Kim Wong

Sen. Bam thanks Bangladesh for patience, assures $81M will be returned

Sen. Bam Aquino thanked Bangladesh for its patience and assured that the Philippine government will leave no stone unturned to ensure the $81 million stolen from its central bank is returned as soon as possible.

“Thank you very much, Mr. Ambassador, for being so patient in our hearings,” Sen. Bam told Bangladeshi ambassador John Gomes during the Senate blue ribbon committee’s last hearing on the hacking incident.

 Despite the adjournment of the hearing, Aquino said the process of returning the stolen money to Bangladesh will continue.

“We won’t stop until the money stolen from the Bangladeshi people is returned, up to the last centavo,” said Sen. Bam.

During the hearing, the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) confirmed that the $81 million was stolen by unidentified hackers from the Central Bank of Bangladesh.

Of the $81 million, the AMLC said $15 million was returned by junket operator Kim Wong, $21 million allegedly went to casinos, $28 million is subject to Supreme Court’s decision on the petition for review and $17 million still at large.

 The AMLC said a court order is needed to forfeit the $15 million in its safekeeping while the Bangladesh government can file a third-party claim to prove that the money belongs to them.

The process, according to the AMLC, will take about three to five months.

The money trail back to Bangladesh

We are finally making headway in locating portions of the $81 million stolen from Bangladesh and siphoned into the Philippines.

So far we have confirmed that Solaire Resort & Casino received P1.365 billion ($30 million) and Eastern Hawaii Leisure Company, owned by casino junket operator Kim Wong, received P1 billion ($23 million) of the stolen money.

Based on money transfer firm PhilRem’s testimony before the committee, it was alleged that around $30.64 million, broken down to $18 million and P600 million, was delivered to Weikang Xu over 6 tranches.

It was only during the Senate hearing last March 29 that we were able to dissect further the location of a portion of the stolen money with the testimony of Kim Wong.

Wong contested PhilRem’s testimony and claimed that they only released P400 million and $5 million over 4 tranches.

Wong also testified to receiving P1 billion from Philrem: P450 million ($9.7 million), which he accepted as payment for a debt of one Shuhua Gao, and P550 million entered to Midas Hotel and Casino. However, of the P550 million, P510 million was lost to Midas and only P40 million is left.

Since his statement, Wong has already turned over P38 million ($863,000) and $4.63 million to the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) for safekeeping. He has also stated his willingness to return the P450 million or $9.7 million paid to him to cover Gao’s debt, but requested for a month to deliver.

Today, a total of about $5.5 million has already been reclaimed from Wong. And once he is able to return the additional $9.7 million, we will have recovered $15.2 million of the $81 million stolen from Bangladesh.

On the other hand, PhilRem offered to return the P10.47 million (about $232,000) representing the fee they purportedly received for conducting the transactions. However, this was rejected by Bangladesh.

In the case of Bloomberry Resorts, operator of Solaire, they’ve stated that they were able to freeze $2.33 million or P107 million of the stolen money in their casino – another amount we can add to the pot for Bangladesh, should they agree to turn it over.

We will continue to probe the money trail through Solaire and will seek to verify if there is still recoverable dirty money in Midas.

Plus, there is the issue of the other junket operators that are still in the process of confirming receipt of over P1 billion from Solaire.

In the next few weeks, we should be able to pinpoint the rest of the illicit funds so we can return as much as we can to Bangladesh.

The AMLC already said that it is within their powers to reclaim money that is laundered ‘regardless of where the money went. However, they would need to go through a court process and the necessary legal proceedings, which will inevitably take time.

The question is whether these institutions will contest a possible civil forfeiture of laundered money still within their coffers.

If I were them, instead of fighting the court case, I would, in good faith, turn over to the AMLC all illicit funds that coursed through their internal systems.

“Yung maduming pera, dapat ibalik,” said Wong. We can hope everyone shares this sentiment.

This flagrant crime perpetrated in our shores with the involvement of Philippine individuals and institutions has tarnished our country’s reputation and now the world is watching our every move.

