The Sangguniang Panlalawigan (SP) sitting as a committee of the whole will resume its investigation into an alleged multi-million dollar deposit in a local bank—which went viral over social media on Wednesday, June 20, 2016—at the Senator Benigno Aquino Jr. Session Hall, Provincial Capitol.

The SP on the June 22, 2016 committee hearing, failed to elicit information on the details of the dollar deposit allegedly owned by a top provincial official due to the failure of Atty. Salvador Diputado to appear as he reportedly had to attend to pressing matters in Manila.

Diputado, editor-in-chief of the local weekly, Bohol Times, was tagged as the source of the $81 million yarn.

But bank officials who testified during the session categorically belied the allegations of the existence of the dollar account and “categorically confirmed the non-existence of such amount in their respective banks”.

The SP is expected to press Diputado to divulge details of the $81 million deposit that was discussed in his radio program “Cuentas Claras” and appeared in his Facebook account and saw print in Superbalita of Sun Star Daily in Cebu.

Denounced as “purely a case of irresponsible journalism”, a news item imputing that an official of the Provincial Government of Bohol has an $81 million deposit in a certain bank in Bohol” gained notoriety after the name of a priest was dragged into the incredible story.

Fr. Patricio Galon, parish priest of Nuestra Senora De La Paz y Buenviaje (Our Lady of Peace and Good Voyage) in Songculan, Dauis, who testified during the SP meeting belied the allegations triggered by Diputado’s Facebook post and column in Superbalita that he was the source of the leak.

Galon reiterated his categorical denial of the incredible story that he was the source of the leak.

Third District Board Member Elpidio Jala, filed a manifestation on Friday, July 17, 2016 expressing deep concern over “issues that tainted the integrity of the provincial officialdom”.

Jala stressed that the SP “should not be a silent bystander since we are all considered suspects unless the depositor is identified”.

Jala moved that the “author of the information be called to clarify the issue and identify the depositor to the Committee of Whole”. (Chito M. Visarra and Rey Tutas)