The Department of Justice has concluded its preliminary investigation on criminal charges against businessman David Bangayan, who has been tagged as rice smuggling king “David Tan.”
The DOJ’s panel of prosecutors submitted the case for resolution after the National Bureau of Investigation opted not to file a reply anymore to the answer submitted by Bangayan.
In his 23-page counter-affidavit filed Oct. 30, Bangayan sought the dismissal of criminal charges.
Bangayan denied allegations of monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade under Article 186 of the Revised Penal Code; bid fixing, as penalized under Section 65 of Republic Act No. 9184 (the Government Procurement Act); using fictitious name or concealing true name, as penalized under Article 178 of the RPC; and violation of Commonwealth Act No. 142, as amended by RA No. 6085.
He denied using “David Tan”—the person authorities said was the rice smuggling king—as his fictitious name or alias.
“I am categorically denying that I am ‘David Tan’ who supposedly was the ‘financier’ of certain cooperatives. My name is Davidson Bangayan. I was born out of wedlock to my parents Victoria Bangayan and Dy Ting Ham. Considering my illegitimacy, I am using my mother’s surname in all my personal and business dealings,” he stressed.
“There is no evidence that I represented myself as David Tan to a certain Hernandez and Ingal. I do not know them nor have I met them,” Bangayan said.
The businessman also explained that he was already cleared on this issue by a Pasay City metropolitan trial court in a perjury case. The said court held that “no direct evidence was presented in order to convince this Court that indeed Davidson Bangayan and David Tan are one and the same person.”
Bangayan stressed that the NBI’s complaint is exactly the same complaint filed by the bureau in July 2014, which was returned by the DoJ for further investigation due to lack of evidence.
The businessman also argued that he could not be held liable for bid fixing, saying he “did not directly nor indirectly participate in the NFA [National Food Authority] bidding.”
Bangayan explained that even assuming that he helped some cooperatives that joined the NFA bidding, such an act alone cannot be considered a criminal offense.
Bangayan’s co-respondents in the first charge are Judilyne Lim, David Lim, and Leah Echiveria of Cebu-based DGL Commodities; Elizabeth Faustino; and Eleanor Rodriguez.
For the second charge, Bangayan has four fellow respondents: Judilyne Lim, Faustino, Rodriguez and Echiveria.
Respondents in the other charges are Eugene Pioquinto, Mary Joyce Lim, Jason Colocado, Michael Villanueva, Denis Gonzales, Willy Sy, Sandra Lim, Gil Calipayan and Inigo Espiritu.
The NBI alleged that the respondents conspired to use rice farmers “for the purpose of acquiring substantial allocations on the PSF-TES importation program [of the NFA] with the end goal of monopolizing the supply of rice.”
The bureau pointed out that the scheme cornered government’s rice import allocations, through the NFA, in 2012 using 25 farmers’ organizations and cooperatives, and single proprietors that did not have the necessary financial and logistical capabilities as “dummies.”
The NBI further alleged that the bidders for NFA rice allocations were financed in exchange for a small percentage per sack as “share.”