In The Matter of Transeast Multitrade Corporation

[PED * CASE NO. 93-1210. September 4, 1997.] IN THE MATTER OF TRANSEAST MULTITRADE CORPORATION O R D E R This is a complaint involving the authenticity of the contents of the corporate documents issued by Transeast Multi-Trade Corporation thru its Corporate Secretary and an allegation for unauthorized withdrawal of dollar deposit from the corporation's bank account by the officers of the corporation. prcd Complainant is Cesar B. Ortiz, a stockholder/director and formerly Executive Vice President and General Manager of subject corporation. Lupo M. Rivera, Chairman of the Board, Carmelita G. Bonzon, Corporate Secretary, Elvira S. Bonzon and Benedicto S. Bonzon, Jr. Directors of subject corporation appear to be the respondents in the complaint. Perusal of the complaint-affidavit shows that due to the commission of unauthorized act and the issuance of questionable documents, a case of Estafa and Falsification of Private Documents was instituted by complainant herein against the responsible officers of the corporation in the Office of the City Prosecutor of Manila. This Department upon review of the allegation in the complaint concurs with the complainant that the offense/s probably committed are Estafa and Falsification of Private Documents defined and punished under the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines. However, pertinent provision of Presidential Decree 902-A as amended by P.D. 1758 states: SECTION 8. ... The Prosecution and Enforcement Department shall have, subject to the Commission's control and supervision the exclusive authority to . . . file and prosecute in accordance with law and rules and regulations issued by the Commission and in appropriate cases the corresponding criminal or civil case before the Commission or the proper court or body upon prima facie finding of violation of any laws or rules and regulations administered and enforced by the Commission. It appears that no other act as alleged in the complaint has been committed by the respondents as to constitutes violation of the law or rules and regulations being enforced and administered by the Commission. WHEREFORE, the complaint, aside from being moot and academic by the institution of criminal action in the Prosecutor's Office, is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. cdll SO ORDERED. (SGD.) MEDARDO R. DEVERA Attorney IV