JAPANESE gambling magnate Kazuo Okada has been cleared by the Department of Justice on the estafa charge filed against him and several others in connection with the supply of light-emitting diode (LED) strips for the façade of Okada Manila, the $2-billion integrated resort and casino in Entertainment City.
In his 10-page decision, DOJ’s Assistant State Prosecutor Alejandro C. Daguiso said Tiger Resort Leisure and Entertainment Inc. failed to prove a conspiracy between Okada and other respondents Kengo Takeda, Tetsuya Yokota and Aruze Philippines Manufacturing Inc.
“From the records, there appears to be no concrete evidence at all of respondents’ [Tiger Resort] alleged conspiracy and representations that brought about the contract in question,” Daguiso said.
He affirmed the resolution of the Parañaque Prosecutors Office dismissing the case on May 15, 2018, for lack of probable cause.
The DOJ said Tiger Resort’s complaint relied on the assertions of Dindo Espeleta, the company’s chief executive adviser, of his perceived close personal association between Okada and other respondents, without giving any specifics on particular dates during the period of negotiations for the awarding of the supply agreement.
The DOJ also said Tiger Resort’s complaint rendered itself defective after failing to present receipts as evidence, either of the LED strips upon delivery or of the payment for the items.
The official said Aruze Philippines did not misrepresent itself in the supply agreement, as it claimed that it would provide the LED strips and not manufacture them. The LED strips were manufactured by J&J Philippines Corp.
“We are not convinced of complainant’s argument that the last recital in the preamble of the supply agreement is a material part of the contract between the parties,” it said.
The DOJ also said Espeleta had every opportunity to conduct due diligence in the preparation for signing of the supply agreement, but he failed to do so.
“Also, the complainant did not refute the material assertions of respondent Yokota relative to the actual problems encountered in the installation of the LED strips themselves, for which respondent APMI [Aruze] is not at all responsible. “To summarize, we find that there is no probable cause to conclude that criminal fraud occurred, absent any additional evidence that can refute the assertion that complainant’s officers actually knew about the involvement of J&J in the manufacture of the LED strips,” the resolution said.