REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

SANDIGANBAYAN
Quezon City

Sixth Division

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff,

- versus - Crim. Case No. SB-15-CRM-0095

ROLANDO C. ALONZO, ET. AL.,

Accused.

x---------------------------x

FORMAL OFFER OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

WITH MANIFESTATION AND MOTION

ACCUSED ALISON A. SY, ET AL., through the undersigned counsel and

to this Honorable Court, most respectfully states that:

1. On June 7, 2022, Accused Alison A. Sy, et. al. completed their

presentation of evidence and thereafter, this Honorable Court gave them a
period of thirty (30) days within which to file their Formal Offer of
Documentary Evidence.

2. In compliance with the said directive, Accused Alison A. Sy, et.

al. respectfully offer the following documentary evidence, copies of which
are herewith attached, to wit:

Exhibit Document Purpose/s

“1”1 Feasibility Study from To prove that Alison Sy et al.

Dynatron Asia, Inc. engaged the services of Dynatron
Asia, Inc. to do a feasibility study
on the grains terminal to
determine if the project is viable
in terms of investment, technical

1
Common Exhibit – Also identified in the JAs of Alonzo and Cometa as Exhibit 1
 “Formal Offer of Documentary Evidence…”
People of the Philippines vs. Alonzo, et al
Crim. Case No. SB-15-CRM-0095
Page 2 of 17
x----------------------------------x

concerns, market performance

and profitability.

“2”2 Credit Information To prove that, in compliance with

Memorandum the directive of Joel Valdez, then
prepared by SGV dated President of TIDCORP, WGI
December 2003 engaged the services of SGV to do
a review of the reasonableness of
assumptions in the Feasibility
Study of Dynatron Asia, Inc.,
prepare a financial model and
prepare an Information
Memorandum for the project.

To prove that WGI totally or fully

complied with all the
requirements for the issuance of
the TIDCORP guaranty.

“3”3 Memorandum to the To prove that the President and

Board of Directors of CEO of PHILEXIM recommended
PHILEXIM (Ref. No. the approval of the guaranty
BM/03-032) dated application to the Board of
October 29, 2003 Directors of TIDCORP.

“4”4 Memorandum 95 To prove that WGI complied with

approving the 2003 the eligibility and acceptability
Investment Priorities requirements of TIDCORP since
Plan its grains terminal project was
listed by the BOI as a priority
project of the government.

“5” Newspaper Clipping To prove that companies owned

from Business World by Alison Sy et. al. were listed by
Business World among the top
1,000 corporations in the year
2001 and 2002.

2
Common Exhibit - Prosecution’s Exh. Q
3
Common Exhibit – Identified in the JA of Alonzo as Exh. 5
4
Common Exhibit – Identified in the JA of Alonzo as Exh. 6
 “Formal Offer of Documentary Evidence…”
People of the Philippines vs. Alonzo, et al
Crim. Case No. SB-15-CRM-0095
Page 3 of 17
x----------------------------------x

To prove that World Grannary,

Inc. (“WGI”), whose stockholders,
directors and/or officers are
members of the Ang Family,
which includes Accused Alison Sy
and Renato Ang, has the requisite
experience to go into the
business of operating a grains
terminal facility.

“6”5 TIDCORP Board To prove that the Board of

Resolution No. 1521, Directors of TIDCORP approved
Series of 2003 dated the guaranty application of WGI.
December 17, 2003

“16”6 Country Bankers To prove that Dynatron Asia's

Insurance Corp. performance bond and insurance
Performance Bond No. policy were kept on the account
194667 file with TIDCORP contrary to the
audit findings in the TAR.

“17”7 Malayan Insurance Co. To prove that the audit findings in

Inc. Performance Bond the TAR with regards to "Expired
No. 2004-01072 by J.E. performance bonds of J.E Manalo
Manalo & Co., Inc. as prior to the contract completion"
principal valid until is false.
September 26, 2005
To prove that policy endorsement
extending the maturity period of
the performance bonds of
Belmont Agricorp, J.E. Manalo
and LM Construction were kept
on the account file with TIDCORP.

