DOJ asked to reinvestigate Okada estafa complaint

Rappler.com

This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.

DOJ asked to reinvestigate Okada estafa complaint
Tiger Resort Leisure & Entertainment Incorporated files two motions before the Department of Justice, seeking a new probe and the junking of resolutions issued by the Parañaque City Prosecutor's Office

MANILA, Philippines – The Department of Justice (DOJ) was asked to start a new investigation into the $10-million estafa complaint against Japanese tycoon Kazuo Okada.

Tiger Resort Leisure & Entertainment Incorporated (TRLEI), which owns and operates Okada Manila, filed two motions before the DOJ seeking to reinvestigate the matter and set aside resolutions issued by the Parañaque City Prosecutor’s Office.

“There are legal grounds to vacate the assailed resolution. Judgment may be set aside or vacated when there is a violation of due process, like when a prosecutor is evidently biased and partial in favor of the respondent,” TRLEI said.

The company previously asked the DOJ to investigate the alleged leaking of a resolution signed by Parañaque City Prosecutor Amerhassan Paudac, in favor of the Japanese tycoon. Portions of the resolution were posted on social media by a certain Chloe Kim, said to be a “close companion” of Okada.

TRLEI also earlier asked Paudac to inhibit from the case. He granted this request.

Following this, Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra ordered the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) to probe the alleged leak and ordered that the complaint be transferred to the DOJ.

“Premature disclosure of orders and resolutions prior to official release is not allowed unless there are compelling reasons that would sufficiently justify the same,” Guevarra previously said.

Guevarra, however, said the DOJ would not set aside the resolutions issued by the Parañaque City Prosecutor’s Office despite TRLEI’s complaint about the supposed leak.

He said the resolutions will remain subject to motions for reconsideration or petitions before the DOJ.

“If upon review, the DOJ sees it differently, the resolutions may be set aside, reversed, or modified accordingly,” Guevarra said. – Rappler.com

Add a comment

Sort by

There are no comments yet. Add your comment to start the conversation.

Summarize this article with AI

How does this make you feel?

Loading
Download the Rappler App!