PHC issues

MANILA, Philippines - We write in behalf of Philcomsat Holdings Corporation (PHC) and Atty. Luis Lokin, whose name was once again maligned by Mr. Federico Pascual Jr. in his column Postscript published in 08 August 2010.

Mr. Pascual misleads his readers when he claimed in his column that Atty. Lokin has only 100 shares in PHC. The truth, however, is that Atty. Lokin holds more shares in PHC than Mr. Pascual. Atty. Lokin, in fact, holds at least 1,100 shares in PHC — a thousand more shares than what Mr. Pascual reported in his column. More importantly, there are only four stockholders with the surname Pascual in the records of the stock and transfer agent of PHC. None has the first name Federico. Mr. Pascual’s claim of being a PHC shareholder therefore remains suspect. His claim that he holds 10 times more shares than Atty. Lokin, which he bannered in his Postscript column, is likewise false and has no place in a well-respected newspaper such as The Philippine STAR.

There is no truth to the statement that a new set of board members was elected by virtue of an annual stockholders’ meeting on 28 May 2010. The Corporate Secretary of PHC did not send any notice of such meeting. The members of the legitimate PHC Board did not received any such notice There was no valid Annual Stockholders Meeting held on such date. Hence, the board of directors led by Ms. Concepcion Poblador remains the legitimate and lawful board at this time.

The statement by Mr. Pascual about the alleged “refusal by the “Araneta-Brodett-Lokin board” to call a stockholders’ meeting is similarly false. There are legal impediments against the holdings of any subsequent meetings on account of standing court orders, which the legitimate board respects and follows.

Mr. Pascual had once again raised the issue of the alleged Secretary’s Certificate that Atty. Lokin purportedly signed to “guarantee a loan with then wobbly Bankwise”. Atty. Lokin has never dealt, directly or indirectly, with said bank regarding any loan involving PHC. The documents was obviously fabricated and the signatures therein forged to make it appear that Atty. Lokin participated in the procurement of the said loan. During the time that the alleged Secretary’s Certificate was executed, Atty. Lokin was not even the Corporate Secretary of PHC. The certificate is obviously fabricated in order to continually harass the legitimate Board of Directors of PHC. Atty. Lokin has never issued any Secretary’s Certificate for and in behalf of the corporation up to today.

Atty. Lokin neither managed nor handled the funds and/or bank accounts of PHC. It was then Vice-President for Finance and Administration Philip Brodett and then Assistant Vice-President Johnny Tan who were in charge of the corporation’s finances. In a Joint Affidavit dated 15 January 2009, PHC Chairperson Concepcion Poblador and Vice President Enrique Locsin affirmed that, “all expenses, vouchers and checks [of the corporation] were prepared, verified and approved by Mr. Brodett and Mr. Tan.”

Also, Mr. Pascual should realize that he is quoting matters that are still pending with the Supreme Court. In order to set the records straight and with due respect to such legal proceedings, Atty. Lokin had already explained therein that he did not make any false statement when he said that he did not know any Veronica Nepomuceno. The official minutes of the meeting of PHC board on November 8, 2006 held at The Manila Golf and Country Club show that Atty. Lokin did not deal with Ms. Nepomuceno when the Board “on motion duly made and seconded, Attys. Ricardo Diaz and Amador Simado, and the Nepumoceno and Partners Law Firm, were appointed additional legal counsels of the Company, to provide legal services to the Company and its officers. The Board also confirmed the previous authority of Messrs. Enrique Locsin and Philip Brodett to fix the terms of engagement of legal counsels, including newly retained lawyers, for the work to be assigned to them.”

Mr. Pascual should refrain from making one-sided remarks and just allow the legal proceedings involving PHC to take their proper course. In the meantime, he is strongly advised to refrain from attacking and besmirching the reputations of the members of the PHC board chaired by Ms. Poblador and their lawyers. Also, Mr. Pascual should realize that he is quoting matters that are still pending with the Supreme Court.

Mr. Pascual should be reminded that polluted sources should not be utilized in order to stay true to journalistic etiquette. Facts must be verified and data confirmed first before submitting an article for print in order that the real truth be delivered to public. Mr. Pascual did not even allow the undersigned or Atty. Lokin to comment prior to publishing his highly contumacious columns.

Mr. Pascual, as a columnist in a respected and widely-read Philippine STAR, should verify facts and refrain from any action that give appearance and impression that he is unfairly taking sides in an issue, and not giving equal opportunity for parties concerned to comment before any publicity is made.

We trust that we have clarified our position on the matter. We also formally request that we be given the opportunity to print the foregoing letter in full in the same prominent space that the column of Mr. Pascual was published and not relegate the same to an obscure part of the editorial section.