“18”8 Philippine Phoenix To prove that the audit findings in

Surety and Insuurance the TAR with regards to "Expired
Inc. Performance Bond performance bonds of LM
No. Construction prior to the contract
5
Common Exhibit – Identified as Exh. 8 for Alonzo
6
Common Exhibit – Identified as Exh. 123 for Cometa
7
Common Exhibit – Identified as Exh. 121-126 for Cometa
8
Common Exhibit – Identified as Exh. 101 to 104 for Cometa
 “Formal Offer of Documentary Evidence…”
People of the Philippines vs. Alonzo, et al
Crim. Case No. SB-15-CRM-0095
Page 4 of 17
x----------------------------------x

G(13)Hoooo584/08915 completion" is false.

by LM Construction
and Mooring Services To prove that policy endorsement
as principal valid until extending the maturity period of
July 2006 the performance bonds of
Belmont Agricorp, J.E. Manalo
and LM Construction were kept
on the account file with TIDCORP.

“27” Bid Documents of To prove that WGI conducted a

Belmont Agri-Corp / bidding for the engineering,
Grain Terminal Storage procurement & construction
Facility Project (EPC) of the terminal.
(Installation Contract)
dated May 13, 2004 To prove that Belmont Agri-Corp
participated in the bidding
conducted by WGI.

To prove that Belmont Agri-Corp

was awarded the contract and as
part of the award, Belmont Agri-
Corp and WGI entered into and
executed an Installation Contract.

“37”9 ABN-AMRO Bank To prove that ABN-AMRO Bank,

Letter dated March now Robinson's Bank, provided
2004 the bridge facility against
TIDCORP's guarantee, after
obtaining in March 2005 WGI's
mandate to act as the Fund
Arranger for the loan syndication
of US$33.03 Million term loan

“38” Term Facility To prove that ABN-AMRO, now

Agreement between Robinson's Bank syndicated or
ABN-AMRO and WGI, acted fund arranger for WGI's
dated December 9, term loan for US$ 33.03 Million.
2004

“46”10 TIDCORP Notice of To prove that TIDCORP notified

9
Common Exhibit – Identified as Exh. 118 for Cometa
 “Formal Offer of Documentary Evidence…”
People of the Philippines vs. Alonzo, et al
Crim. Case No. SB-15-CRM-0095
Page 5 of 17
x----------------------------------x

Approval dated August WGI on the approval of the

15, 2006 additional PhP220 Million
guarantee, including the terms
and conditions imposed by the
Board.

“47-A to 47- Official Receipts for To prove that WGI paid the non-
U” the payment of refundable processing fee in the
Processing Fee, amount of Two Million Two
Guarantee Fees and Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos
related charges (Php 2,250,000.00) plus VAT.

To prove that WGI paid the

Guarantee Fees as required by
TIDCORP in the Terms and
Conditions provided in the Notice
of Approval.

To prove that WGI totally or fully

complied with all the
requirements for the issuance of
the TIDCORP guaranty.

To prove that the status of WGI’s

account with TIDCORP was
current, i.e. WGI was not in
default, at the time that it filed its
petition for corporate
rehabilitation.

“54” Stay Order dated To prove that RTC Lucena City,

December 12, 2006 Branch 57, in Spec. Proc. No.
issued by RTC Lucena 2006-77 issued a Stay Order
City, Branch 57, in suspending all proceeding and
Spec. Proc. No. 2006- enforcement of actions of
77 creditors for the collection of the
debts or obligations of WGI.
Similarly, WGI is also prohibited
from making any payments to its
creditors.
10
Common Exhibit – Identified as Exh. 30 for Cometa
 “Formal Offer of Documentary Evidence…”
People of the Philippines vs. Alonzo, et al
Crim. Case No. SB-15-CRM-0095
Page 6 of 17
x----------------------------------x

To prove the factual

circumstances that prompted
WGI to file a petition for
corporate rehabilitation.

To prove that the status of WGI’s

account with TIDCORP was
current, i.e. WGI was not in
default, at the time that it filed
its petition for corporate
rehabilitation.

To prove that TIDCORP is a

claimant-creditor in that
rehabilitation proceedings.

“55” Bid Documents of To prove that WGI conducted a

Belmont Agri-Corp / bidding for the engineering,
Company Profile procurement & construction
dated September 5, (EPC) of the terminal.
2003
To prove that Belmont Agri-Corp
participated in the bidding
conducted by WGI.

