi po normal iyon, kaya lang nga po since we are under the Securities and Exchange Commission, they have access to all our records and they can demand us to turn over anything at any time, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ito ba ang kauna unahang pagde demand ng Securities and Exchange Commission ng isang preliminary report sa isang imbestigasyong kino conduct ng inyong opisina?

MR. YULO. Ito po iyong kauna unahang panahon na hiningan kami ng preliminary report, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Kung ipapakita sa inyo ang dokumento na iyon, makikilala ba ninyo?

MR. YULO. Opo.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ipapakita namin sa inyo ang isang dokumentong kasama ng premarked Exhibit “MMMMMMM-11” at Annex “O” n’ong nasabing premarked na dokumento. Pakitingnan lang po ninyo at sabihin sa amin kung iyan ang sinasabi ninyong preliminary report na inyong ibinigay kay Chairman Yasay, sa kanyang kahilingan.

MR. YULO. This is the same document, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Now, pagkatapos ninyong ibigay itong preliminary report na ito, ano pa ang nangyari noong November 9 na ‘yon, kung mayroon?

MR. YULO. November 9, n’ong ibinigay… wala na po at that time.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Nasabi ninyo na nagkaroon pa kayo ng mga meetings, mayroon pa ba kayong additional meetings with Chairman Yasay regarding this BW Resources Corporation problem?

MR. YULO. Nakatanggap po ako ng one more phone call at humingi ng appointment uli ho si Chairman Yasay on November 26 for breakfast at Ciudad Fernandina at he told me very specifically to please bring along Atty. Almadro to that breakfast meeting.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At pinagbigyan ba ninyo ‘yong request ni Chairman Yasay na mag-meet kayo doon sa Ciudad Fernandina?

MR. YULO. Well, pag tumatawag po ang Securities and Exchange Commission, we have to follow, Your Honor, so nag-meeting, nag-meet po kami.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Noong mag-meeting kayo noon, sinu-sino ang nandodoon?

MR. YULO. Nandoon po si Chairman Yasay at si Atty. Almadro at saka ako-kami lang tatlo po.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Sa meeting na ‘yon, ano ang nangyari, kung mayroon?

MR. YULO. Nag-order ho kami ng breakfast, pagkatapos, again, I noticed medyo tensed na naman si Chairman Yasay noon. And then, he started telling us that he is… well, in effect, he has received several calls from Malacañang, and that he is being asked to clear Dante Tan by the President, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Specifically, sinabi ba ni Chairman Yasay kung sino sa Malacañang ang tawag nang tawag sa kanya tungkol dito?

MR. YULO. Si Presidente Estrada po raw. And then, he was also asking me and verifying if I also received telephone calls, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At ano’ng naging kasagutan ninyo?

MR. YULO. At that time po, eh, tumanggap na rin po ako at sinabi ko, “Yes, I received several calls as well.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. ‘Yon lang ba ang napag-usapan ninyo ni Chairman Yasay at ni Atty. Almadro doon?

MR. YULO. Well, n’ong nagko-compare ho siya ng telephone calls niya at telephone calls ko, then, he said, “Tinatawagan ka, tinatawagan ako, pine-pressure tayo, mukhang wala tayong choice dito.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At ano…?

MR. YULO. Actually, he said it in English, “It looks like we have no choice.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At ano ang naging comment ninyo o kasagutan sa kanyang sinabing, as if you have no choice?

MR. YULO. Ang sumagot ho kaagad ay si Atty. Almadro, at sinabi niya, “Matibay ang ebidensya na nakikita ko so far, so mukhang may choice.” So….

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At kayo naman, ano ang sinabi ninyo, kung mayroon man?

MR. YULO. Well, sinabi ko, “Chairman, I think we have a choice, we can tell the truth.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At ano ang naging reaction ni Chairman Yasay doon sa sinabi ninyo, kung mayroon?

MR. YULO. Sabi niya, parang naghinga siya, tapos sabi niya, “Aba, eh… eh, kung ganoon, sige, pero kailangan sama tayo rito.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Witness making a gesture joining his two forefingers.

‘Yon lang ba ang nangyari doon sa meeting ninyo sa Ciudad Fernandina noong November 26?

MR. YULO. We continued to eat our breakfast, Your Honor, and time was going on, and then when it was almost nine o’clock, he said, “Alam mo, darating si Dante Tan.” And as soon as he said that, Dante Tan walked into the door, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What happened after Dante Tan walked into the door?

MR. YULO. Well, I felt uncomfortable because he did not… the Chairman did not inform that Dante Tan was going to attend the meeting. And I also noticed Atty. Almadro was fidgeting on the seat, Your Honor. Well, I felt personally…

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What about…?

MR. YULO. Can I?

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Yeah.

MR. YULO. I felt I was set up, Your Honor, we were set up.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What about Chairman Yasay? Where was he at that time?

MR. YULO. He was sitting across me, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Why did you feel uncomfortable?

MR. YULO. Because we did not know that we were supposed to meet with Dante Tan. We thought it was only the Chairman, so I felt that that was a cheap trick that was dealt on us.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Aside from the fact that you did not expect to meet Dante Tan, do you have any reasons, if any, why you felt uncomfortable?

MR. YULO. Well, because Dante Tan was a subject of an investigation by the compliance group, so it was not proper to meet… especially for Almadro to meet him.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At that time?

MR. YULO. At that time.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And what transpired next, if any?

MR. YULO. The chairman excused himself and he said, “You know, I just wanted you guys to meet,” and then he stood up and left, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And the three of you were left?

MR. YULO. We were left for a while and Dante Tan immediately started talk, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What did the he say, if any?

MR. YULO. He was trying to explain to us. He said, I am building a company at hindi naman ako ang nagma-manipulate nito because I want to build a real company. ‘Yon ang sinasabi po niya.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At ano ang naging komento ninyo o kasagutan, kung mayroon man ho?

MR. YULO. Well, I myself I said, “That’s good. I think you should put value to the price of your stock and maybe attend to your fundamentals. At ‘yong mga project na nirereport po sa Stock Exchange, you should do them.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And after that comment from you, was there any other thing that happened?

MR. YULO. Nagpaalam po agad si Almadro, gusto na niyang umalis, so noong tumayo si Almadro tumayo na rin ho ako at iniwanan namin si Dante Tan.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And that was the end of the meeting on November 26?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Now, you also made mention earlier that you also had a talk with Governor Buenaventura…

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. …of the BSP. Is that correct?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. When was that, more or less, if you remember?

MR. YULO. This was sometime in the later part of October, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Where?

MR. YULO. Well, we met in the office, in the Bangko Sentral at the 5th floor, in one of the conference rooms, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What did you talk about, if any?

MR. YULO. Well, present in that meeting was Secretary of Finance, Ed Espiritu. And if I remember right, the Secretary of Trade at that time, Titoy Pardo, was also there and other brokers. And I didn’t know what the meeting was about. I just got an emergency call.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. You were called in that meeting?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And did you finally come to know what was the subject matter of the meeting?

MR. YULO. Yes. It seems some member-brokers had intimated directly to Secretary of Finance, Ed Espiritu. that the Exchange was in danger of collapsing because of the possible unsettled trades of BW and therefore can the Central Bank be ready in the event that it has to help the Stock Exchange.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What did Governor Buenaventura say, if any?

MR. YULO. Since I was in the meeting, I also offered my own knowledge about the matter and I told…

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What did you say?

MR. YULO. Well, I said, other stock exchanges of governments rather, like for example in Hong Kong, the Department of Finance sometimes helps the Stock Exchange when there is a liquidity crunch. So perhaps the Philippine government should not be close to the idea because the Stock Exchange is an important segment of the economy and it must not be allowed to collapse.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. To whom were you addressing that suggestion?

MR. YULO. To Governor Buenaventura, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And what was the comment of Governor Buenaventura or then Secretary Ed Espiritu?

MR. YULO. Well, there were exchanges of opinions and, of course, it is something that they were not sure whether they were allowed under Philippine laws if they could do this. So there was just a lot of discussions and the meeting ended.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. That was the end of the meeting?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. You also made mention that you had a talk with then Secretary Ed Espiritu outside of this meeting?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At the BSP did you have occasion to have a talk with Ed Espiritu regarding this…

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. …BW Resources Corporation problem?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. When was this, more or less?

MR. YULO. Well, the chairperson at that time who was Trinidad Kalaw and I went to the office of Secretary Espiritu also at the BSP Building in Roxas Boulevard and we wanted to talk to him and sort of ask his help because there was a lot of rumor going around in the Stock Exchange that the friends of the President were the ones really playing with the stock and we wanted that to stop, not to go on anymore. And so we wanted to ask the Secretary to talk to President Estrada and to talk to his friends and perhaps also help us find out more information, if he knows any.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And what was the comment of then Secretary Ed Espiritu?

MR. YULO. Well, he said that as far as he knew, Mark Jimenez and Dante Tan were fighting over BW at that time. That was what he knew about and he said he will look into the matter and see what he can do.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What about Chairman Kalaw?

MR. FLAMINIANO. Mr. Chief Justice, we respectfully move to strike out the answer of the witness on the ground that it is hearsay.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. He was there, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. May remain as part of the narration of the witness.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. When was this?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. This was on the first… I think on the first week of November, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Where was this meeting?

MR.YULO. In the Office of the Secretary of Finance, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Was that all that transpired in that meeting with Secretary Ed Espiritu?

MR. FLAMINIANO. Mr. Chief Justice, I think we are veering away from the real matters in issue as tendered by the offer of testimony. We object to…

REP. RODRIGUEZ. We are trying to…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. What is… so what is the objection then?

MR. FLAMINIANO. Immaterial, Mr. Chief Justice.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Very material, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Overruled. The witness may answer.

MR.YULO. What’s the question?

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What about Chairman Kalaw, did he say anything in connection with that meeting?

MR.YULO. Well, the Chairman was also intimating what the rumors that were going on about the presidential friends engaged in the BW stocks. So both of us were sort of saying the same thing. And then when we concluded, Secretary Espiritu just said, “Go on with your investigation and I will see what I can do”.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And that was all?

MR. YULO. Yes.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Mr. Chief Justice, we have to move to strike out the answers of the witness on this point because he’s dealing on rumors, speculations, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The witness was there. He was talking to these individuals. So the testimony may be admitted as part of the narration but not necessarily as to the truth….

MR. FLAMINIANO. But not as to the truth.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. …of what the other parties have said.

MR. FLAMINIANO. As to the tenor of the conversation.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Only as to the tenor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. …tenor of the conversation.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. I think that’s very obvious.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Yes, Mr. Chief Justice.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. You also made mention, Mr.Witness, that you had a talk with BIR Commissioner Fonacier in connection with this BW Resources Corporation?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Mr. Chief Justice, we have to…

MR. YULO. When was this?

