2002] COCONUT LEVY FUNDS I 55

formerly held by Ferdinand Marcos, his relatives, cronies, and close associates.
The Public Character of Coconut Levy Funds The saga began after the successful People Power Revolution in 1986 that
propelled Corazvn Aquino to the presidency.
in Republic v. COCOFED
Kristqffer James E. Purisima* As one of her first acts in office, President Aquino issued three executive
orders that prescribed and defined the remedies to be undertaken by the
government to- recover "ill-gotten wealth" amassed by the previous regime.
This was the beginning of the crusade that would last for more than a decade.
I. PREFATORY STATEMENTS . . • . • . . . . • . • . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . 154
II. LE~AL FRAMEWORK RELATING TO THE To this end, the Presidential Commission on Good Govenunent
PHr:r.IPPINE CocoNuT INDUSTRY .....•...•••....•.•...... r56
(PCGG) - the government agency authorized to pursue the declared
A. Republic Act No. 6z6o national policy - carried out its specific mandate by means of sequestration,
B. Presidential Decree No. 232 freeze orders, and provisional takeover. These special remedies were oudined
C. P~esidential Decree No. 276 in the initial executive issuance of President Aquino under the
Revolutionary Government prior to the effectivity of the present
D. Pfesidential Decree No. 582
Constitution.
E. Presidential Decree No. 755
F. Presidential Decree No. 961 Thereafter, PCGG had to investigate the numerous fi:at1dulent
G. Presidential Decree No. 1841 transactions that spanned the era Of dictatorship. It was tasked to pierce and
H. Executive Order No. 1 unmask m~re-than two decades of conspiracy to defraud the government. A
I. Exewtive Order No.2 colossal endeavor, no doubt. Former Chief Justice Andres Narvasa
J. PCGG Rules and Regulations characterized it as an enterprise of"great pith and moment."
III. Republicv. COCOFED .. ~ .......... : . ................ 174
In this case, which is the primary subject of comment, the Supreme
A. Facts sumllmding the case Court ruled on the issue of who may vote the sequestered shares of stock of
B. Majority holding the United Coconut Planters Bank (UCPB). This problem, however, was
C. Dissenting opi11ion not untouched by other various matters in contention. Indeed, the
IV. THE CouRT's CONFLICT ..•... :. • . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2n
sequestration of ass~:ts by PCGG gave birth to numerous, correlated judicial
V. THE INESCAPABLE CONCLUSION . . • . . . • . . . . . . . • . • . . . . . . . . 2I 5
actions. 2
At this point, it is imperative that the reader be acquainted with the
context surrounding the duties and responsibilities ofPCGG. Before the case
This Court holds that the government should be allowed to continue voting those
in point is discussed, the historical circumstances shall be traced to give the
shares inasmurh as they were p14rchased with coconut. levy funds -funds that arc
reader a better understanding of the issues raised before the Court. Related
pn'ma fade pubh'c in character or, at ti1e very least, are "clearly affected with public
itlterest." holdings of the Court shall likewise be given ample treatment in order
that the reader may understand the context within which this decision..is
situated.
I. PREFATORY STATEMENTS

Republic rf the Philippines v. COCOFED' is not an isolated case. It is, rather,

a mere facet within the greater context of the sequestration of various assets

The author would like to extend his paramount gratitude to Associate Solicitor
1. Republic of the Philippines, represented by the Presidential Commission on
DereK Anthony P. Lim of the Office of the Solicitor General for his constructive
Good Government v. COCOFED et al. Ballares et al. Eduardo M.
and beneficial elucidation of the pertinent f.1cts and issues affecting the long line of
Cojuangco, Jr. and the Sandiganbayan (First Division}, G.R. Nos. 147062-64
Sequestration cases being handled by the Presidential Commission on Good
(Dec. 14, 2001}.
Government and the Office of the Solicitor General.
2. See Francis E. Garchitorena, Sequestration: A Review, 36 ATENEO LJ. I (1992}.
Cite as 47 ATENEO L.J. 154 (2002).