“55-A” Bid Documents of To prove that WGI conducted a

Belmont Agri-Corp / bidding for the engineering,
Grain Terminal Storage procurement & construction
Facility Project (Supply (EPC) of the terminal.
Contract) dated June
4, 2004 To prove that Belmont Agri-Corp
participated in the bidding
conducted by WGI.

To prove that Belmont Agri-Corp

was awarded the contract and as
part of the award, Belmont Agri-
Corp and WGI entered into and
executed a Supply Contract.
 “Formal Offer of Documentary Evidence…”
People of the Philippines vs. Alonzo, et al
Crim. Case No. SB-15-CRM-0095
Page 7 of 17
x----------------------------------x

To prove that the ship unloader

that broke-down was part of the
equipment that was supplied by
Belmont Agri-Corp.

“59” J.E. Manalo & Co., Inc. To prove that WGI conducted a
Bid Documents for the bidding for the construction of its
Proposed Pier Facilities pier.
and Conveyor
Supports To prove that J.E. Manalo & Co.,
Inc. participated in the bidding
conducted by WGI.

“60” Letter Application for To prove that per instruction of

Guaranty addressed to TIDCORP’s President Joel Valdez,
Mr. Rolando Alonzo, Accused Alison A. Sy prepared
EVP of TIDCORP, dated and submitted a letter application
April 9, 2003 addressed to Mr. Rolando Alonzo,
the Executive Vice President of
TIDCORP and Head of the
Marketing Group - Large
Accounts at that time.

To prove that WGI totally or fully

complied with all the
requirements for the issuance of
the TIDCORP guaranty.

“61” Engagement and Fee To prove that WGI engaged the

Proposal of SGV and services of SGV to do a review of
Co. dated Aug 19, the reasonableness of
2003 assumptions in the Feasibility
Study of Dynatron Asia, Inc.,
prepare a financial model and
prepare an Information
Memorandum for the project.

To prove that WGI totally or fully

complied with all the
requirements for the issuance of
the TIDCORP guaranty.
 “Formal Offer of Documentary Evidence…”
People of the Philippines vs. Alonzo, et al
Crim. Case No. SB-15-CRM-0095
Page 8 of 17
x----------------------------------x

“62” TIDCORP’s Notice of To prove that the Board of

Approval dated Directors of TIDCORP approved
December 23, 2003 the application for loan
guarantee of WGI for Php 1.800
Billion or US$ 33.03 Million

To prove the Terms and

Conditions for the Guarantee

“63” Order, dated July 16, To prove that the rehabilitation

2019, issued by RTC court issued an Order allowing
Lucena City, Branch the sale of the assets of WGI and
57, in Spec. Proc. No. pay-off all its creditors.
2006-77
To prove that TIDCORP is a
claimant-creditor in that
rehabilitation proceedings.

“64”11 Order, dated January To prove that the rehabilitation

22, 2021 issued by RTC court issued an Order allowing
Lucena City, Branch the sale of the assets of WGI and
57, in Spec. Proc. No. pay-off all its creditors.
2006-77
To prove that TIDCORP is a
claimant-creditor in that
rehabilitation proceedings.

“65” Deed of Declaration To prove that pursuant to the

with Acknowledgment Orders of the rehabilitation court,
of Receipt, Release, WGI paid its loan obligation to
Waiver, and TIDCORP.
Quitlclaim, dated April
26, 2021 signed by To prove that the Nine Hundred
Philippine Guarantee Sixty-Six Million Forty Thousand
Corp. (formerly Pesos (Php 966,040,000.00)
TIDCORP) and WGI received by TIDCORP was in full
and final satisfaction of their
“65-1” Signature of Alison Sy claim against WGI arising from
and Renato Ang the guarantee.
11
Common Exhibit – Identified as Exh. 85 in the Supplemental JA of Alonzo.
 “Formal Offer of Documentary Evidence…”
People of the Philippines vs. Alonzo, et al
Crim. Case No. SB-15-CRM-0095
Page 9 of 17
x----------------------------------x

“66” Asset Sale and To prove that pursuant to the

Purchase Agreement Orders of the rehabiliation court,
between WGI and the assets of WGI was sold to
Universal Robina URC.
Corporation (URC)
dated March 4, 2021 To prove that the 156 parcels of
land that were owned by WGI
and was mortgaged to TIDCORP
as part of the collateral for the
guarantee agreement were sold
to URC.

