DOJ HAS JUNKED THE SMUGGLING CASE AGAINST OILINK
June 25, 2009
Citing lack of probable cause, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has junked the smuggling charges filed by the Bureau of Customs (BOC) against officials of independent oil player Unioil Petroleum Philippines Incorporated (UPPI) and Oilink International Corporation (OIC)
In a three-page ruling, Investigating Prosecutor Arman De Andres said there were no probable cause to charge Unioil, Oilink and the officers and directors of both corporations with smuggling and for violation of the Tariff and Customs Code of the Philippines.
“The Investigating Prosecutor found that the allegations of the complaint filed by the Bureau of Customs failed to establish with certainty the acts attributable to the Respondents that constitute unlawful importation under the Tariff and Customs Code. There were no specific allegations of circumstances constituting the crime against Oilink and Unioil,” said the DOJ resolution.
“The allegations in the complaint are in itself inadequate to engender a reasonable conclusion as to the culpability of the respondents for the crime charged,” the resolution added.
Cleared of the charges were Paul Chi Thing Co, Kenneth Pundanera, Manuel Co, Sally Co, Stanley Tan, Liza Magaway, Janice Co, Vicencio Abano, Greg Yu, Edwin Agustin and Victor Piamonte.
Aside from the inadequacy of the complaint, de Andres also found that Pundanera, the Unioil President successfully refuted the accusation of smuggling as he was able to present evidence that the subject oil products, Gasoil or Mogas, were locally procured by Unioil.
During the hearing, the respondents averred that Unioil only leases oil tanks from Oilink in the latter's depot in Bataan, thus the charge against Unioil and its officers and directors are merely based on a misplaced belief that the oil withdrawn has been imported by Unioil.
Oilink Chief Legal Counsel Rodolf Britanico stressed that the firm and Unioil are separate entities. Unioil, he said only leases the oil tanks through a terminalling agreement with Oilink.
Likewise, Magaway who was then Oilink president averred that the execution of the terminalling Agreement with Unioil was part of her company's regular course of business and is a valid contract, contrary to the assertion of the BOC.
They also pointed out that the allegations of fraud and knowledge that the importation of articles is unlawful are insufficient to warrant the filing of the case.
“The complaint filed by the BOC merely alleged that we have knowledge and/or information or at least consent to the alleged illegal withdrawal or release of the said oil products. There were no concrete and specific allegations to show our knowledge and consent to the alleged illegal withdrawal. Criminal liability can only attach to a corporate officer of he had actual participation to the criminal act or assented thereto,” the respondents said.
The case started when the BOC filed the charges last December 15, 2008 for alleged violation of Sections 3601 and 3602 in relation with Section 2530 and Section 3604 of the Tariff and Customs Code.
This was after a Warrant of Seizure and Detention was issued on Oilink's tank depot in Bataan containing Oilink's oil products.
During the pendency of the seizure case, Unioil requested for the release of its Gasoil and Mogas products which was stored in the depot. That request was granted by BOC Commissioner Nelson Morales but latter on, the Customs said that upon verification, they discovered that Unioil did not import the said oil products, thus the withdrawal was illegal.
by: Ms. Leah C. Flor
Corporate Communications Officer