A crucial step in redeeming ourselves is to return as much of the stolen money to Bangladesh at the soonest possible time.

Are you following the investigation of the stolen $81 million from Bangladesh? Whose story do you believe? What questions would you ask the resource persons?

First Published on Manila Bulletin

Bam on $81M Scandal: Magkaiba ang Sinasabi nina Wong at ng Philrem

Transcript of Interview on Pasada Sais Trenta

 

Karen Davila: Ano ang future ng pagbabayad sa Bangladesh? Ito muna tayo, Sir, based on your calculation. Iyong puwedeng ibalik ni Kim Wong, puwedeng ibalik ng Pilipino, magkano lang talaga Senator Aquino ang accountability na puwedeng ibalik?

 

Sen. Bam: Actually Karen kung tutuusin may 61 million dollars na pumasok. Iyon ang una nating titignan kung ano ang pwedeng makuha doon sa 61 million. Ang iba pumunta kay Kim Wong, may iba pumunta sa Solaire at ia-analyze natin ang puwede pang ibalik and I think si Mr. Wong said na magbabalik siya ng pera.

Humingi nga ng 30 days para mabuo niya iyong 450 million pesos na nasa kanya pa.

Ang pera na nasa casino, ang tanong diyan, ano diyan ang na encash? Iyon, mahirap ng habulin iyon kasi cash na iyon.

Pero ang nilaro sa kanilang sistema at whether kumita, natalo or anoman, basta nandoon sa loob ng sistema nila, dapat ibalik iyan ng mga casino sa Bangladesh.

 

Karen Davila: Kumbaga ang sinasabi mo, Senator, kasi let’s not be naïve, ayoko naman magsabi na ganito ang Solaire o ang Midas, pero alam mo many casinos all over the world, when the house wins, sabi ko kay Vic dinidistribute na iyan eh. Kasi may agreement na rin iyang mga iyan.

Sen. Bam: Tinanong ko iyan kay Executive Director Abad. Puwede talagang habulin ang pera na yan. Ang sabi niya, pwedeng habulin ang perang iyan through a civil forfeiture case. So ibig sabihin, magpa-file siya ng civil forfeiture, ang tanong, kung ico-confess ba ng mga casino at mga institution ang kasong iyon.

Kasi kapag cinonfess nila ang civil forfeiture case ibig sabihin, they’re claiming its theirs. Diba? Sa amin na ang perang iyan. But kung hindi nila i-coconfess at sabihin nilang, “Sige parang ginagawa ni Kim Wong iyon.”

Hindi po. Ibabalik niya lang kasi he recognized na mali ang pinanggalingan ng perang yan o madumi ang pinanggalingan ng perang iyan para lang ibalik.

That’s why I was telling Executive Director Abad, mag-file na kayo para magkaalaman na.  Kasi lahat nagsasabi na mag-cocooperate po kami, mag-cocooperate kami pero pagbalik kaya ng pera. Hindi iyan totoong cooperation.

Kung madumi ang pinanggagalingan niyan, puwede talaga iyang magpalitan kasi if within our laws, ang kailangan lang ay court order.

Ang tanong, papaabutin ba ng mga casino na 35 years, 30 years ang kasong iyan? Papaabutin pa sa supreme court bago sila mag comply?  Or in good faith dahil alam naman nating galing ito sa ating bansa at nakaw ito, ibalik nalang nila kaagad.

 

Vic: Senator, bakit kailangang makarating sa punto na “hindi, pera namin ito. Knowing na it’s dirty money.” Bakit nila ike-claim na kanila iyon?

 Karen Davila: Kasi casino sila. Iyon iyon eh. Not anything specifically. Tanong ko lang, Senator, iyong junket operator na si Mr. Chao, technically he received the biggest amount, 900 million. And sabi ng abogado niya, tinatally pa raw ni Mr. Chao kung iyon talaga ang binigay sa kanya.

Pero do you remember, Senator, kung magkano ang napanalunan ni Mr. Chao, magkano ang naiwan sa Solaire?