“67” Escrow Agreement To prove that the amount paid by

dated March 4, 2021 URC for the sale of the assets of
WGI was deposited to an Escrow
Account.

To prove that the sum of One

Billion Five Hundred Million Pesos
(Php 1,500,000.00) was delivered
to the Escrow Agent, Robinsons
Bank Corporation, for the
purpose of holding and disbursing
the same pursuant to the terms
of the Escrow Agreement and the
Purchase Agreement.

To prove the amounts disbursed

to the creditors of WGI including
TIDCORP.

“68” Deed of Absolute Sale To prove that the assets of WGI

between WGI and URC was sold to URC
dated April 26, 2021
To prove that the 156 parcels of
land that were owned by WGI
and was mortgaged to TIDCORP
as part of the collateral for the
guarantee agreement were sold
to URC.
 “Formal Offer of Documentary Evidence…”
People of the Philippines vs. Alonzo, et al
Crim. Case No. SB-15-CRM-0095
Page 10 of 17
x----------------------------------x

To prove that the assets of WGI

was bought by URC in
consideration of the sum of One
Billion Five Hundred Million Pesos
(Php 1,500,000,000.00).

3. In the course of the proceedings, Accused Alison A. Sy, et al.

adopted the testimony given by Accused Rolando C. Alonzo both in his
Judicial Affidavit dated February 18, 2020 and Supplemental Judicial
Affidavit dated July, 2021. However, undersigned counsel failed to mark
the documentary evidence identified by Accused Alonzo, which Accused
Alison A. Sy, et al are adopting. Accordingly, Accused Alison A. Sy, et al.
hereby manifest that they are adopting the following documentary
evidence identified by Accused Alonzo, to wit:

Exhibit Document Purpose/s

“69”12 Board of Directors To prove that when the

Minutes of the 172nd Marketing Group - Large
Regular Meeting Accounts reported their findings
regarding the eligibility and
acceptability of the grains
terminal project proposal, as well
as the background of NGI and its
stockholders, the CRECOM voted
unanimously to recommend the
pre-clearance approval to the
Board of Directors of TIDCORP.

“70”13 Statement of Account To prove that WGI paid the non-

with Reference No. refundable processing fee in the
ABD / SA 2003-041 amount of Two Million Two
and dated 14 May Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos
2003 (Php 2,250,000.00) plus VAT.

“71”14 TIDCORP Secretary's To prove the issuance of Board

12
Exh. 54 for Alonzo
13
Exh. 47-A for Alonzo
 “Formal Offer of Documentary Evidence…”
People of the Philippines vs. Alonzo, et al
Crim. Case No. SB-15-CRM-0095
Page 11 of 17
x----------------------------------x

Certificate dated Resolution 1572 where the Board

August 16, 2019 of TIDCORP unanimously
approved the bridge facility of
WGI carrying with it the same
terms and conditions provided in
Board Resolution 1521.

“72”15 Discharge of Real To prove that WGI paid its loan

Estate Mortgage dated obligation to TIDCORP.
April 23, 2021
To prove that the amount
received by TIDCORP was in full
and final satisfaction of their
claim against WGI.

“73”16 Secretary's Certificate To prove the existence of the

issued by Dynah G. Board Resolution granting the
Nepomuceno-Bayot of President of TIDCORP the
PhilGuarantee dated 5 authority to execute the Deed of
April 2021 Declaration with
Acknowledgment of Receipt,
Release, Waiver and Quitclaim
dated April 26, 2021 between
WGI and TIDCORP and the
Discharge of Real Estate
Mortgage dated April 23, 2021.

“74”17 Official Receipt No. To prove that TIDCORP received

0035152 dated April PHP 966,040,000.00 in full and
26, 2021 final satisfaction of their claim
against WGI.
“74-A”18 PhilGuarantee
Transmittal Letter May
6, 2021

