BEHEST LOANS

BEHEST LOANS PROJECT

Behest Loans are loans classified as such due to the presence of two or more of the eight (8) criteria mentioned under Memorandum Order No. 61, dated November 9, 1992, pursuant to Administrative Order No. 13 , dated October 18,1992 creating the now defunct Presidential Ad Hoc Fact – Finding Committee on Behest Loans, namely:

1. It is undercollateralized;
2. The borrower corporation is undercapitalized;
3. Non-feasibility of the project for which financing is being sought;
4. Endorsement by high government officials (presence of marginal notes);
5. Extraordinary speed in the release of loans;
6. Stockholders or management closely associated with the Marcos cronies;
7. Corporate layering;
8. Diversion of loan proceeds to other purposes

For the Marcos era alone, there were already 419 accounts reviewed by the defunct Presidential Ad-hoc Fact Finding Committee, 130 accounts were found to be “positively behest”, pursuant to the classification above. Consequently, said Committee filed criminal cases with the Office of the Ombudsman for violation of Republic Act No. 3019.

Effective May 26, 2005 , by virtue of Executive Order No. 432, PCGG has been empowered to assume the task of investigation, filing and prosecution of cases for the recovery of claims arising out of non-performing loans whether behest or non-behest.

Currently, there are 3 behest loans cases pending before the Sandiganbayan which are undergoing trial, to wit:

1. Criminal Case Nos. 26297-26314
   People vs. Panfilo O. Domingo, et al. (Integrated Shoes Account)
2. Criminal Case Nos. 26201-26204
   People vs. Panfilo O. Domingo et al. (SOWEXOR Account)
3. Criminal Case Nos. 20557-26344
   People vs. Rafael Sison, et al. (Sta. Ines Steel and Mining Corp. account)