 

Sen. Bam: Wala pa iyon. Pero nangako ang abogado that they will protect the accounting pero last hearing, kanina lang, tinanong ko na rin sila kung ipapabalik ang pera. Kasi kung mayroong na-encash, ibang usapan na iyon. Kasi wala na sa kanila iyon eh diba?

Now secondly, pagbukas natin at ito ang in-account naman po ni AMLC, kung talagang galing sa nakaw iyan, mayroon talagang legal remedy.

Iyong legal remedy diyan ay magbalikan. Hindi imposible iyon. In fact, that’s probably what’s going to happen. Ang tanong lang, pahahabain pa ba natin ang proseso kung from the beginning, in good faith pumayag na tayo. Ibalik nalang natin ang pera.

Nakakahiya. Magkaharap iyong mga resource speakers na siguro may kinalaman dito sa mga taga-Bangladesh. Hindi lang ambassador, nandoon pa ang representative ng AMLC nila, may mga representatives po sila.

Can you imagine Karen? Kung ito ang nangyari sa Pilipinas, can you imagine ang iskandalong nangyayari kung ninakawan tayo ng 81 million dollars?

Kaya ako, the fastest na maibalik natin ang perang iyan, the better for our country.

 

Vic: May tanong dito ah. Hindi ko na sasabihin sa iyo pero galing sa Congressman. Bakit hindi habulin ang mga naglaro? Iyong tao dapat ang hulihin. Si Mr. Chao at iyong mga ibang naglaro.

 

Sen. Bam: I agree. Dapat habulin din. Hindi pa na-poproduce kung sino ang mga taong iyan.

 

Vic: isa pang tanong. Sabi nga ni Sen. Enrile kanina nakikita ko ang body movements ng mga resource speakers, why is it that only Kim Wong ang agresibong magbalik ng pera? What’s happening to Philrem?

Bakit si Kim Wong, kahit iyong utang sa kanyang 450M, utang nga sa kanya iyon, inilabas pa rin niya. How is that?

 

Sen. Bam: Alam mo, Vic, until now sinasabi ng Philrem na wala ng pera na nasa kanila. Ang testimonya nila, wala ng pera sakanila. But again, I will show it out ano? Magkaibang-magkaiba ang kwento ni Kim Wong at ang kwento ng Philrem.

Ang difference nila, 13 million dollars and 200 million pesos. Iyon ang pagkakaiba sa kwento nila. Ang kung totoo nga na na encash nila yan, Karen nandito pa yan sa ating bansa. 13 million dollars and 200 million pesos. In speculation yan kung totoong na encash nila.

And ako kanina, I wanted to point out rin ang inconsistency sa mga kuwento kasi every hearing, paiba-iba ang kuwento.

 

Karen Davila: Actually, Sen. Aquino, I agree with you. Nakakainsulto na nga ito si Deguito at Philrem. Parang grabe ang tolerance ng mga Senador.

Una tama ka, paiba-iba ang kuwento. Pagkatapos niyan ang lakas ng loob gumawa ng ganito, pagkatapos lalabas na kunwari walang nagkakaalaman sa Senado.

Ito sir ang gusto kong tanungin, is it possible in a way, alam mo si Kim Wong maraming bumibilib sa kanya eh. Dahil at least siya ang pakiramdam ng iba, buti pa ito nagsasauli ng pera.

Is it also because, let’s be honest, kasi ang casino, any money you receive today, is not covered under AMLAC so technically hindi mo makasuhan si Kim Wong, is that correct?

 

Sen. Bam: I think if I’m not mistaken kasama na siya, under investigation na siya ah. Kahit itong pagbabalik niya ng pera, hindi ko alam kung mali, kung kakasuhan siya o hindi but kumbaga kapag nasa korte na ito, syempre titingnan ng korte kung sino ba ang nagbalik ng pera? Diba? Siyempre kasama yan sa determination.

Right now, ang line up question ko is ano ang maibabalik natin kaagad? Ang perang dumaan sa Midas, we’re trying to find out kung maibabalik talaga ang pera na iyan.