MR. FLAMINIANO. …object to these questions because the…

REP. RODRIGUEZ. This will be the last one, Your Honor, in connection with this particular point.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Please let the other party finish first. Do not interrupt.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. I’m sorry, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. The offer of testimony is limited to the following: that there was a CSG investigation on BW; that the President called this witness several times and that this witness gave a copy of the investigation report to the President. That is all, Mr. Chief Justice.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Your Honor please, if I remember correctly, it was the very Chief Justice who made mention of the factum probandum and in his expounding of the same, he mentioned that the stock manipulation of the BW Resources Corporation and other matters are relevant to the issue for purposes of that particular point, with respect to factum probandum. This will be the last question, anyway, with respect to this particular point, Your Honor, this discussion or conversation with BIR Commissioner Fonacier.

MR. FLAMINIANO. May we ask for a ruling of the Chair on this point, Mr.Chief Justice, on our objection?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. We have not even heard the last question yet. He said it will be the last.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. In connection with this point, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Let’s hear the last question.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. We have a pending question. I was asking, Your Honor what was… He made mention that he also had a talk with then Commissioner, BIR Commissioner Fonacier regarding the BW Resources Corporation problem, is that correct?

MR. FLAMINIANO. I think we have an objection which was not ruled upon by the Chair, Mr.Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Are you making another question?

REP. RODRIGUEZ. No, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Was that the question objected to earlier?

MR. FLAMINIANO. That’s correct, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. May be sustained but not on the ground as stated by you.

SEN. ENRILE. Just to correct the record, Mr. Chief Justice, I think it is a matter of legislative notice that Daki Fonacier was not the BIR Commissioner at that time. He became a BIR Commissioner later on.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. The witness, if Your Honor please, with due respect, never mentioned an exact date and we do not know exactly, that is why I am asking, Your Honor, to clear that very issue. I am asking him if he had a talk. He mentioned earlier that among other persons and officials in the government, he had a talk with Mr. Fonacier. I am asking him if he really had a talk with Director…BIR Commissioner Fonacier.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. That was answered before.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Yes, what was the subject matter of that talk?

MR. FLAMINIANO. Already answered, Mr. Chief Justice.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Not yet, Your Honor. That was the last question.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. What was the answer of the witness, Atty. Flaminiano?

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What was the answer?

MR. FLAMINIANO. We appeal to the record, Mr.Chief Justice. I think he answered the..

REP. RODRIGUEZ. There was no answer yet, Your Honor. Just to abbreviate the proceedings.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Let the witness answer the question.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.

MR. YULO. We discussed about BW, Your Honor, and also about the tax implications, the capital gains tax that should have been collected from the over the counter transactions of Dante Tan and all the others who participated therein. And I was telling him that per the estimate of the Stock Exchange, the BIR could have collected anywhere from maybe a low of 500 million to over 1 billion pesos in taxes that were not paid, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And what was the comment of Commissioner Fonacier?

MR. YULO. He said he would look into that, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. We have to object to that because he said he would only ask one question on that point.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. It was a follow up, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. We will never see the end of this follow up question.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Mr. Counsel, you promised you’ll make only one question?

REP. RODRIGUEZ. I will leave that then, Your Honor.

You also made mention that you received calls from President Joseph Ejercito Estrada in connection with this BW Resources Corporation problem, is that correct?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Do you remember more or less when these calls were made?

MR. YULO. These were mostly in the months of November, Your Honor, most of the calls came in. And I double checked with my executive assistant because she keeps tab of my calls. And I did receive the two sets of calls, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. When was the first set if you remember?

MR. YULO. This was November 17 and November 18, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. On November 17, who received the call of the President?

MR. YULO. My executive assistant, Mary Ann Corpuz, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And what happened after receiving that call of the President?

MR. YULO. She passed the phone to me telling me it was Executive Secretary Ronnie Zamora on the phone.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Did you have a talk with Executive Secretary Zamora?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What did you talk about?

MR. YULO. He just told me that he will pass on the telephone to President Estrada because the President wanted to talk to me.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And did he finally pass the telephone to President Estrada?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Did you have a talk with President Estrada in that call?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Why do you know that it was President Estrada with whom you are talking?

MR. YULO. Well, the President introduced himself. He told me, “Nonoy, si President Erap ito.” And I know his voice, Your Honor. I hear his voice on radio, television, and I do know him as well.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Do you know him personally?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Have you met him personally?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. How many times more or less?

MR. YULO. Quite a number of times, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Is that the reason why you are familiar with the voice of the President?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And in that call made by the President, what did you talk about, if any?

MR. YULO. At that time, Your Honor, or specifically that day, November 17, all the media, that the newspapers were full of releases on BW. And also particularly on that day, Chairman Yasay and I were having an exchange or… How do you call it… a media word war. We were fighting in the media about certain press releases he had made. And so the President told me that he was concerned about the media scandal being created by our media war with Chairman Yasay. And so he said, “I would be issuing a memorandum order to Chairman Yasay ordering him to clear all media announcements about the stock exchange or about your trading activities.” So he wanted me to know that. And I think in Tagalog he said something like “Para manahimik na ‘yan.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And what did you say, if any, in that conversation through telephone with the President?

MR. YULO. Nothing, Your Honor. I was just listening.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What else transpired, if any, in that call?

MR. YULO. The conversation shifted and he started talking about BW and Dante Tan, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What was he told you in connection with BW Resources Corporation and Dante Tan?

MR. YULO. He told me that Dante Tan is a close friend and is a good guy. In Tagalog, he used the words “Kaibigan ko ‘yan, at mabait na tao ‘yan.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What else transpired, if any?

MR. YULO. And then before he closed the phone, he told me he was going to give me a copy of the memorandum order. And he was passing me on back to Executive Secretary Ronnie Zamora to get my fax number.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And did you finally receive Did you give your fax number to Secretary Zamora?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. After giving that fax number to Secretary Zamora, what happened next?

MR. YULO. Within… probably within 30 minutes, the fax arrived, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. You received personally the fax?

MR. YULO. My secretary. The fax machine is in the office of my executive assistant right next to me, so she got it, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. But were you able to see that fax copy of the memorandum?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. If you will be shown a copy of the same, will you be able to to identify it?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Showing to you this document entitled…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Louder, please.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Showing to you this document earlier premarked Exhibit “YYYYYYY” with the title “Memorandum From the President” dated November 17, 1999. Can you tell the Honorable Impeachment Court if this is the same document you were referring to?

MR. YULO. This is the same document, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. This document, Your Honors, was conditionally marked because at the time of marking we do not have a certification to the effect that the original of the same is unavailable in the files of the Securities and Exchange Commission. But we have now a certification to that effect. We will be, by reason of this, requesting that this certification be also marked and sub marked as our Exhibit “YYYYYYY 1″.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Let it be so marked.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Was that all that the President told you and transpired in that call on November 17?

MR. YULO. That was all, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And you mentioned earlier that there was another call, the first set, another call on November 18, is that correct?

MR. YULO. That’s correct, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Who received the call?

MR. YULO. Again, it was my Executive Assistant, Mary Anne Corpuz, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And did you finally talk to the President?

MR. YULO. Well, the first one on the line was the Secretary, a certain Sherryl who was on the line and she said she was passing it on to the President, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And the President talked to you at that time?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Can you recall what was the discussion about, if any?

MR. YULO. The topic at this time was about the trading bandwidth that I talked earlier, Your Honor. Because I had received already an order from the Securities and Exchange Commission to narrow the trading bandwidth to not more than, if I remember it right, 15 percent uptick rather than 50 percent and a 10 percent downtick rather than 40 percent. So it became narrower. I have received this order earlier, Your Honor, and he was telling me that the President was telling me that the SEC will order me again to restore the trading bandwidth back to its original level of 50 percent up instead of 15 percent and down to 40 percent instead of 10 percent. In effect, going back to widening the trading band again, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. You mean to say, the President called you up to inform you about this?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And you made an explanation, a statement regarding the narrowing and/or widening of this trading bandwidth. Para ho sa kaalaman nating lahat, puwede ho bang paki esplika (explain) ninyo sa amin kung ano itong sinasabi ninyong “narrowing or widening of the trading bandwidth”?

MR. FLAMINIANO. I think this has been answered before, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. What is that, Atty. Flaminiano?

MR. FLAMINIANO. The question being asked by counsel has been answered. He is asking the witness to describe this scheme that the witness…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The terms used now are “narrowing and expanding”?

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Yes, Your Honor, that was never asked.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The witness may answer.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Thank you.

MR. YULO. The original bandwidth of the trading of the Philippine Stock Exchange, as I said earlier, was the widest among other stock exchanges, ‘no. The trading bandwidth is like a check valve.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Uh huh.

MR. YULO. …or a safety feature of an exchange. Whenever the trading band is breached, then it necessitates a disclosure statement from a listed company to the investing public to inform the investing public of any information that the company would know to explain why the prices is fluctuating, ‘no. And if there is no explanation, then the Exchange will call, will do a trading halt so nobody can trade on that stock anymore.

This is a safety feature, Your Honor, to make sure that the investing public is always informed about any disclosures on the insides or the ongoings of a company that’s listed and to give the investing public a chance to deliberate and to think about his investment.

So, the wider the trading band, Your Honor, the more difficult it is for an investor to get information about a company and for the Stock Exchange to order a trading halt. Whereas, the narrower the trading band, then the more often would the public be given information about investing in the company. And it was also easier and more oftener is the possibility of the stock exchange calling for a trading halt, Your Honor. So, that is the significance of the trading bandwidth.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At pagkatapos ho sabihin sa inyo ni Presidente na ibinabalik na sa dating level ang trading bandwidth, ano ang naging kasagutan ninyo, kung mayroon man?

MR. YULO. Bumalik na naman ho sa BW at Dante Tan. At ipinaalam niya ho sa akin na – inulit lang ho na kaibigan niya si Dante Tan, mabait na tao ito, at matagal na akong tinutulungan niyan. Words to that effect, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ano pa ba, kung mayroon man, na napag-usapan ninyo ng ating mahal na Pangulo, sa kuwan niyang ‘yon noong November 18?

MR. YULO. Wala na po. That was it, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And you mentioned that there was a second set of calls.

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. When was this set of calls, if you remember?

MR. YULO. Well, after the weekend, the next week, November 22 and November 23, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. On November 22, who received the call from the Office of the President?

MR. YULO. Again, my executive assistant, Mary Ann Corpuz, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And finally given to you?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. With whom did you talk first?

MR. YULO. At that time, it was Deputy Executive Secretary Ramon Cardenas, Your Honor.

REP RODRIGUEZ. What did he tell you, if any?

