By James A. Loyola Japanese gaming tycoon Kazuo Okada suffered another legal setback with the Las Piñas city prosecutor dismissing the perjury cases filed by Okada’s Aruze Phils. Manufacturing Inc. (APMI) against the chief executive adviser (CEA) of Tiger Resort Leisure & Entertainment Inc.(TRLEI). Okada had accused TRLEI’s CEA Dindo Espeleta of false claims regarding APMI’s manufacture of light emitting diode (LED) strips for Okada Manila, the hotel and casino resort of TRLEI. In a resolution, Las Pinas City Senior Asst. Prosecutor Donald Macasaet said the elements of perjury were absent in the statements made by Espeleta against APMI when he filed TRLEI’s estafa complaint against APMI. APMI sued Espeleta for three counts of perjury for claiming in the TRLEI estafa case filed against APMI that it made false representations when it entered into a deal to supply TRLEI with LED strips for outdoor use in the Okada hotel casino. Among others, Espeleta, who was in charge of the LED project for TRLEI, accused APMI of making it appear that it was the manufacturer of the LED strips when it merely engaged another company, J and J Phils., to supply the LED strips. APMI, in its complaint for perjury against Espeleta, said the TRLEI executive knew beforehand that APMI was just buying the LED strips from another supplier and lied at least thrice about it in his estafa case. But Macasaet said “the requirement that the respondent (Espeleta) made willful and deliberate assertion of falsehood is lacking.” Citing a Supreme Court ruling, Macasaet said “a false statement of a belief is not perjury.” Macasaet said Espeleta “was able to establish that his assertions” in the estafa case against APMI were “based on belief and conviction” and after an examination of APMI’s corporate papers. The resolution said “a reading” of APMI´s amended articles of incorporation confirmed Espeleta´s claim that manufacturing LED strips for outdoor use “was never mentioned as the primary or secondary purpose of the corporation.” Espeleta´s claims, Macasaet said, “proceeded from his examination of the corporate papers…In other words, there is no falsity that can be atttributed” to Espeleta, the resolution said. Email messages presented by APMI against Espeleta as evidence, “to put it bluntly, are not clear of their import in proving perjury,” said Macasaet. The claim by APMI that Espeleta or TRLEI knew ahead that APMI did not manufacture LED strips “is based purely on conjectures and does not have a leg to stand on.”