Ang perang nasa Solaire sabi nila, ang karamihan pumunta doon sa 2 junket operator, pero meron ding nilaro sakanila.

 

Vic: Are we running after the 61 million or just a part of it?

 

Sen. Bam: Dapat lahat. Kasi ito nga ang tanong ko kay AMLC eh. Sabi ni AMLaC basta galing sa money laundering yan, galing sa maduming bagay iyan, ang ending niyan sa korte, civil forfeiture.

Kung ano ang nagamit mo gamit ang perang iyan, magbabalikan. And ako naman, ang tingin ko, if you are a valid and legal institution, bakit mo kikimkimin ang pera na alam mong madumi? Dapat kusa mo nang ibalik yan.

Now, baka sabihin ng mga iba ay wala namang court order. So sabi ko, mag-file na kayo ng civil forfeiture, kasi kaso yan. Pero ang kabilang panig, huwag na nilang i-confess o huwag na nilang i-claim ang perang iyan.

Ibalik na nila kaagad. And there, makikita talaga natin kung sino ang gustong kimkimin ang maduming pera, at sino ang handang magbalik.

 

Karen Davila: Now on another note, ano ang liability or accountability ng isang remittance company katulad ng Philrem? Ipaintindi niyo sa amin, Sir, kaming mga ordinaryong Pilipino, kunwari kami ba ni Vic, pwede ba kaming magtayo na lang ng remittance company tapos may magbibigay sa amin ng 20 million dollars at maghahanap kami ni Vic.  Kami pagpapalit all over, ano po ba ang accountability ng ganoon?  

 

Sen. Bam: Well unang-una, Karen at Vic, talagang mag-uulat ang mga hearing ng mga reporma sa batas kasi marami talagang nagsasabi na ang casino ay hindi under AMLA, pagiging maluwag sa mga remittance company. Iyon talaga ang kailangang baguhin.

 

Karen Davila: Pero actually ang remittance company ay under AMLA no?

 

Sen. Bam: They are a covered institution.

 

Karen Davila: Pero ang isang kumpanya na tulad ng Philrem which is a remittance company, ano ang nakasaad sa batas sir? At a certain amount should they report it?

 

Sen. Bam: Ang alam ko walang ganoong rule.

 

Karen Davila: Ang Philrem, hindi pa inaamin sa Senado kung magkano ang kinita nila sa lahat ng ito. At the very least si Kim Wong alam natin kung magkano ang kinita niya, magkano ang nasa kanya. Itong Philrem, inuuto tayong lahat.

 

Sen. Bam: Ang testimonya nila ay mga 10 million ang kanilang kinita. Although ako, honestly hindi ako naniniwala na ganitong kalaking pera tapos 10 million lang ang kikitain mo.

Now, ako kasi, hangga’t hindi nagtutugma ang testimony ni Kim Wong pati ni Philrem, it clearly shows na mayroong isa diyan na nagsisinungaling.

13 million dollars and 200 million pesos ang pinagkaiba ng kanilang kuwento. Malaki talagang pera iyon.

 

Karen Davila: Alam mo actually, Senator, nakaka-disturb na ang actuation ng Philrem owners specifically iyong Irene Bautista, she’s very casual.

 

Sen. Bam: Ako the fact na every hearing may dumadagdag sa kwento, palagay ko nakita niyo kanina medyo nainis talaga ako. Nainis ako dahil every single time, nag-iiba ang kwento.

Dumadagdag. Ang una, 600 million pesos lang. Iyong pangalawa, naging 680 million.

Iyong pangatlo yata si Wei kansu lang o kasama pala si Kim Wong. Ngayon, may mga transaksyon na hindi pala kasama si Kim Wong, so medyo paiba-iba.

Now, lahat iyan lalabas sa report. Lalabas iyan sa determination namin ng mga nakikinig, lalabas at lalabas ang mga inconsistencies nila.