MR. YULO. Well, he told me that he was passing on the telephone to the President, President Estrada because the President will talk to me.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And did you have talk with the President finally?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RORIGUEZ. Ano ba ang naging konbersasyon ninyo kung mayroon man?

MR. YULO. At that time, he told me something in – because he was in Tagalog. He said something like, “O, ang SEC, hindi na nag-iimbestiga, kayo na lang sa PSE. So, paki-expedite na lang ‘yan.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Noong sabihin sa inyo ni Presidente ‘yon, ano ang naging sagot ninyo, kung mayroon?

REP. YULO. I just said – I was sort of telling him but I was hearing what he was saying. And I was saying something like “Opo, opo, Mr. President.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ano ang pakiwari mo at pagkakaintinde sa sinabi niyang “expedite ‘yan”, if you know?

MR. YULO. Well, pagkatapos noon kasi, bumalik na naman siya roon sa “Kaibigan ko si Dante Tan, matagal nang tumutulong sa akin ‘yan, Bise Presidente pa lang ako, tumutulong na ‘yan.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ano pa ang naging usapan ninyo ni Presidente sa tawag na ‘yon noong November 22, 1999?

MR. YULO. After telling me that Dante Tan is a friend of his and has helped him since he was Vice President, wala na po, natapos na ‘yong aming pag-uusap noon.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What about this call on November 23? Who received the call?

MR. YULO. ‘Yong aking executive assistant uli.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Finally, nakausap ho ba ninyo si Presidente sa araw na ito?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Natatandaan ho ninyo kung ano ang napag-usapan ninyo ni Presidente?

MR. YULO. Well, this time, he was a little bit more insistent, Your Honor. And he told me, “Sabi sa akin ni Dante Tan, hindi siya nagmamanipular ng stock at siya daw ang biktima dito at mayroon daw dalawang bilyon ang lugi niya dito sa BW.” And I felt he wanted me to give some kind of answer or confirmation of an action that I should do regarding the investigation of PSE.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At ano ang naging kasagutan ninyo, kung mayroon man?

MR. YULO. Well, ang pagka-intinde ko ho ay, because he wanted me or the PSE investigation to either clear Dante Tan or be favorable to Dante Tan. That was my interpretation. And so, to get out of the fix, I answered him by saying, “I understand what you are telling me, Mr. President.” And then tinagalog ko at sinabi ko, “Mr. President, naiintindihan ko ‘yong sinasabi mo sa akin, kaya lang po, hindi ho ako ang nag iimbistiga niyan. Ang nag iimbistiga ho nito ay ‘yong aming Compliance and Surveillance Group at independent body ho ‘yan sa aming by laws.”

And I continued and I said, “Ang magagawa ko po, Mr. President, ay pag natapos ‘yong imbestigasyon ng aming Compliance and Surveillance Group ay ipaaalam ko agad sa iyo kung ano ang resulta noon.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ano ang naging kasagutan o komento ng Presidente, kung mayroon man, pagkatapos ninyong sabihin ‘yon?

MR. YULO. He was quiet for a while and then, he said in Tagalog, “Sabagay, kung may kasalanan eh wala tayong magagawa diyan pero, alam mo, kaibigan natin ‘yan, tumutulong ‘yan. Noong senador pa ako eh tumutulong na ‘yan.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Now, noong sabihin ninyong ang magagawa lang ninyo pagkatapos ng imbestigasyon, bigyan ninyo ng kopya ng report …

MR. YULO. Hindi ho bigyan. Sabi ko lang, “Ipapaalam ko sa inyo ang resulta ng report.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ah, ipapaalam sa kanya. Nasabi ninyo ‘yong imbestigasyon na ‘yon. Ano’ng nangyari sa imbestigasyon na ginagawa noong panahon na ‘yon sa aktibidades ng BW Resources Corporation?

MR. YULO. Nagpatuloy po ‘yong imbestigasyon ng CSG at natapos din po.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Kailan natapos itong imbestigasyon, kung alam ninyo?

MR. YULO. Natanggap ko po ‘yong finished report on February 11, Your Honor …

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Bakit ninyo …

MR. YULO. … of 2000.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Sino’ng nagbigay sa inyo ng kopya ng report?

MR. YULO. Si Atty. Almadro po.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Bakit ho ba? Ano ho ba ang procedure sa inyo pagka nagkaroon ng report ng ganyan sa isang imbestigasyon? Automatic ‘yan, binibigyan kayo ng kopya bilang presidente and chief executive officer?

MR. YULO. Based on the rules of the Exchange, Your Honor, the investigation reports of the CSG, once finalized, are submitted to the president

because the president is supposed to go over it, review it and the president can either veto the report or send it back for more studies and action, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Sinasabi ho ninyong presidente, sino’ng presidente?

MR. YULO. Ako po ‘yon.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ah. Pagkatapos ninyong matanggap ang kopya ng report, ano’ng ginawa ninyo sa report?

MR. YULO. Well, binasa ko po ang report. And then, after finding it in order, we were going to have a meeting of the Business Conduct and Ethics Committee on Monday dahil ho tumanggap kami ng request from Chairman Yasay and from Senator Roco, at that time, for a copy of the report as soon as we are finished, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Can you give a particular date, Monday?

MR. YULO. This was February 14 at 12:00 noon.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Doon kayo humingi ng meeting?

MR. YULO. Opo.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Meeting ng ano?

MR. YULO. Ito po ‘yong Business Conduct and Ethics Committee because, ayon sa rules of the Exchange, from the Conduct and Surveillance Group, it is given to me, to the president, and the president endorses it, if he finds it in order, to the Business Conduct and Ethics Committee dahil iyong Business Conduct and Ethics Committee ho ang authorized to take action and/or dispose of the report.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At nagkaroon ba naman ng meeting kayo ng Business ano’ng tawag natin doon?

MR. YULO. Conduct and Ethics Committee.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Business Conduct and Ethics Committee.

MR. YULO. The Business Conduct and Ethics Committee met 12:00 noon of February 14 to discuss the request of Senator Roco and Chairman Yasay for copies of the report, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At ano ang napagkasunduan ninyo, kung mayroon man?

MR. YULO. Well, the I am not a member of the committee, Your Honor, I’m only an ex officio member. I cannot vote because I will only execute the decisions of the Business Conduct and Ethics Committee. So …

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Pero nandoon ba kayo noong magkaroon ng meeting …

MR. YULO. Nandoon po ako at nandoon …

REP. RODRIGUEZ. … as ex officio member?

MR. YULO. I was there and so was Atty. Almadro because Atty. Almadro acts like a prosecutor, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At sapagkat nandoon kayo bilang ex officio member, nalaman ba ninyo kung ano’ng nangyari sa meeting na ‘yon sa request ni Senator Judge Roco and SEC Chairman Yasay?

MR. YULO. The Committee, as a committee, decided to approve the request and to turn over a copy of the report to Senator Roco and, of course, to the SEC, ‘no. Anyway, we, all at the SEC, do this and we were instructed to come up with a covering letter that this report be transmitted under condition of confidentiality. As a matter of fact, the covering letter was drafted by the committee members themselves and they asked our chairperson, Atty. Kalaw, and myself to co sign the transmittal letter.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Now, you made mention of this request and which you deliberated upon in that meeting. Pakisabi ho ninyo sa amin kung bakit kailangan pa ng request at kailangan pa ninyong aprubahan ng Business Conduct and Ethics Committee ‘yong request?

MR. YULO. Well, actually, Your Honor, any documents we have should be really be given to the SEC because they have absolute powers to demand documents from us so there was really no need to do that.

As far as the Senate also, they also have the authority to demand records from us. But since I believe it was a very important report, I found it proper to inform the Business Conduct and Ethics Committee and make them make the decision, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At kung natatandaan ninyo, sinabi ninyo kanina napangakuhan ninyo si Presidente sa last call n’ya at pag uusap ninyo na ipapaalam ninyo sa kanya ang magiging resulta nitong imbestigasyon. In connection with that, what did you do?

MR. YULO. Noong when I got the report on February 11, Your Honor, after having read it, I also called the Office of the President and I left a message. I told them, “Pakisabi lang sa Presidente na tapos na ‘yong BW report.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At pagkatapos na tumawag kayo sa Malacañang para ipaalam na tapos na ang investigation report ng CSG o ng PSE, ano ang nangyari?

MR. YULO. Noong Monday morning po, before the Business Conduct and Ethics Committee meeting, sometime in the morning, I got a call from Malacañang telling me that I should go to Malacañang to report to the President at 2 o’clock of February 14, that same day.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At ano ho ang sinabi ninyo sa request na ‘yon kung mayroon man?

MR. YULO. Nag oo po ako.

EP. RODRIGUEZ. At sabi n’yo kanina nasa meeting kayo ng Business Conduct and Ethics Committee…

MR. YULO. Opo. So, while the meeting was ongoing, I asked permission from the members of the committee. I told them that the Office of the President has called me and he wants me to report on BW at 2 o’clock that afternoon so I had to excuse myself early, and I will be bringing along Atty. Almadro with me. And so the Committee excused me, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And you finally proceeded to Malacañang as per request?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Anong oras more or less noong pumunta kayo doon?

MR. YULO. Well, our meeting was scheduled for 2 o’clock but because we had a committee meeting ongoing, I couldn’t leave early, and so I was running late and I think I arrived between about 2:15 or 2:30 in the afternoon, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Bakit ninyo isinama si Atty. Ruben Almadro?

MR. YULO. Kasi ho, I was supposed to explain the report to the President. And since I was not the one who prepared the report, I thought it best if the person himself who prepared it explains it to the President for clarity, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Normal ba sa inyong procedure sa PSE na pagkatapos ng isang investigation at magkaroon ng kopya ang upisina mo ng investigation report ay pinadadala mo ang kopya sa Malacañang, sa Office of the President?

MR. YULO. Wala po akong ibang request for that, so hindi po, hindi normal po.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Sa mga nakaraang panahon na kayo ay Presidente at Chief Executive Officer ng PSE, nagkaroon ba ng pagkakataong kayo’y magdala ng kopya ng isang investigation report ng CSG sa Malacañang?

MR. YULO. Wala po.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Bakit kayo nagdala ng report sa Malacañang?

MR. YULO. Dahil nga po sa naganap na pag uusap namin at napromise ko kay Presidente ho na siya ang unang una ho well, pagkatapos ng imbestigasyon ay ipapaalam ko kaagad sa kanya ang resulta. So, I had to comply with that promise, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Bakit ninyo pinangakuan si Presidente ng ganoon na hindi naman pala ninyo obligasyon ang magbigay ng kopya sa kanya?

