My close encounter
with Panfilo Lacson



DO I have a death wish? That was the question most often asked of me after people learned that I was leaving for Manila less than a week after I had obtained a three-million-dollar judgment against former Philippine National Police General and now Sen. Panfilo Lacson -- perhaps the most feared man in the Philippines today.

Before leaving San Francisco on Jan. 14, I obtained an Order of Examination from Alameda County Superior Court Judge Harry R. Sheppard directing Defendant Lacson to appear in his court in Oakland on March 52003 to "furnish information to aid in enforcement of a money judgment" awarded by the court on Jan. 10. Lacson was also directed to provide me with various documents including the bank statements of all of his accounts for the last five years and a list of the real property owned by the defendant, his wife or anyone else acting on his behalf.

The order stated that if Lacson fails to appear at the time and place specified, he may be "subject to arrest and punishment for contempt of court."

But how do I serve Lacson in the Philippines? It is common knowledge that he is constantly surrounded by dozens of armed security who would likely prevent any process server from getting anywhere near him If he is not served, then he is not required to appear in court.

I went through various scenarios in my head, from Plan A to Plan Z, imagining how best to serve Lacson. And then serendipity happened.

Upon arriving in Manila, I received an invitation to appear at the ABS-CBN studios to be, interviewed by newscaster Karmina Constantino on her morning news-talk TV show about the Lacson judgment. I quickly accepted. Segments of my interview appeared all day in various top-of-the-hour news reports and this led to a call from respected TV journalist Pia Hontiveros inviting me to be a guest on her highly popular "Strictly Politics" weekly talk show set for the following Tuesday evening.

Pia informed me that she would contact Sen. Panfilo Lacson and his lawyer, Sigfrid Fortun, and she was hopeful that they would accept her invitation to appear on her hour-long show. Pia also wanted to interview my client, Blanquita Pelaez, live by telephone from her home in Fremont, California.

That Sunday, I received a text message on my cell phone from Pia informing me that both Senator Lacson and Sigfrid Fortun had confirmed that they would appear at her show. I couldn't believe my luck.

On Tuesday, I arrived at the TV studio at 8:30 p.m., and I was directed to proceed to the make-up room. Accompanying me was my client's Philippine lawyer, Federico Cristobal Jr.

While I was seated in the chair having my face powdered, I heard a voice behind me say: "Good evening, Senator Lacson, welcome to the show."

As I turned around, Pia Hontiveros shook my hand and introduced me to Senator Panfilo Lacson. We shook hands and sat in the sofa together.

"I understand you know Harold Hicks in San Francisco," he said. I told him that I have known Harold for almost 15 years. "Well, he used to be soldier of mine in the PNP," he explained. "When I heard you had obtained a Judgment against me, I asked Harold to go to the Alameda Court and obtain a copy," he said.

"I have a copy of that judgment with me if you need it," I said.

"No need," he said. "I already have one."

"What about the Order of Examination?" I asked.

"No, I don't have a copy of that yet," he said.

I turned to Atty. Cristobal who gave me a copy of the Order of Examination along with a copy of the Notice to Produce which I then handed over to Senator Lacson.

With ten minutes to go before the show, we were escorted to our seats in a round table. Pia was on my left and Senator Lacson on my right. With barely a minute before we went on the air, Sigfrid Fortun finally showed up at the studio, apologizing profusely for being late. He was quickly seated between Senator Lacson and myself.

Pia asked me to briefly narrate the circumstances surrounding the case and how I managed to obtain a three-million-dollar judgment against Lacson.

When it was his turn, Fortun expressed amazement that a US court would render a judgment on a case involving a Philippine senator about a contract that was entered into in the Philippines.

I explained that actually the events which formed the basis of my complaint happened in Alameda County in the US. It was there on Sept. 12, 2001, when Senator Lacson spoke to a Filipino gathering where he defamed my client ("scam artist na, smuggler pa"), which was also the basis of the intentional infliction of emotional distress. Contrary to Fortun's claim, the contract between Smith and Wesson and my client was signed in Fremont and it was this contract with which Senator Lacson interfered.