 

Karen Davila: At hindi lang iyon Sen. Bam. Magkano ang kinita ni Deguito rito? Let’s face it, si Kim Wong nagsasauli ng pera. Si Deguito nagbasa pa ng speech sa Senado kanina na ang drama niya ang ginamit po ako, nagpagamit ako para ma-advance ang career ko pero we are all forgetting iyong testimonya ni Agarato sa bangko na ang lakas ng loob nitong si Deguito na, “Oh magkano retirement mo? Limang milyon ba?”

Nakita niyo sir, ito ay isang babae na in her scope of power, was also bribing people sa range po niya.

 

Sen. Bam: Naniniwala ako na maraming involve dito. At least iyon naniniwala ako doon.

 

Karen Davila: Kanina one of the advances na ginawa ninyo is you made an effort na alamin sa LTO kung totoo ang mga lisensya na sinubmit which I have to say that was quite good entrepreneurial work and in your staff. 

Because ang nangyari ngayon, ang RCBC napa-oo ninyo na dahil nag submit ang LTO na lahat fake, napa-oo ang RCBC that they will open all the fictitious accounts. Tama ba sir?

 

Sen. Bam: Yes. Tama iyon Karen.

 

Karen Davila: Sen. Bam last question po. I’m curious, noong nagbigay ng stop payment order ang Bangladesh government, ang central bank ng Bangladesh ay humingi ng stop payment order.

Was it a US Federal Reserve or iyong Bangladesh ang humingi ng stop payment order?

 

Sen. Bam: Hindi ako sure Karen. On Thursday, masasabi ko po kung sino ang nag decide. I’m just not sure right now.

Bam on Kim Wong

Kim Wong returning 4.6 million dollars is only the first step.

In the previous hearing, we know that he received much more than that. In fact, I am hoping that all institutions that  received the illegally acquired funds will return it at the soonest possible time.

We should insist that the other junket operators, casinos and other institutions return the money that coursed through them, in good faith, and because it is the right thing to do.

Of course, these actions will not absolve any party as the investigation by the authorities is ongoing and the the true picture of what happened is still unclear to the public.

Bam: Pambansang Kahihiyan ang Pagnanakaw sa Bangladesh

Transcript of Phone Patch Interview at News to Go

 

Q: Ano po ang inyong assessment o pananaw sa naging pagdinig sa senado kahapon?

Sen. Bam: Maraming mga real [inaudible] kasi nakadalo na rin si Kim Wong.

Noong unang mga hearing palagi mine-mention si Kim Wong at parang sa kanya naka focus ang spotlight noong wala siya, pero noong pumunta na siya kahapon, parang lumabas kaagad na mayroon talagang specific amount of money na hindi pa talaga na-a-account.

May P59 million na nasa casino and I’m happy to say that the casino wanted to return it. Kim Wong also said pwede niya rin ibalik and definitely priority dapat natin na maibalik ang pera.

Kahapon na napansin ko, iyong testimony ni Phill Leng is that $18 Million and P600 Million ang kanilang binigay kay Kim Wong at kay Wang King Tzu.

Sabi naman ni Kim Wong ang nakuha lang nila ay $5 Million at P400 Million. Kumbaga may balanse na $13 Million at P200 Million.

Napakalaking halaga niyan. Dalawang panig nag a-agree kung saan napunta ang pera na iyan. sa totoo lang it’s either Kim Wong o Philrem at iyon ay isang malaking bagay na na-reveal kahapon.

Iyong isa pa siguro is yung pera na nasa casino kaya naman nila i-trace. Kung tutuusin may kakayahan na kunin ulit ang pera na iyon through other legal preceding kasi galing ang pera na iyon sa nakaw at sinangayunan naman tayo ng AMLC na may kakayahan at kapangyarihan sila na kunin ulit ang pera na iyon.

Sa totoo lang 3rd hearing na natin ito at ngayon lang natin pinaguusapan kung paano pwede ibalik ang pera sa Bangladesh.

 

Q: Ano naman ang consequences kung hindi nga maibalik ang perang ito?