MR. YULO. Dahil nga doon sa nag uusap kami sa tawag na ‘yon at sinabi n’ya sa akin na biktima si Dante Tan at siya pa ang nalugi at sinabi n’ya, “O, expedite mo na ‘yan, tapusin na natin ‘yan.” Hindi ko alam ho kung ano’ng isasagot ko kasi he wanted to confirm with me na ang resulta ng imbestigasyon na ginagawa ng PSE ay will be favorable to Dante Tan or will clear Dante Tan. Kaya ho para makaiwas doon ay sinagot ko siya at sinabi ko nga po na hindi ho ako ang nag iimbistiga n’yan. Ang nag iimbistiga ay ‘yong Compliance and Surveillance Group at independent body ho ‘yan. Ang magagawa ko na lang ay pagnatapos ‘yong imbestigasyon ay ipapaalam ko agad sa inyo ang resulta.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At ‘yon ang dahilan kung bakit nagdala kayo ng kopya…

MR. YULO. Opo.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. … ng investigation report sa Malacañang?

MR. YULO. ‘Yon ang dahilan ho kung bakit ko s’ya tinawagan sa upisina n’ya at ipinaalam na tapos na ang report at tumanggap naman ako ng tawag na magpunta nga doon ng alas dos ng hapon.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At nakarating ba naman kayo sa Malacañang sa araw na ‘yon, February 14?

MR. YULO. Opo.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At noong dumating kayo doon, ano’ng nangyari?

MR. YULO. Pumasok ho kami roon sa guesthouse ‘no, sa ground floor. We went through the security and then there was some kind of a lounge or sala very close to the door, half right side; and naghintay ho kami roon, pinaupo kami ng sekretarya.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Pagkatapos ninyong maupo, ano pa ang nangyari?

MR. YULO. Wala naman po. Naghihintay kami; naalala ko ho dumaan si Jerry Barican; at kilala ko ho ito dahil — noong araw pa; we exchanged familiarities, nag-hello, hello lang ho kami.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Were you finally ushered in in any place there by the President?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor. After a while, the secretary told us to go into the Office of the President – it was on the same ground floor – we just walked inside, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Nakapasok naman kayo sa opisina?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Sino ang dinatnan ninyo doon, kung mayroon man?

MR. YULO. Pumasok kami; may parang kaunting U-shape; tapos, mayroong mesa doon, nakaupo si Presidente at may dalawang silya. Umupo ho ako sa isang silya at si Atty. Almadro nasa kabila naman ho… Actually, nakatayo muna kami.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At pagdating ninyo doon at dinatnan ninyo ang ating mahal na Presidente, ano pa ang nangyari?

MR. YULO. I introduced Atty. Almadro, Your Honor; I said, “Ito ho si Atty. Almadro. Siya ang nag-imbestiga – iyong kanyang grupo. And so dinala ko ho siya rito para siya na ho ang mag-explain sa inyo tungkol sa BW.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At ano pa ang nangyari pagkatapos mong i-introduce at sabihin iyon sa Presidente natin?

MR. YULO. Binigay ho namin iyong kopya ng report doon sa harapan ng Presidente at nag-umpisa na hong mag-explain si Atty. Almadro.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At nag-eksplika naman si Atty. Almadro tungkol doon sa report?

MR. YULO. Opo, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Natatandaan mo ba, more or less, kung ano ang nasabi ni Atty. Almadro sa Presidente sa pag-e-explain sa nilalaman ng report?

MR. YULO. Inuulit lang ho niya iyong laman ng report na sinasabi niya, “Ang gumawa ho ng price manipulation ho ay si Dante Tan at mga kasama niya.” At in-explain po niya iyung mga technical details po no’n.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At pagkatapos na inisplika iyon ni Atty. Almadro, nagkaroon ba naman ng comment o nagsalita ba si Presidente ng nauukol doon sa report?

MR. YULO. After a while, Your Honor, nagsalita ang Presidente at sinabi niya, “Alam mo, Attorney, hindi ko naintindihan ito.” And then, he said, “Iyan bang mga sinasabi mo ay nandiyan ba iyan sa report?” At tinuro niya iyung report, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At pagkatapos niyang ituro iyung report at sabihin iyon, anong ginawa ninyong dalawa ni Atty. Almadro, kung mayroon man?

MR. YULO. Sabi ho ni Atty. Almadro, “Opo.” And then, before he started explaining, I already intervened, Your Honor. And I said, “Mr. President, siguro po doon na lang tayo sa summary page at mas madali hong maintindihan doon.” Page 56 po iyon. And so, I flipped the pages to Page 56 and I started to explain to him the violations thereof committed on BW.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Bakit ninyo pinarticular iyung Page 56 ng report na iyon, sa anong kadahilanan?

MR. YULO. Kasi nandoon po iyong summary ng lahat ng violations ng price manipulation at mas madali hong intindihin pagka sa executive summary na lang ho.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At tiningnan ba at binasa naman ng kagalang-galang na Presidente iyung Page 56 ng report?

MR. YULO. Binuksan ko nga iyung pages at sinabi ko, “Ito ang Page 56, so ito ho ang basahin n’yo na lang.” So, binabasa ho niya.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Kung ipapakita sa inyo iyung Page 56 ng investigation report na iyon, makikilala ba ninyo?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ipapakita ho namin sa inyo ang isang premarked na Exhibit “MMMMMMM-7,” ito ho ba iyong sinasabi ninyong Page 56 ng report?

MR. YULO. This is the same document, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At pagkatapos na ipakita ninyo at i-isplika ito at ipakita sa ating mahal na Presidente, ano ho ang nangyari pa, kung mayroon man?

MR. YULO. Binabasa po niya. And I remember he got interested in two words, sabi niya something like “kiting” and “wash sale”. Inulit ho niya iyon, binasa niya iyon. Pagkatapos po sabi niya, “Bakit hindi sinabi sa akin ni Dante Tan ito? May problema pala siya. Sabi niya siya pa ang nalugi dito. Siya ang biktima.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At ano ang nangyari pa, kung mayroon man, pagkatapos sabihin iyon ng Presidente?

MR. YULO. Medyo kumontra po ako at sinabi ko, “Hindi ho yata siguro tama dahil ho doon sa nakita ng investigation ay kumita pa si Dante Tan ng over 800 million as of June 1999.” At sinabi ko po, “At isa pa ho, Mr. President, what was done was very blatant.” I talked in English and then Tinagalog ko po, sabi ko, “blatant ho, masyado hong garapal at paulit ulit po ito, mahirap hong palampasin.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Noong sabihin mo kay Presidente na masyadong garapal, anong ibig mong sabihin sa “masyadong garapal?”

MR. YULO. Well, in English I said “blatant”, I don’t know where the word is …

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Bakit sinabi mong garapal? Ano ang garapal, iyong report, iyong ano or … ?

MR. YULO. The violations committed, Your Honor, because it was done over and over again in seeming disregard for the rules of the Exchange, Your Honor, at saka mukhang lahat nu’ng puwedeng gawin ay nagawa, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At ano ang naging reaction ng Presi¬dente noong sabihin mong, “As of June, kumita na ng 800 million si Dante Tan at masyadong garapal ang ginawa”?

MR. YULO. Hindi naman po nag react noong sinabi kong kumita ng 800 million.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ano pa ang nangyari pagkatapos mong sabihin sa Mahal nating Presidente na garapal ang nangyari?

MR. YULO. We continued to discuss, Your Honor. I was trying to explain the summary page and then eventually the conversation shifted to his pending visit to the United States. And I suggested that perhaps he would want to call on the New York Stock Exchange, and I said the Chairman of the New York Stock Exchange can meet with him and we can arrange a presentation with the different fund managers ho sa New York para maimbitahang mag invest sa Pilipinas.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ano ang naging kasagutan ng Presi¬dente?

MR. YULO. Umoo po siya doon at sabi niya, kailangang kasama ka.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. At pagkatapos kayong mag touch about his trip to the United States and offered your services to him as President and Chief Executive Officer of PSE, what happened next?

MR. YULO. He shifted back to BW and this time to Chairman Yasay and he was a little bit irritated, Your Honor, I remember, and he said in Tagalog: “Walanghiya talaga iyang Yasay na ‘yan, hindi lalakeng kausap ‘yan. Sinabi sa akin magre resign siya nung December, tapos nag¬biyahe sa Amerika, pagbalik kasama si Ordoñez at saka si Salonga, at hindi na siya magre resign. Walang kuwen hindi talaga lalake ‘yan.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Anong nangyari pa pagkatapos sabihin ni Presidente ‘yan, kung mayroon?

MR. YULO. Mayroon pa siya hong sinabi which was a little bit surprising to me, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Ano iyong surprising na sinabi sa iyo ng ating Presidente pagkatapos niyang sabihing walanghiya si Chairman Yasay?

MR. YULO. Pagkatapos niyang sabihin na “walanghiya talaga ‘yan,” sinabi niya, “At saka ayon kay Dante ayos na si Yasay.”

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Witness making a gesture with his thumb and forefinger making that circle.

Bakit mo sinabing you were surprised? Bakit ka na surprise sa sinabing iyon ng Presidente at ginawa?

MR. YULO. Kasi ho parang inaamin po sa akin na alam niya na si Dante Tan ay sinusuhulan si Chairman Yasay at sa harapan ko at kay Almadro ay inaamin niya sa amin iyon at natandaan ko po na sa isang television interview ay binin¬tangan na nga niya si Chairman Yasay na binayaran daw ni Dante Tan ng isang milyon, so sa mind ko nako correlate ko po iyon, so nagulat ako na alam niya pala na parang pinaba¬bayaan pa niya.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. That will be all the witness, Your Honor.

Your witness.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Cross examination.

The Majority Leader.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. Mr. Chief Justice, I believe we can use a 15 minute break at this time before the cross.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. How many minutes?

THE MAJORITY LEADER. Fifteen minutes.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Fifteen minutes. Any objection? The Chair hears none, the trial is suspended for fifteen minutes.

THE TRIAL WAS SUSPENDED AT 7:04 P.M.

THE TRIAL WAS RESUMED AT 7:29 P.M.

THE SERGEANT AT ARMS. Please all rise for the entrance of the Honorable Senate President Judge Aquilino Q. Pimentel, Jr., and the Honorable Presiding Officer, Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The trial is resumed.

Attorney Flaminiano.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Mr. Chief Justice, may I beg permission to proceed with my cross examination of this witness?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. You may now proceed.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Thank you, sir.

Mr. Witness, can you tell us when you learned for the first time that you were going to testify in this impeachment case the very first time that you learned that you will testify in this case?

MR. YULO. I got telephone calls from Sonny Alvarez and Romy Capulong, and I was asked to meet with Prosecutor Raul Gonzalez who wanted to talk to me, Your Honor. But I wasn’t sure whether I would testify or not, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. I was asking about the date when you first learned that you were going to testify in this case, the date.

MR. YULO. I received a subpoena last Friday, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Was that the first time that you knew that you are going to testify or you were notified earlier?

