In a decision promulgated last Aug. 9, the CA’s special fifth division said the extention sought for "required the introduction and appreciation of evidence to determine if extension is justified" which the Court cannot entertain.
If such procedure is given to this Court as the petitioners want it to appear, it would transform this Court as the trier of facts rather than a court of review, said CA Justices Eugenio Laborita, Teodoro P. Higino and Mariano C. del Castillo.
The CA said the hearing on the petition for the extention of the freeze order should have been lodged with the Regional Trial Court as it cited the legislative deliberations when the AMLC law was discussed in Congress. In the said deliberation, Rep. Imee Marcos asked and later was allowed to introduce the "extension or opening order" deposit accounts "may be secured from the RTC level."
The freeze order was served on the deposit accounts of RAB Realty with Chinatrust Bank and Rizal Commercial Banking Corp. last Feb. 22, 2002 and it expired on March 2, 2002 since the effectivity period of a freeze order is 15 days.
Then, the AMLC sought for the extention of the freeze order and forthwith filed the petition with the Court of Appeals, which deliberated on the case at bar.
However, the CA dismissed the said petition effectively unblocking the deposit accounts of RAB Realty with Chinatrust.