Sen. Bam: Nakaw kasi ang perang ito. I don’t think there are legal consequences in our country pero para sa akin isang pambansang kahihiyan ito na nasangkot ang mga kababayan natin sa ganitong klaseng nakawan.

We know na Bangladesh ay parang Pilipinas din yan na isang bansa na nagsisikap umangat rin. Ang perang yan ay halos P4 Billion din kasi. Bilyon bilyon din sa pera ng Bangladesh iyan at kailangan nila ang perang yan.

Sabi ko nga kung ginawa ito sa Pilipinas, ganun din ang magiging galit natin sa bansang iyon. I think it’s imperative, it’s a priority na kung ano ang pwede natin ibalik sa kanila ay ibalik na kaagad at pagplanuhan na kung paano pwede ibalik ang perang yan kung ang pera ng Bangladesh ay andito pa sa Pilipinas kasi definitely napakalaking na en-cash at andito pa yan sa ating bansa.

Ang casino operator, ang Eastern Hawaii na pag-aari ni Kim Wong, parang nandito pa rin ang perang iyan.

Iyong sa Solaire nalipat na nila sa isang foreign operator na pinatawag namin sa susunod na hearing. Malalaman natin kung nandito pa ang perang iyan.

It is important na i-prioritize natin na kahit malaking porsyento o sana lahat as soon as possible ay maibalik sa Bangladesh.

 

Q: Correct me if I’m wrong pero ang pagkakaintindi ko, ang mga pera na hindi pa nagagastos ay kaya pa isauli, pero ang pera na naisugal na ay mahirap na i-recover?

SBA: Ang mahirap i-recover that something I think na kailangan natin tingnan pa kasi siyempre ang mga casino sasabihin nila “natalo na yan, tapos nay yan”. Pero we cannot forget na if it’s proven, tainted fund yan.

That’s why I’m asking Executive Abad yesterday kung may kapangyarihan ba sila na kunin ito. Hindi din ganoon kaklaro ang sagot. Sabi naman niya meron but kung ano ang legal remedy ang pwedeng gamitin. But even if it’s in the casino, pwede pa itong makuha. Titignan natin sa susunod na hearing.

 

Q: Since the story broke, Senator, ang spotlight napunta nga sa casino na may nagsasabi na it’s kind of a black hole for being laundered or stolen from places around the world. So kasi exempted daw ang mga casino sa AMLC, hindi sila kailangan mag report sa mga awtoridad tungkol sa mga perang malalaking halaga na pumapasok sa kanilang sistema.

 Sen. Bam: Sa totoo lang, isa sigurong kadudulutan nito is really amendment sa ating AMLA law. Iyong mga exempted, siguro iyong paghigpit sa mga loyal customer, ang pagiging clear rin sa kung ano ang pagtaas ng mga chain of command ng mga bangko saka kailangan maklaro rin iyon ng BSP.

Coming from this experience, mukhang marami din talagang kailangang reporma pang kailangang gawin pagdating ng 17th congress at una diyan ang paninigurado na hindi na gagamit ang ating legal institutions dito sa ating bansa para sa masasamang bagay.

 

Q: Ok. Nagkaroon din ng focus sa mga Remittance Center o mga kumpanya katulad ng Philrem. Hindi rin sakop ng anti-money laundering act o AMLA, isa rin ba iyan sa kino-consider ngayon na pumasok din iyan sa ilalim ng AMLA?

Sen. Bam: Isa rin iyan sa mga pinag-uusapan. Isa pa ang pagklaro sa bank secrecy law. I think natapos ang aming hearing kagabi sa isang debate kung pwede bang buksan ang suspicious account. Of course may magkakabilang panig iyan. Inaaral iyan ng mga Senate lawyers natin.

Pero para sa akin, kung klaro naman na hindi legal ang mga ginamit na identification sa pagbukas ng account and may problema na mismo ang account to begin with kasi sa mga IDs na ginamit ng 4 suspicious persons ay wala naman talagang ganun na government ID and they used the Driver’s License.