MR. YULO. When I talked to Prosecutor Gonzalez, he told me that what he is asking of me is something for the country and if I was willing to testify. And I said, “If you subpoena me, then I will do my duty.”

MR. FLAMINIANO. Do you recall that the impeachment complaint was filed with the House of Representatives sometime in November when there was a complaint filed with the House of Representatives?

MR. YULO. I don’t recall.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Now, were you not asked by any congressmen or private lawyer that your testimony would be needed to support the complaint for impeachment filed with the House of Representatives?

MR. YULO. No, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. So during the whole period when complaints for impeachment were filed with the House of Representatives, you never knew that you were going to be a witness in this case?

MR. YULO. I had an indication, Your Honor, when the impeachment trial began. And if I remember, it was either Arroyo or Raul Gonzalez, one of them were coming up with an opening statement and there was a mention that the President called both the heads of the PSE and the Securities and Exchange Commission. So, when I heard that, then in my mind, I thought that they will be coming to me soon.

MR. FLAMINIANO. So, that was the time when the Articles of Impeachment were already referred to the Senate by the House of Representatives, correct?

MR. YULO. As far as I remember, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. That’s right. And it was after the opening statements were made in this case?

MR. YULO. That the idea sank in my mind because the head of the PSE was mentioned specifically. So I thought that sooner or later, they will probably talk to me.

MR. FLAMINIANO. So, during the initial hearing, that was when opening statements were made by the prosecution and defense that marked the opening of the trial, you were not yet certain that you were going to be called as a witness, is that it?

MR. YULO. No, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Now, how many days after the opening statements were made before this body did you actually learn that you were going to be used as a witness by the prosecution?

MR. YULO. I don’t recall, Your Honor. All I know is, I got two telephone calls and making an appointment for me to meet with Raul Gonzalez, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. And when did you meet with Congressman Raul Gonzalez?

MR. YULO. I don’t recall, Your Honor. I did not really mark it on in my diary book.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Before you took the stand this afternoon, did you meet with any member of the prosecution panel or with any private lawyer regarding your testimony in this case?

MR. YULO. I met with Congressman Raul Gonzalez, Your Honor, and later on they introduced me to the prosecutor who was going to question me, Your Honor, Oscar Rodriguez.

MR. FLAMINIANO. When did you meet with Congressman Gonzalez and Congressman Rodriguez?

MR. YULO. When they brought me to a safe house, I think it was Monday, Your Honor, if I remember very clearly.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Could that be January 8 of this year? January 8, which was a Monday?

MR. YULO. And also before that, Your Honor, when they informed me that they had already asked for a subpoena. Then, I remember also being introduced to Oscar Rodriguez.

MR. FLAMINIANO. And they brought you to a safe house?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Who brought you to the safehouse?

MR. YULO. The prosecutors, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Will you kindly name them?

MR. YULO. It was being coordinated by female lawyers, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. I beg your pardon?

MR. YULO. There were two female lawyers, Your Honor, who was talking to me.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Can you tell the names of these female lawyers?

MR. YULO. Atty. Chona Dimayuga and Marie Yuviengco, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. How about … Any Congressmen with them?

MR. YULO. When they brought me to the…

MR. FLAMINIANO. When they brought you to the safehouse?

MR. YULO. No, Your Honor. Well, in the safehouse, Your Honor, I would meet some of the prosecutors, yes.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Can you name the prosecutors whom you met at the safehouse?

MR. YULO. I met Oscar Rodriguez. I saw Raul Gonzalez, as well, there because they were the ones whom I had talked to, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Was former Chairman Yasay also at the safehouse when you were being interviewed by these prosecutors? Chairman Yasay was there, was he not?

MR. YULO. Chairman Yasay I met Chairman Yasay, actually, last night, Your Honor,…

MR. FLAMINIANO. Yes.

MR. YULO. … because we were in the safehouse, as well.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Yes. And so, before you testified, you met with Chairman Yasay.

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. And you discussed the nature of the testimony that you gave before this Impeachment Court this afternoon. Is it not? You discussed with him.

MR. YULO. Not entirely, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Now, when you say “not entirely,” what matters did you discuss with Chairman Yasay at the safehouse?

MR. YULO. At the safehouse, Your Honor, we were trying to confirm the dates when he called me, Your Honor, because that was a long time ago. So, I just wanted to make sure my dates were correct.

MR. FLAMINIANO. And you were able to confirm that you, Chairman Yasay, Atty. Almadro and Dante Tan met at Ciudad Fernandina on November 26, 1999. Right?

MR. YULO. That was in my calendar book, Your Honor, so, I remember that date, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Yes. And you and Chairman Yasay talked about what took place during that meeting at Circulo Ciudad Fernandina. Right?

MR. YULO. Not entirely, Your Honor. We were just trying to recall our recollections, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. But was it not part of the recollection that you were trying to make that on November 26, 1999, you met with Mr. Dante Tan at Ciudad Fernandina?

MR. YULO. I knew that happened because it was in my diary book, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. And Chairman Yasay was there?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor, at Ciudad Fernandina. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Yes. And also Atty. Almadro?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Yes. And you said that when Mr. Dante Tan arrived, you were rather surprised of his presence at that meeting.

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Will you kindly tell us why you were surprised?

MR. YULO. Because when Chairman Yasay asked us for a meeting, he did not tell us there were other people involved, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. And you did not say that Chairman Yasay played a dirty trick on you by inviting Dante Tan…

MR. YULO. That’s the feeling that I got, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. That was the feeling. It was a cheap trick, as you said…

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. … played by Chairman Yasay.

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Now, later, you said you stood up as soon as Mr. Tan arrived. You stood up and left the place.

MR. YULO. No, no. Mr. Yasay was the first to excuse himself, so, he left and he left us there, together with Dante Tan, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. And you and Mr. Dante Tan, Atty. Almadro stayed there for how many minutes more after Chairman Yasay left?

MR. YULO. Just a few minutes, 5, 10, 15 minutes thereabouts, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Five or ten minutes.

Now, did you not confront Chairman Yasay later and ask him why he set you up…

MR. YULO. When I met him in the safe…

MR. FLAMINIANO. … and he played a dirty trick on you?

MR. YULO. When I met him at the safehouse, I asked him that question, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. What did he tell you?

MR. YULO. He told me that he got a call from Dante Tan and that Dante Tan told him that the President wanted him to meet with Atty. Almadro and me and so we arranged the meeting. Yes, he admitted it, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Now, are you saying that last night was the only time that you talked to Prosecutor Rodriguez?

MR. YULO. No, Your Honor. When they issued me a subpoena, which I did not receive yet, they informed me and they called me and they asked me to come to the safehouse to meet with them.

MR. FLAMINIANO. And was it Congressman Rodriguez who interviewed you?

MR. YULO. The first time, it was Raul Gonzalez, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Were you asked questions by Congressman Gonzalez?

MR. YULO. He gave me some kind of a lecture, Your Honor, on the need to do something for the country and he was telling me that he hopes I will comply, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Now, I’m asking you about the questions that were propounded by Congressman Gonzalez to you when he was interviewing you.

MR. YULO. He just asked me, Your Honor, about BW because I was President and it was all over the papers and if I’m willing to testify on that matter, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Was that all that Congressman Gonzalez asked you?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. He did not ask you to narrate what you knew about the circumstances of the investigation conducted of BW Resources?

MR. YULO. That was done, Your Honor, by one of the lawyers, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Was that on the same occasion or on a different occasion?

MR. YULO. If I remember right, Your Honor, it was on the same occasion, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Was Chairman Yasay present on that occasion when Congressman Gonzalez interviewed you and told you to testify for the sake of the country, as you said?

MR. YULO. No, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Congressman Rodriguez was not there?

MR. YULO. No, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. When did you meet with Congressman Rodriguez for the first time?

MR. YULO. At about the time when they called me to tell me that they had issued a subpoena for me, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. When was that?

MR. YULO. This was a few days before I received the subpoena.

MR. FLAMINIANO. When did you receive the subpoena?

MR. YULO. Last Friday, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. And did you talk to Congressman Rodriguez the following day or on the same day that you received the subpoena?

MR. YULO. Before I received the subpoena, I was asked to drop by the safehouse and I came over.

MR. FLAMINIANO. That was?

MR. YULO. That was two or three days before Friday, Your Honor, thereabouts.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Before Friday and then Congressman Rodriguez interviewed you?

MR. YULO. Yes, he introduced himself that he was the one …

MR. FLAMINIANO. Yes.

MR. YULO. … in charge of me.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Yes. Now, did he prepare questions to be answered by you or he was spontaneously asking questions for you to answer?

MR. YULO. He was asking questions and he was taking notes.

MR. FLAMINIANO. He was taking notes. And did he later transcribe the notes into written form, into a computer or a typewriter for you to read?

MR. YULO. He had his own notes, Your Honor, that he had and he was showing it to me, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Uh huh. Now, you said that the President, through his aides, called you about four times?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. And when was the first call? Will you kindly tell us again?

MR. YULO. It was in the month of November, Your Honor, and I double checked with my Executive Assistant before coming here and she was the one who told me the exact dates. And she said it was November 17, November 18, that she reminded me of, and 22 and 23. So that stuck to my mind.

MR. FLAMINIANO. So the first call … Okay. So the first call was on November 17?

MR. YULO. That’s correct, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. At what time?

MR. YULO. Normally, the calls would come in late morning until midday, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. And did you actually talk to the President?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. What did he tell you at that first call?

MR. YULO. At the first call, Your Honor, the papers were splashed all over about the BW scandal and Chairman Yasay and I had a … we were fighting in the media and so he talked about that. He was concerned about the media scandal and so he said that he was going to issue a memorandum order to Chairman Yasay for him to no longer talk to the media and to first clear statements with Malacañang, Your Honor, among other things.

MR. FLAMINIANO. And was that all that you talked about?

MR. YULO. No. Then he told me that Dante Tan is a friend, kaibigan at saka “mabait na tao iyan.”

MR. FLAMINIANO. Okay. How about in the second call?

MR. YULO. And he also faxed me a copy of the memorandum order, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Okay. How about the second call? You said it took place on November 18?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. What time?

MR. YULO. That was probably about noon almost because I remember I was in a meeting, noontime, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. And do you recall the substance of your conversation with the President on that day?

MR. YULO. It was about the trading bandwidth, Your Honor, that he said the SEC will issue me an order restoring the original trading bandwidth that was wider and I did get an order from the Securities and Exchange Commission dated the same day, November 18.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Substantially, that was the essence of the conversation that you had on November 18? Right?

MR. YULO. He again told me that Dante Tan was a friend who has helped him at “tinutulungan ako niyan.” Those were the words, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Okay. And then on November 22 you again talked to the President?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. What was the substance of your conversation, if you recall?