After my complaint was filed on Dec. 14, 2001, I asked various Philippine authorities to serve Senator Lacson with the complaint. They couldn't personally serve the security-conscious Lacson although various copies of the summons and complaint were left with his secretary at his senate office. But without proof that Senator Lacson had actually received a copy of the summons and complaint, I would not be able to obtain a default.

Fortunately, Lacson's lawyer, Sigfrid Fortun, wrote me on Jan. 23, 2002 confirming receipt of the summons and complaint by Lacson. He informed me, however, that the manner in which the summons and complaint were served was improper as it did not conform to Philippine law which requires that only court-designated individuals can properly serve court papers.

But California follows California law, which allows anyone over 21 not a party to the action to serve the summons and complaint. Furthermore, under a local rule (CCP Sec. 217), the defendant's acknowledgment of service, through the lawyer's letter, is proof of service. Ironically, it was Fortun's letter which convinced the California court to grant the default.

In the course of the show, Fortun repeatedly complained that I did not show professional courtesy to him when I did not reply to his letter so that he would know what to do to protect his client's interest.

I did not mean to be rude but that's his client's problem. It's not my practice to give legal advice to my opponents. That's what they pay their lawyers for.

Besides I was only responding in kind to Fortun's letter which stated "any further attempt to serve the summons without complying with the procedural requirements under Philippine law shall be met with the same indifference and shall merit no further response from Senator Lacson."

At one point in the show, Pia asked Lacson if he would comply with the court
order and appear in court on March 5 if he was served with the court papers. I told Pia that Lacson was served in the make-up room just before the show began.

"That was service?" Lacson asked. "But I only asked for a copy," he protested. That's sufficient service, I maintained.

In that case, Lacson told Pia, he would appear and answer "none" to questions about his assets in the US. He then turned to me and said "I do not have any bank accounts in my name in the US." He then added: "If you find 700 million dollars in the US, you can keep it."

"No, I won't keep it," I replied. "If I find the 700 million dollars, I'll return it to the Filipino people."

"Are you insinuating that I stole that money?" he responded angrily.

"I simply want to make the record clear that if I find money of yours, whether it's 700 million dollars, 70 million dollars or 7 million dollars, that I won't keep it," I replied.

I then turned to Fortun and asked him for confirmation of Philippine law which states that money found in excess of what a public official can show as having been derived from one's salary is presumed to be obtained by graft and corruption.

"Right, Atty. Fortun?"

By the end of the hour, the studio had filled with staff members from other studios as word had spread of the tension and the heated exchange between Senator Lacson and myself. The word was out that Lacson had lost his cool as he hurriedly left the studio after the show. Fortun was seen hurrying after him, perhaps to explain why his strategy of "indifference" to the complaint had resulted in a three-million-dollar judgment against his client.

Two days after the show, I held a press conference in Makati City attended by most of the local media. I wanted to respond to Senator Lacson's published denials that he had any bank accounts in California. I produced photocopies of four Bank of America Panorama City (California) checks totaling more than 100,000 dollars from the account of Lacson's wife, Alice DePerio Lacson, issued in 2001.

"California is a community property state," I said. "The bank account of one spouse is the joint community property account of the other spouse."

The following day, the newspapers reported that Senator Lacson had abruptly skipped his Senate session and had flown to California amid widespread speculation.

(Rodel Rodis is the US lawyer of Blanquita Pelaez. He is the Northern California chair of the National Federation of Filipino American Associations. Send comments to Rodislaw@yahoo.com.)

RELATED STORIES:

Lacson willing to go to US
'if necessary' in court case

US judge orders Lacson
to list properties in US

US court tells Lacson to pay
$3M to handcuffs supplier

Palace won't gag Berroya;
Lacson belies handcuffs rap

$3-M civil case filed
vs Lacson in US