Kung mapatunayan naman kung fictitious ang ginamit na pagbukas ng account ay baka naman hindi na ito sakop ng Bank Secrecy Law.

Our Senate lawyers especially the Blue Ribbon Committee are studying kung puwede pa ito pagbuksan.

But then again sabi nga ng AMLC, naibigay na rin nila ang datos na ito sa Committee.

 

 

Bam on the $81M Hearing: Nakakahiya sa Bangladesh

Transcript of the Ambush Interview after the Senate Hearing

 

Q: There seems to be growing frustration on your end. You’re the only Senator before Sen. Koko Pimentel spoke that really focused your attention on how to get the money back. It’s all about trying to dissect what happened and who is involved but to you, it’s really about getting the Bangladeshi people’s money back.

Sen. Bam Aquino:

That’s right. In fact, in all of the hearings, the ambassador of Bangladesh is there. To be frank, nakakahiya that we talk about everything but we’re not talking enough about how to get them the 81-million US dollars back.

 

I don’t think the previous hearings were able to cover where exactly the money is currently. Earlier, we found out that there is discrepancy in the testimony of Kim Wong and Philrem on the cash that was given out.

 

At the same time, we found out that some of the money was actually still in the casinos through their junket operators. We’re hoping to get to the bottom of this and if we can actually get that money back for Bangladesh.

 

Q: What’s your reaction to what the AMLC said about getting information before they file a freeze order to the court of appeals? Isn’t that putting a lot of layers to the bureaucracy when at this minute we have Kim Wong saying I can just give you the money and bring it to the BSP for safe keeping.

 

Sen. Bam Aquino:

Exactly. Many of these questions have not been asked and I understand that the focus would be the Filipino actors who were part of this scam. But I think, first and foremost, we should focus on securing the money, making sure it’s intact, and giving it back to the people of Bangladesh.

 

Can you imagine if that happened to the Philippines, if 81-million dollars of our money was stolen elsewhere? The first thing we would want to ensure is that it gets back to our own treasury.

 

I think the minimum that we need to do is to go through AMLC, go through the motion, and ensure that whatever money is found is held and eventually returned to Bangladesh.

 

Q: Do you feel that we have the moral obligation not only to investigate the matter but really return the money to the Bangladeshi people?

 

Sen. Bam Aquino:

Yes, yes. Definitely. And hopefully everyone will cooperate. If Eastern Hawaii through Kim Wong is willing to cooperate, that’s great.

 

Hopefully, we get to the bottom of how much cash was given out because currently it’s a contradictory story of how much was encashed and how much was given to Kim Wong and Weikang Xu.

 

If there is Bangladesh money in our casinos then maybe our casinos can also cooperate and be willing to return the money without going through a lengthy court procedure. AMLC said it is within the powers of the current laws to get the money and eventually file civil forfeiture cases against those involved.

 

But I hope we don’t reach that. If the money is still there and if it can still be returned, we should return it at the soonest possible time.

 

Q: We’ve already proven that the bank accounts are fictitious so what is there for the bank secrecy law to protect?

 

Sen. Bam Aquino:

Exactly. That was the subject of the first part of the hearing and Sen. Osmena was very frustrated with the answers given to him regarding the bank secrecy law specially considering that these are fictitious accounts and, more or less, it has been established that the money came from a theft or a heist.

 

So the Senate lawyers are looking into this further. Of course, it’s the position of the bank right now that even if it’s fictitious, you can’t disclose any of these amounts but definitely the committee and our offices are looking into this further.

 

Q: 3rd day of the hearing, who are you most likely to believe at this point?

 

Well, we don’t want to pre-judge. We’re often accused of pre-judging everyone. But if you listen to the hearings, it’s becoming clear that this could not have been perpetrated by just one person.

 

I don’t want to talk about guilt or innocence at this point but definitely you need a lot more people and a lot of moving parts to get this to happen. Whether they’re guilty of theft, money laundering, or negligence, that’s something we will uncover in the next few hearings. And AMLC is doing a parallel process to go after the people who perpetrated this crime.

Scroll to top