MR. YULO. It was something about that the SEC is no longer investigating and it is only the PSE now and so “paki-expedite ninyo na iyan”.

MR. FLAMINIANO. That fourth call was … ?

MR. YULO. 22 November, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. On November …?

MR. YULO. That was …

MR. FLAMINIANO. … the fourth call?

MR. YULO. That was part of the second set of — that was the third.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Yes. I want the fourth call. Was it on November 22?

MR. YULO. Twenty-third.

MR. FLAMINIANO. On November 23. And this was the time when you talked about the BW Resources?

MR. YULO. He called me and told me that Dante Tan told him that he was the victim and he had lost P2 billion, so he is not manipulating because he is losing money.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Was this the occasion when the President told you something like this: “Kung sabagay kung may kasalanan man si Dante Tan, wala tayong magagawa diyan.” Was that the occasion when he said those words?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. And you recall perfectly that this was precisely the words used by the President on that occasion when you talked about the BW Resources – “Sabagay kung may kasalanan si Dante Tan, wala na tayong magagawa diyan.”

MR. YULO. The full sentence, Your Honor, if I recall, in Tagalog was, “Sabagay kung may kasalanan ay wala tayong magagawa. Pero alam mo matagal na akong tinutulungan niyan. Senado pa, tumutulong na iyan. The word “Senado” was the first time he mentioned, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Yes. And you distinctly remember “Kung may kasalanan, wala siyang magagawa”?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Now, gusto ko ring magsalita sa wikang Pilipino sapagkat pareho kaming Kapampangan ni Congressman Oscar Rodriguez. Gusto ko naman ipakita sa kanya na kaya ko ring magtanong sa wikang Pilipino.

Now, Ginoong Yulo, sinabi ninyo na nagpunta kayo sa Malacañang noong February 14, 2000?

MR. YULO. Opo, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Oo. At anong oras kayo nagpunta doon?

MR. YULO. Dumating po kami roon mga 2:15 to 2:30, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINANO. 2:15. At ano iyong napag-usapan ninyo ni Presidente, iyong unang salita ni Presidente noong nagkita kayo?

MR. YULO. Noong pagpasok na pagpasok ho namin, kung naalaala ko po, parang naghe-hello-hello ho at mayroon siyang sinabing parang “Aalis na sana ako sa barberya ko.” Something along that line, Your Honor. Parang biro-biro po.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Ngayon, naalaala ko noong nagtestigo si Atty. Almadro dito palagay ko nadinig mo iyong ibang bahagi ng kaniyang testimony sapagkat nandito ka raw sa loob ng Session Hall habang nagbibigay ng testimony si Atty. Almadro. Totoo ba iyon na nandito ka sa loob ng Session Hall noong kasalukuyang nagbibigay ng salaysay dito sa Impeachment Court si Atty. Almadro?

MR. YULO. Opo, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. At marami kang nadinig sa kaniyang testimoniya?

MR. YULO. Hindi ho marami. Ang nangyari po noon, Your Honor, galing po ako sa holding room, nagpunta ako sa restroom to relieve myself. At noong nasa restroom po ako nakita ko ho si Oscar Rodriguez at siya rin po ay nagre-relieve sa kaniyang sarili at sinabi niya sa akin, “Oh, susunod na tayo.” And tapos umalis ho siya. Tapos nakita ko naglakad siya, pumasok ho sa kuwarto. Akala ko dapat sumunod na ako, so basta’t kusa ho akong sumunod ako dahil may ID naman ako at wala naman hong pumigil sa akin. So, it was about, I think a few minutes after I sat down, Atty. Almadro was still testifying and then recess was called and so I stood up to leave the room, and the media was hounding me and so I wanted to get away from them. And one of the security men told me, “Pumasok ka muna sa loob at hindi ka masusundan ng media.” So, I entered again and I stood somewhere here by the pillar and when the media left, I left again, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Okay.

MR. YULO. But I’d like to state, Your Honor, when I came in I thought that I was due to testify so I walked in and I had no idea that I wasn’t supposed to come in because I was not privy on any of the Rules of the Senate, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Okay. Now, maaalaala mo ba kung ano ang nadinig mong sinabi ni Atty. Almadro habang nandidito ka sa Session Hall nadinig mo na ‘yong kuwento…

MR. YULO. Opo.

MR. FLAMINIANO. …ni Atty. Almadro noong nandodoon kayo sa Malacañang noong February 14, 2000?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Tama ba ‘yon?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. At siguro nadinig mo si Atty. Almadro na sinasabi niya na noong okasyon na ‘yon wala namang sinabi si Pangulong Estrada na baguhin ‘yong report, ‘yong investigation report na ginawa ni Almadro? Kinukompirma mo ba ‘yong sinabi ni Atty. Almadro na wala namang sinabi si Presidente sa kanya na baguhin ‘yong investigation report, tama ba?

MR. YULO. At that time po, tapos na po ‘yong report hindi na po puwedeng baguhin ‘yon dahil nabigay na namin sa Business Conduct Committee po ‘yon.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Kaya nga. Sabi ni Atty. Almadro noong nag testify siya dito at nadinig mo ‘yon, sinasabi mo, na wala namang sinabi si Pangulong Estrada sa iyong dalawa na baguhin ‘yong investigation report na ginawa ni Atty. Almadro, tama ba?

MR. YULO. Tama po.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Kinukompirma mo ‘yon?

MR. YULO. Confirmed po.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Now, isn’t it true, Mr. Yulo, that you are one of those actively advocating the resignation of President Estrada even before the impeachment trial started, isn’t it a fact?

MR. YULO. Your Honor, when the jueteng scandal came out, Your Honor, I am a member of the board also of the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry. And we discussed this thoroughly, Your Honor, and we did come up with a position on this. And I did vote that the best solution to get out of the problem was a quick resignation, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. In other words, you firmly believe that the President should have resigned or should resign even before the outcome of this impeachment case is decided.

MR. YULO. At that time, Your Honor, there was no impeachment case when this was being discussed at the board. And so, everybody was giving his own comments. And they were saying “If business and the economy is suffering, what could be the quick solution to the problem?” And everybody said “What’s good for the country is a quick resignation.”

MR. FLAMINIANO. Okay. Isn’t that true that you were one of those who spoke in a gathering of Makati businessmen advocating the resignation of the President?

MR. YULO. Spoke?

MR. FLAMINIANO. Espousing the resignation of the President.

MR. YULO. I spoke at a gathering not in Makati, it was in Manila, of Boy Scouts, a club of Boy Scouts who were old people and who were talking about this and they were asking me questions as to what’s the best solution. And I said, “The quick resignation is the best solution.”

MR. FLAMINIANO. Yes. That was what you told that gathering of Boy Scouts, isn’t that…

MR. YULO. That’s correct.

MR. FLAMINIANO. …the President should resign, isn’t it?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Okay. Now, will you kindly tell us why you refer to the place where you were interviewed by the prosecutors as a safehouse?

MR. YULO. That is what they called it, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Is it a safehouse in the sense that it is a secluded place where nobody else can go to except the public prosecutors?

MR. YULO. They told me it’s a safehouse, nobody knows where it is. So, I am safe from the public, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. And were you able to find out who own that house which you call a safehouse?

MR. YULO. No, Your Honor.

MR. FALMINIANO. Now, whom did you actually find in that safehouse when you were interviewed?

MR. YULO. The two female lawyers who were talking to me, Atty. Dimayuga and Marie Yuviengco and some of the prosecutors, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Okay. Now, were you ever called as a witness in hearings conducted by the Senate regarding this BW Resources?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Now, do you recall if you mentioned about the four telephone calls which you allegedly received from the Office of the President when you testified before that body?

MR. YULO. At that time, Your Honor, when I was asked by Senator Roco, I just said I remember a call that I got, Your Honor. I was not detailing all the calls because I wasn’t being asked in that manner, Your Honor. So, I just said I remember a call.

MR. FLAMINIANO. You were able to mention only one call or two calls?

MR. YULO. I just said I remember a call that I got regarding the media gag order, Your Honor, because that one stuck to my mind at that time because I got a copy of the fax.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Okay. Now, did you talk to Chairman Yasay yesterday?

MR. YULO. We met at the safehouse, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Yes. And how long did you talk to him at the safehouse?

MR. YULO. We had dinner, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Yes. How long were you there in that safehouse?

MR. YULO. Over dinner, Your Honor, we were exchanging — we were talking, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. And was Atty. Almadro also there?

MR. YULO. He did not eat there, no, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Yes, but he was there at the safehouse earlier, was he not? He was there at the safehouse, was he not?

MR. YULO. Last night?

MR. FLAMINIANO. Yes.

MR. YULO. I am not too sure, Your Honor. Perhaps. I’m not too sure, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. But it was only yesterday, and you are not too sure?

MR. YULO. Because I thought, Your Honor, he was supposed to be with us, Your Honor, so I’m not too sure if he had sat down and he ate in the safehouse.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Yes, but he was there in the safehouse, but you are not too sure whether he ate or took his dinner there? That’s what you mean, is it not?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. He was there.

MR. YULO. I think, briefly, then he left, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Yes. And he talked to Chairman Yasay, did he not?

REP. RODRIGUEZ. The witness, Your Honor, is not in a position to answer that categorically?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. What is the objection?

REP. RODRIGUEZ. No basis, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Witness may answer. Overruled.

MR. YULO. I don’t know if the two of them talked, Your Honor, because when I arrived, I went to the other room, and then I went to the toilet, Your Honor, and when I came out, I started to eat, Your Honor, and then Chairman Yasay joined me.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Before you proceeded to the Session Hall, you were at the holding room of the Senate where witnesses are held, is it not?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. And Chairman Yasay was with you, was he not?

MR. YULO. At the holding room yesterday, yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. How about… Yesterday, he was in the holding room?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. You were both there at the holding room. And did you discuss your testimonies… the testimony that you gave this afternoon with Chairman Yasay?

MR. YULO. No, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. You did not discuss about your testimony?

MR. YULO. We would banter and exchange jokes and, you know, talk about other things, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. But not about what you were going to say before this Court?

MR. YULO. I did not say anything specific, Your Honor, about what I was gonna say, aside from the fact that when I said when we met at the safehouse, I was trying to recall the exact dates, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. How about this afternoon? Did you talk to Chairman Yasay at the holding room?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor, he was…

MR. FLAMINIANO. At the holding room?

MR. YULO. He was at the holding room, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. And what time did you go to the holding room?

MR. YULO. We probably arrived — I dont know — about between two and three, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Was Chairman Yasay already there when you arrived at the holding room?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. And did you talk about the testimony that you gave this afternoon?

MR. YULO. No, Your Honor.

.MR. FLAMINIANO. He did not ask you what matter you are going to testify on?