4. In the course of the proceedings, Accused Alison A. Sy, et al.

14
Exh. 77 for Alonzo
15
Exh. 81 for Alonzo (Supplemental JA)
16
Exh. 82 for Alonzo (Supplemental JA)
17
Exh. 83 for Alonzo (Supplemental JA)
18
Exh. 83-A for Alonzo (Supplemental JA)
 “Formal Offer of Documentary Evidence…”
People of the Philippines vs. Alonzo, et al
Crim. Case No. SB-15-CRM-0095
Page 12 of 17
x----------------------------------x

adopted the testimony given by Accused Teresita C. Cometa in her Judicial

Affidavit dated August 29, 2019. However, undersigned counsel failed to
mark the documentary evidence identified by Accused Cometa, which
Accused Alison A. Sy, et al. are adopting. Accordingly, Accused Alison A. Sy,
et al. hereby manifest that they are adopting the following documentary
evidence identified by Accused Cometa, to wit:

“75”19 Minutes of the Board To prove that Chairman Camacho

Meeting on October instructed Marketing Team that
29, 2003 the market gap should be
explained in detail by SGV, which
prepared the CIM. Specifically,
Chairman Camacho wanted SGV
to incorporate all relevant
information concerning the local
grains market (demand/supply
situation) and how bulk storage
was being addressed by the end
users.

To prove that this instruction was

the reason why SGV prepared the
Confidential Information
Memorandum dated December
2003.

“76”20 Secretary's Certificate To prove that the Corporate

on Board Resolution Secretary issued Board Resolution
No. 1521 dated No. 1521 in January 2004 on the
January 2004 approval of a guarantee facility to
WGI including the terms and
conditions imposed by the Board
of Directors of TIDCORP.

“77”21 TIDCORP Letter dated To prove that TIDCORP was

July 2003 supposed to act as the Fund
Arranger for WGI's term loan for

19
Exh. 127 for Cometa
20
Exh. 128 for Cometa
21
Exh. 81 for Cometa
 “Formal Offer of Documentary Evidence…”
People of the Philippines vs. Alonzo, et al
Crim. Case No. SB-15-CRM-0095
Page 13 of 17
x----------------------------------x

its grains terminal project.

“78”22 TIDCORP Board To prove that the Board of

Resolution 1572 TIDCORP unanimously approved
the bridge facility of WGI. The
bridge facility was subject to the
terms and conditions approved
by the Board on 17 December
2003, and to its subsequent
conversion into a term loan upon
completion of the loan
syndication.

“79”23 Bridge Facility To prove that the purpose of the

Agreement dated May bridge facility was to facilitate the
7, 2004 importation of the financed
machinery and equipment and
partially pay the financing
charges during construction.

“80”24 Secretary's Certificate To prove that a Task Force to

on Board Resolution review the WGI Project was
1828 creating the Task created to take into account the
Force to review the various issues raised by the
WGI Project CRECOM regarding the status of
the project implementation,
compliance to conditions and
justifications for the additional
PhP220 Million guarantee.

“81” and Office Order Nos. 121 To prove that a Task Force to
“82”25 and 132 dated May review the WGI Project was
and June 2006, created to take into account the
respectively various issues raised by the
CRECOM regarding the status of
the project implementation,
compliance to conditions and
justifications for the additional
22
Exh. 97 for Cometa
23
Exh. 119 or Cometa
24
Exh. 98 for Cometa
25
Exh. 99 and 100 for Cometa
 “Formal Offer of Documentary Evidence…”
People of the Philippines vs. Alonzo, et al
Crim. Case No. SB-15-CRM-0095
Page 14 of 17
x----------------------------------x

PhP220 Million guarantee.

To Prove that Accused Alonzo

and Cometa are not members of
the Task Force

“83”26 Memorandum to the To prove that the Task Force

Board dated July 2006 recommended the approval of
the additional PHP 220 Million
guarantee to WGI after a
thorough review of the WGI
project, including its compliance
to imposed conditions and status
of project implementation.

To prove the Task Force's

favorable report on the results of
its project review as well as the
merits of the additional works.

“84”27 TIDCORP Board To prove that the Board approved

Resolution 1841 the additional guarantee for
PhP220 Million to WGI based on
the Task Force's favorable report
on the results of its project
review as well as the merits of
the additional works.

“85”28 SEC Certificate of To prove that the Stockholders of

Increase in Capital WGI put in a total of Php 1.433
Stock Billion as its equity in the grains
terminal project.