REP. RODRIGUEZ. He answered already, Your Honor…

MR. YULO. No, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. … there was no conversation about that matter.

MR. FLAMINIANO. No, I am asking…

MR. YULO. There were other people there, Your Honor, so we just kept quiet, and I started to sleep, Your Honor. I slouched on the couch, Your Honor, and I closed my eyes.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Now, according to you, in that fourth telephone call that was made in November, the President told you, “Sabagay, kung may kasalanan wala tayong magagawa diyan”. Do you recall that?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Now, during that Malacañang visit on November 14… on February 14, I should say, 2000, did not President Estrada repeat what he said on November 26 na kung may kasalanan si Dante Tan, let him face the music o wala na siyang magagawa?

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Misleading, Your Honor. There was no conversation on November 26 with the President.

MR. FLAMINIANO. No, no, February 14.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is overruled.

MR. FLAMINIANO. February 14.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. You mentioned 26.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Witness mat answer.

MR. YULO. What’s the question again, Your Honor?

MR. FLAMINIANO. Noong pumunta kayo sa… Sinabi mo noong November 26, sinabi mi Pangulo sa telephone…

REP. RODRIGUEZ. You mentioned again…

MR. FLAMINIANO. November 23.

MR. YULO. 23, po.

MR. FLAMINIANO. November 23, I’m sorry, ay ito and sinabi sa iyo ni Pangulo, “Sabagay, kung may kasalanan wala tayong magagawa diyan”. Iyan and sinabi ni Pangulo.

MR. YULO. “Sabagay, kung may kasalanan, wala na tayong magagawa diyan pero alam mo kaibigan ko iyan, matagal nang tumutulong sa akin iyan noong sa Senado pa ako”.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Correct.

MR. YULO. That was the complete sentence, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Okay.

Ito bang binitawan na salita ni Pangulo noong November 23 ay hindi ba baga na inulit niya sa Malacañang noong February 14?

MR. YULO. Hindi po, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. “Kung may kasalanan si Dante, let him face the music.” Iyon ang sinabi niya, hindi ba?

MR. YULO. Hindi po, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Hindi niya inulit iyon pero wala naman siyang sinasabi na baguhin ninyo iyong investigation report. Wala namang sinasabing ganoon?

MR. YULO. Wala po, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. That would be all with the witness.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Redirect?

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Prosecutor Rodriguez.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. You said that the prosecutors told you that they described the venue where you were interviewed being a safehouse and they said that you would be safe there. Why? Have you experienced any threat to your security before that?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. What kind of threat was that or were they?MR. YULO. Well, my driver, Your Honor, was stopped on the road one time. A guy was dressed in maong and maong jacket and the guy was asking my driver whether the car he was driving was owned by me and how many cars we had, Your Honor. And also, one of our househelps was also stopped in the supermarket and a guy was trying to befriend her telling her she knew my driver and asking information about my family, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. When you met President Estrada on February 14, year 2000, did you come to know whether or not the President was aware that the report was already submitted to the Committee on Business Conduct and Ethics of the PSE?

MR. YULO. Well, I don’t think he was aware of that, Your Honor, but I did inform him that Senator Roco and the Securities and Exchange Commission will be getting copies of this report.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Now, in the event… In your procedure at the PSE, after a final report has been made and submitted to you and then submitted to the Business Conduct and Ethics Committee, is there a way for anybody to effect or ask for the changes in the report?

MR. FLAMINIANO. Objected to on the ground that it was not the subject of the cross-examination, Mr. Chief Justice.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. It was, Your Honor. The counsel repeatedly asked if the President asked them to change the final report.

MR. FLAMINIANO. To change but not in that context.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. That is my question, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is sustained on the ground that there is no sufficient basis yet. Ask another question.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Now, you mentioned earlier under cross, after the counsel asked you whether the President told you to change the report submitted to him. Do you remember having been asked that?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And I am asking you now, is there a way under your procedure at the PSE, after the submission of a final report regarding an investigation whether or not you can change or anybody can change that report?

MR. YULO. Your Honor, I received the report on February 11 and after reading it on that same day, I already signed it and I said, endorse to the Business Conduct and Ethics Committee, and I already told Atty. Almadro to prepare additional copies to give to the Business Conduct Committee. So when I signed it, Your Honor, it could no longer be changed.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. And in the event that the President would ask you to change that report, would you be able to do so?

MR. YULO. Your Honor, when the President kept on calling me several times…

MR. FLAMINIANO. Objected to for being hypothetical.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The objections will have to be sustained. One, the witness already testified on cross examination that the President did not; and secondly, it would be speculative.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Now, were you at any time asked to say anything other than the truth. by any member of the prosecution or any of the witnesses?

MR. YULO. No, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. When you testified today, were you ever supplied answers or told what and how you should answer?

MR. YULO. Never, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. You took an oath earlier to swear and you took an oath to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth before you testified today. Do you affirm this oath that everything you said today is the truth?

MR. YULO. I do, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. That will be all, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Recross?

MR. FLAMINIANO. Just one question, Mr. Chief Justice.

Di ba totoo, Ginoong Yulo, na kahit na maraming sinasabi mo, apat na tawag yata ang tinanggap mo kay Pangulo, di ba?

MR. YULO. Opo, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Ang ginawa n’yo, hindi n’yo… ang ginawa ng grupo ni Almadro ay adverse kay Dante Tan, hindi ba? Kung ano ‘yong dapat gawin, ‘yon ang ginawa ni Dante Tan…

MR. YULO. Hindi po adverse.

MR. FLAMINIANO. … despite the calls of the President-si Almadro.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Your Honor, it is very obvious that this is now improper for recross.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. So, the objection is, it is improper. Objection sustained.

MR. FLAMINIANO. May I ask, Your Honor please, permission to ask this as an additional cross-question.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. We object, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair cannot allow that.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Anyway, I will try to reform my question, Mr. Chief Justice.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. I’m sorry, Cabalen.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Okay. Now…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Just reform it as a proper recross-examination question.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Now, Mr. Yulo, the public prosecutor asked you whether or not you came here to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, is that it?

MR. YULO. Yes, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Now, isn’t it a fact that your desire to have President Estrada resign may somehow affected the nature…?

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Objection, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. … and sincerity of your testimony?

MR. YULO. Not at all, Your Honor.

MR. FLAMINIANO. Not at all. Okay. That would be all.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Was there an answer made by the witness?

MR. YULO. Not at all, Your Honor.

REP. RODRIGUEZ. It’s okay, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Already answered?

REP. RODRIGUEZ. Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Now, it would be the turn for the Members of the Court to ask the questions. Can we register the names of the members who will?

So, the following have registered, the Honorable Senator-Judges Guingona, Aquino-Oreta, Legarda-Leviste, Sergio Osmena III, Biazon, and the Majority Leader would be number six.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. You want to ask the question now?

THE MAJORITY LEADER. I just want to call attention…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. You’re the last to the list, Your Honor.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. Yes, Mr. Chief Justice. I just want to call attention to the fact that it is now eight minutes after eight.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Eight minutes after eight. And so?

THE MAJORITY LEADER. We seek…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Assuming that that is the correct time, what is the pleasure of the Majority Leader?

THE MAJORITY LEADER. Indication from the Chair, as agreed, we can suspend now, so that the judges can ask their questions tomorrow.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Before we suspend, we act on the motion, the Honorable Senate President would take up one of the motions and other pleadings under capital letter F of the supplemental agenda. The rest will be taken up tomorrow. So, we will just consider Item 2 here which is the compliance by the Secretary of the Senate to the manifestation and directive of the Honorable Senate President in open court re the mauling incident of 08 January 2001 filed on 09 January 2001.

The Senate President is recognized.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. Thank you very much, Mr. Chief Justice.

Very briefly, there is a report in the possession of the Senate President from our Security Officers regarding the mauling of Mahomel Adam Yakain, the driver, Your Honor, of the Senate bus who was manhandled last January 8 in the premises of the Senate grounds. The report states that cases for Physical Injuries and Grave Coercion had been filed with the Pasay City Prosecutor’s Office charging six people for the incidents complained of, Your Honor.

So, I will submit to the Senate Secretary for safekeeping a copy of this three-page report, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes.

Considering that some of the remaining matters here would seem to be urgent, the Presiding Officer will just make the following rulings thereon, with the permission of the Majority Leader:

One, the Rejoinder or a subpoena duces tecum on production of certain documents by the PNB relating to Dante Tan, Best World Resources Corporation, and/or Best World Gaming and Entertainment Corporation filed by the prosecution panel on 9 January is noted but the matter will be called for resolution on Friday, the 12th.

Second, the Comment and Motion to Expunge re: Manifestation concerning the grant on Governor Luis “Chavit” Singson, Ms. Emma Lim and Miss Ma. Carmencita Itchon filed on 8 January 2001 by the defense panel. Noted and call again the matter on 15 January.

Third, Opposition to the Motion to Recall Witness Maria Carmencita Itchon, filed on 8 January 2001 by the defense panel. The Presiding Officer resolving on the Motion to Recall and the opposition thereto, grants the Motion for Recall. When will Carmencita be called back to the witness stand? The prosecution may submit the date.

Fourth. Opposition to the Urgent Motion to Declare Yolanda Ricaforte as a hostile witness filed on 8 January 2001 by the defense panel. And the Reply to the Opposition filed by the prosecution panel on 9 January 2001. This matter will have to be deferred until the witness shall have taken the witness stand. Said witness was subpoenaed upon request of the prosecution and, therefore, the determination of whether she is an adverse or hostile witness will be at the time that she will take the witness stand and would testify.

The same ruling is made in respect of the Opposition to the Urgent Motion to Declare Anton Prieto as Hostile Witness on 8 January 2001 filed by the defense panel.

The parties’ attention is invited to the fact that when Prieto testified here, he was not declared a hostile witness because of a question which was adopted by the prosecution suggested by the Honorable Senator-Judge Juan Ponce Enrile.

If at all the time would become necessary to do so, meaning to declare him as hostile witness, it is only when he is called back to the stand to continue his testimony.

The last would only be, to note the Reply to the Opposition filed by the prosecution panel on January 2001 to the Urgent Motion to Declare Anton Prieto as Hostile Witness.

Those are all the matters, pending resolution for this evening.

The Majority Leader now.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. Mr. Chief Justice, before I make my motion, perhaps the Court can now temporarily excuse the witness with the instruction to return tomorrow.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The witness is excused but he is advised to come back tomorrow for the continuation of his testimony on questions by the Members of the Court.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. Before we adjourn…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes, Atty. Mendoza?

MR. MENDOZA. If I may interrupt briefly, if Your Honors please, with reference to the witness Yolanda Ricaforte and Anton Prieto, both of these witnesses, I recall, were called as witnesses under Article 1. So in view of the fact that these witnesses are witnesses in regard to Article 1, may I request or suggest that they be called back to the witness stand as early as possible since we had agreed that next week, it will be Article.. .