“86”29 CSC Resolution No. To prove that the administrative

1200476 dated 13 case filed by TIDCORP with the
March 2012 Civil Service Commission (CSC) in
April 2011 against Accused
Cometa and SVP Clarissa Tuazon
26
Exh. 95 for Cometa
27
Exh. 96 for Cometa
28
Exh. 121 for Cometa
29
Exh. 122 for Cometa
 “Formal Offer of Documentary Evidence…”
People of the Philippines vs. Alonzo, et al
Crim. Case No. SB-15-CRM-0095
Page 15 of 17
x----------------------------------x

was remanded by CSC to

TIDCORP.

To prove that Accused Cometa

has not been held
administratively liable for her role
or participation in the approval of
the guarantee of WGI.

“87”30 Alpha Insurance & To prove that Dynatron Asia's

Surety Company, Inc. performance bond and insurance
Contractors' All Risks policy were kept
Policy No. 02817 on the account file with TIDCORP.

“88”31 Pioneer Insurance To prove that the audit findings in

Policy No. EN-EAR-HO- the TAR with regards to "Expired
05-0000021-00-d for performance bonds of Belmont
Belmont Agricorp Phil. prior to the contract
completion" is false.

To prove that policy endorsement

extending the maturity period of
the performance bonds of
Belmont Agricorp, J.E. Manalo
and LM Construction were kept
on the account file with TIDCORP.

“89”32 Progress Report No. 06 To prove that ABN-AMRO Bank

as of 20 May 2005 only disbursed the total amount
prepared by TIDCORP's of US$28.6 Million via letters of
technical credit, cash drawdowns and
representative telegraphic transfers based on
the supply contract with Belmont
Agricorp. Upon arrival of the
shipments, the TIDCORP technical
representative verified the
physical delivery of the items and
validated the value of all

30
Exh. 117 for Cometa
31
Exh. 121-126 for Cometa
32
Exh. 90 for Cometa
 “Formal Offer of Documentary Evidence…”
People of the Philippines vs. Alonzo, et al
Crim. Case No. SB-15-CRM-0095
Page 16 of 17
x----------------------------------x

shipments.

Prayer

WHEREFORE, Accused Alison A. Sy, et al. most respectfully pray that:

(a) This Honorable Court notes the manifestation of Accused

Alison Sy, et al. insofar as they adopt the documentary
evidence identified by Accused Rolando C. Alonzo and
Teresita C. Cometa listed above; and

(b) That all of the foregoing documentary evidence or exhibits

listed above be permanently admitted into the records as
proof of the facts therein stated and for all other relevant
purposes.

Other relief that are just and equitable in the premises are likewise
prayed for.

Makati City, Metro Manila, July 1, 2022.

GATCHALIAN & CASTRO

Counsel for the Accused Alison A. Sy, et al.
5/F Jose Cojuangco & Sons Building
119 Dela Rosa corner Palanca Sts.
Legaspi Village, Makati City
Metro Manila
Telephone Nos. 892-03-01 to 02

By:

ROMARICO I. GATCHALIAN
PTR No. 8855459/01.06.22/Makati City
IBP No. 172340/01.06.22/Cavite
ROLL No. 35839
MCLE Compliance No. VI-0026204
23 May 2019; Makati City
 “Formal Offer of Documentary Evidence…”
People of the Philippines vs. Alonzo, et al
Crim. Case No. SB-15-CRM-0095
Page 17 of 17
x----------------------------------x

Tel. Nos. 892-03-01 to 02

Fax No. 818-22-20
mayko.gatchalian@gatchaliancastro.com

WILLIAM KYLE C. SANTOS

PTR No. 9042514/06.17.22/Makati City
IBP No. 224951/05.26.22/PPLM
ROLL No. 79548
MCLE Compliance VII
(Exempted - Admitted to the Bar in 2022)
william.santos@gatchaliancastro.com

Copy Furnished:

OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR (by Personal Service)

4th Floor, Ombudsman Building,
Office of the Ombudsman,
Agham Road, Diliman, Quezon City

BERNARDO PLACIDO CHAN & LASAM LAW OFFICES (by Reg. Mail and Email)
Counsel for Accused Rolando C. Alonzo
Unit 2303-2304, 139 Corporate Center
139 Valero St., Salcedo Village
Makati City 1227, Metro Manila

J. L. ANASTACIO, CPA & ASSOCIATES (by Reg. Mail and Email)

Counsel for Accused Teresita C. Cometa
Unit B6 L22 Villa Felisa,
Alabang – Zapote Road, Pamplona II,
Las Pinas City, Metro Manila