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. IV already.

MR. MENDOZA. II-B.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. II-B, yes.

MR. MENDOZA. II-B, yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. I remember yesterday there was already an agreement…I think a day before, to issue the subpoena ad testificandum to both Prieto and Ricaforte. This was an announcement made by Prosecutor Apostol. So just the same, the Secretary, Atty. Yap more particularly, is hereby directed to prepare the subpoena ad testificandum for Ricaforte and Anton Prieto for both to appear and to testify on Friday. So by Friday we can complete already the testimonies of witnesses for Article 1. The Majority Leader now.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. Before we adjourn, Mr.Chief Justice, I move for the approval of the Journal of the Impeachment Court of Monday, January 8, 2001.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes, the Honorable Senator –Judge Roco.

SEN. ROCO. Can we just hold it for a while, until tomorrow? I haven’t read it.

THE PRESIDING JUDGE. Until tomorrow then.

SEN. ROCO. Yes.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. I withdraw that motion.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. So the motion to approve is withdrawn and the Secretariat is directed to reset or reschedule this particular item on the approval of the Journal of 8th January tomorrow.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. And I move that the…

MR. DAZA. My apologies to the Majority Floor Leader…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Atty. Daza.

MR. DAZA. I just wanted to ask a clarification on the advisory that was announced by the Senate President which… and I’m reading from the transcript. It says:

“We would like, therefore, to issue an advisory to all counsel, both of the prosecution and of the defense, as well as to all witnesses either already testifying or will be testifying in this impeachment trial, to refrain from discussing the merits of the impeachment case before any public forum in accordance with the mid-trial conference agreement that was reached by counsel of both parties on January 8, 2001 at the Office of the Senate President.”

I’m now asking for clarification as to the scope and coverage because even as of now, in all candor, some members of the media have indicated that they want to interview me in one or two of the adjoining rooms on this floor. As we know, the Senate has hosted the media by providing them with rooms where they are, with their radio units and TV cameras and because my reading of this advisory, Mr.Chief Justice, which is in relation to what was quoted as the matter brought up by Senator-Judge Biazon, in regards to participation in talks using public forum.

So my query is this: would interviews by media within the premises of the Senate, specifically on the second floor where they have rooms for this purposes be covered by this advisory?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate President is recognized to respond.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. While it is true that the Senate may have provided media with facilities for interviewing all people here, God has given you the right to say no, Mr. Daza. So you are covered by that prohibition on the merits of the case.

MR. DAZA. Only on the merits of the case.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. That’s correct.

MR. DAZA. Thank you, Mr.Senate President

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. When the term “merits of the case” is used, it simply means that there should be no discussion on the merits of the testimony of the witnesses by either the defense or the prosecution. Is that the meaning, Mr…?

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. That’s correct, Mr. Chief Justice.

SEN. ROCO. May I, Mr. Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Honorable Senator Roco.

SEN. ROCO. I share the difficulty of counsel. It’s very difficult. I think the judges, we, have been very prudent in making any value judgments. All of us should be very conscious of that. But counsels have to manifest what they believe. I mean, prosecution will say they have made this point; defense will say they did not make the point. And if that is construed not to be included in the “merits of the case,” then I guess they will have to do their duty as they see fit. So if it can be cleared, “merits of the case”, meaning, what exactly, then it’s not clear to me. I understand it, for the judges, we must not say, “Ang galing ng testigos. I believe him.” We refrain from that. “I love him,” worse.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate President, again.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. Yes. At the meeting of counsel last January 8, specifically it was agreed upon that discussions on substantive issues connected with the case will be avoided by counsel as well as by the judges, of course. And we take that to mean any evaluation of how the trial went should also be covered by that inhibition, Your Honor.

SEN. ROCO. But they can be expository because the public needs to be guided. I think they can be…

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. Probably explaining what they tried to do without putting any value judgment as to how, I mean, how weighty or how, you know, convincing their arguments were.

SEN. ROCO. I can understand how I, as a judge, must refrain from value judgment. But I don’t know how an advocate, whether for the prosecution or for the defense, can refrain. That’s what they are here for.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. Yes, but the argumentation should be done before the Impeachment Court. That was the whole point of the caucus this afternoon, Your Honor.

SEN. ROCO. No, I’m sorry, I was not… I did not really think it was a formal caucus because there was supposed to be an agreement, and the Monday… I was under the impression 12:00 o’clock was the discussion with the counsels. I should not intrude with what counsels agree on. But from the beginning, it was my understanding that the Impeachment Court, and this is our difficulty because it is the first time, is judicial, political and public. It is the first time in fact that the doors of the Senate are specifically required to be open because of the public nature. So I have a conceptual difficulty in understanding the order. That’s why even as I said I requested the Chief Justice, normally he would say, “I take that as a motion and that it be approved.” But because it was not clear to me, I did say, puwede ho bang huwag ng i-motion para parang admonition lang, internal guidance, use best judgment within the … within our canons, within our code of responsibility.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. Yes, and we would like that specifically to apply exactly to both counsels within their own constraints as litigants before this Court.

SEN. ROCO. Yes. Thank you very much, Chief Justice, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Prosecutor Arroyo.

REP. ARROYO. Mr. Chief Justice, Mr. Senate President, as far as the prosecution is concerned, we have no difficulty with complying with the advisory yet the realities of the situation makes it very difficult. For so long as when we get out of the doors, media would meet us. Now, yes, we could refuse. But just what is the merits of the case? I find a little difficulty because media will not ask us about the past or the future.

Now, if the idea is we cannot discuss it, then so be it, that we should not discuss it at all. But once there is a discretion that is given, then what are the boundaries of those discretion, and that is what makes it difficult.

Now, the reason for this is perhaps the sub judice rule. Now, if we apply the sub judice rule, then this proceeding partakes of a judicial proceeding which it is not.

I’m not advocating here that we should be free to discuss. But I would just take it that from the point of view of the prosecution, we are worried that little by little the character of this proceeding is retreating from a political trial to a judicial trial. From our point of view, we are guarding against that. Because it is not to our we will be prejudiced if this becomes a judicial proceeding.

Now, the way the proceeding’s being conducted, we apply now the Rules of Court and that is the way it is. But if we understand the Clinton trial, while the impeachment trial was going on, you could hear Larry King with the guests both from the Senate both from the majority and the minority discussing it.

Now talk shows which projected the political character of the proceeding well, everybody is free to discuss it because it is political in nature and the judgment will be rendered anyway by the 22 senators, whose judgments and whose integrity we cannot question.

Now, the idea for a sub judice rule is so that a judge may not be influenced other than what is stated in a proceeding. That is the essence of a sub judice rule. Now, is the Senate afraid that they will be that their judgment would be impaired in case it is discussed outside? In fact that is the question. It’s not for us. But it is really addressed to the Senate. Is the Senate capable of judging the case regardless of what is discussed outside? Not for us. I don’t think the defense or the prosecution. As far as we are concerned, we will present our side. But if the Senate feels that they cannot make a sound and correct judgment, if matters involving the case is discussed outside, then so be it. But I think that the prosecution will be hard put to commit itself without necessarily disagreeing with the ruling because we abide with any ruling. That if we agree to this, then we transform the character of this proceeding from a political to a judicial. That is all that we want to point out.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. Mr. Chief Justice.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. May I.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate President first.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT. May I just make this brief reply. That there is no basis to compare the situation obtaining in this country today with the situation that obtained during the Clinton trial in the United States. The United States is a very highly developed country, democratically, as well as economically. In this country, we’re still a Third World country trying to make our democracy work. And we are operating under a very highly emotionally charged environment as you can witness the demonstrations outside the doors of the Senate and the start of physical violence being inflicted upon bystanders even to this impeachment trial.

Now for the counsel to say that he does not understand the merits of the case, well, I’m sorry, but as lawyers, we do understand what we mean when we say we are talking about the merits of the case. The Senate is not afraid that it will not be able to render sound and correct judgment. We will be capable of doing that, Your Honor. But we do not want ours, the soundness of the judgment and the correctness of that judgment being muddled while we are still arriving at the process of getting to the final verdict of this Impeachment Court.

And therefore, that’s the reason why you will notice that the admonition to counsel of both parties was given in an advisory form. In effect, it was an appeal to counsel for both parties to exercise restraint on their part so that they do not unnecessarily discuss the merits of the case, not to the prejudice of the Senate itself, but as a means to politicize the whole situation much more than is indicated by the circumstances of the impeachment trial.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Honorable Senator Biazon.

SEN. BIAZON. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.

Let me stress probably by example, the points we would like to raise. This proceedings has the so-called “exclusion rules.” We sequester witnesses inside a room where they cannot listen to the testimonies being rendered by witnesses. A very good example is this witness was asked whether he discussed certain things with the witness Mr. Almadro. And this witness testified tonight he probably did not have to get together because he listened to the testimonies or to discussions of Mr. Almadro in the radio stations — last night in some television stations discussing his testimony and even discussing probably evidences.

Now, the other point, Mr. Chief Justice, Mr. President is this — in this proceedings, there are rulings rendered by the Court on whether or not testimonies or even documentary evidence offered as evidences are ruled upon by the Court. And yet, the very same testimonies and documentary evidences are being discussed out there.

So, what is this?

So, I would say that — For example, this morning, I was listening to the radio, one potential evidence was already raising issues in public. So, what happens to the rulings of this Court in reference to admissibility of evidence; what happens to the policy of the Court for excluding witnesses when all we have to do is listen to talk shows, listen to radio stations and we find everything including testimonies that are yet to be presented in Court, including getting acquainted with evidences that are yet to be presented in Court.

This, Mr. President, Mr. Chief Justice, is the concern that I would like to raise.

Now probably, in the definition of what really constitutes merits of the case, again, I think that the President of the Senate has said it very accurately, especially lawyers and all the members of the –or the officers of the Court specifically members of the defense panel and the prosecution panel are all lawyers. And I think, as the President said, lawyers would know what constitute merits of the case.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Honorable Senator-Judge Miriam Defensor Santiago.

SEN . DEFENSOR SANTIAGO. Mr. Chief Justice, at the caucus of the Senator-Judges earlier this afternoon, it was unanimously agreed that a draft resolution precisely on this point will be circulated among the Senator-Judges tomorrow.

I am therefore compelled to move to adjourn immediately.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Yeah, until tomorrow.

The Majority Leader.

THE MAJORITY LEADER. So the motion to adjourn, I move to suspend until two o’clock tomorrow afternoon .

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The continuation of the discussion of the incident will be until tomorrow at two o’clock and the motion therefore to adjourn until such time, there being no objection, is approved.

THE TRIAL WAS SUSPENDED AT 8:30 P.M.