The Long Wait for Justice: AMA Bank Depositors Demand Immediate Action from the BSP

Depositors at AMA Rural Bank of Mandaluyong, Inc. ("AMA Bank") have been in limbo and unable to access their hard-earned money for more than five years.  Many of them, especially the elderly, have been pursuing justice nonstop in the hopes of finding a solution that will enable them to get their deposits back.  With every year that goes by, their annoyance only grows as the bank's reopening is still delayed by legal and administrative complications.  Unfortunately, a number of these depositors have died before the resolution they had long fought for was realized.

The Supreme Court's First Division ("SC First Division") issued a Resolution of Even Date ("First SC Resolution") on March 1, 2023, rejecting the SC Petitions of the Philippine Deposit Insurance Corporation ("PDIC") and the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas ("BSP"), respectively, and upholding the CA Decision.  This decision required PDIC to return the seized assets and money within five days, and it ordered BSP to reopen AMA Rural Bank.

The Supreme Court En Banc then "with finality" rejected the Motions for Reconsideration of BSP and PDIC in its Resolution dated May 28, 2024 ("Second SC Resolution").  After that, the Supreme Court En Banc issued an Entry of Judgment affirming the CA Decision in CA-G.R. and the First and Second SC Resolutions.  On May 28, 2024, SP No. 163288 became final and executory.  

After this ruling, a group of AMA Bank depositors returned to BSP on March 5, 2025, to voice their concerns.  This visit comes after earlier attempts to get clarification on the status of their deposits, which included a formal letter to BSP officials and a previous meeting.  The BSP's actions contradict its repeated declarations that it is in favor of AMA Bank's reopening.

The second Motion for Reconsideration (M.R.) that the BSP filed with the Supreme Court, which vehemently opposes the reopening of AMA Bank, is the source of the issue. The depositors' worries have only grown as a result of this contradiction. Why continue using legal tactics to block the reopening if BSP actually supports it? This second M.R. was communicated to the depositors.  continues to be considered by the Supreme Court, adding to the ambiguity surrounding their funds.

To make matters worse, PDIC, the Department of Education ("DepEd"), and the BSP itself are denying AMA Bank access to nearly 2 billion pesos in legitimate funds.  Even if AMA Bank were to reopen, it would find it difficult to function efficiently without these funds.  Depositors worry that if a reopening is forced without sufficient funding and the BSP second M.R.  stays pending, AMA Bank would only be subject to contempt of court, which would make matters more complicated.

On November 7, 2019, the BSP issued Monetary Board ("MB") Resolution No. 1705.D ("MB Resolution No. 1705.D"), which ordered the closure and liquidation of AMA Bank, designated PDIC as its receiver, and instructed PDIC to move forward with the takeover and liquidation of AMA Bank. This marked the beginning of the protracted suffering endured by AMA Bank depositors.

Following the Notice of Closure, PDIC implemented MB Resolution No. 1705.D on November 8, 2019, and took over the operations of AMA Bank's Mandaluyong City head office, nine branches, and three (3) other banking offices (OBO) across the nation. PDIC also seized all of the bank's assets, including cash assets, and all of its records and documents.

However, the Court of Appeals granted AMA Bank's CA Petition in its Decision dated 7 September 2020 ("CA Decision"), among other things, by nullifying and annulling MB Resolution No. 1705.D and all actions taken in accordance with it. It also ordered PDIC to (i) return all records, documents, and assets that it had seized from AMA BANK and (ii) to revoke the orders it had issued in order to implement MB Resolution 1705.D.

The Court of Appeals determined that the closure was illegal in this CA Decision and directed the BSP and PDIC to reopen the bank and return the assets that had been seized.  The bank has been closed for over four years in spite of this decision.

When BSP and AMA Bank met on March 5, 2025, BSP's Deputy Governor Atty.  Elmore Capule presented the BSP's position on the matter.  But instead of offering a firm solution or a clear course of action, BSP, via Atty.  Capule requested that the depositors come back in a month.  The depositors were even more disappointed by this response because they had anticipated a more significant update or commitment from the central bank.  The depositors were further irritated by the BSP's failure to release an official statement about the meeting, which left them with more questions than answers.

Now, the depositors are making a direct appeal for BSP to:

1. Withdraw the second motion for reconsideration and allow the Supreme Court’s ruling to take effect without further delay.
2. Use its influence over PDIC, DepEd, and BSP itself to release AMA Bank’s rightful funds, ensuring that the institution can operate once more and fulfill its obligations to its depositors.

Time is no longer a luxury for the elderly depositors who have been waiting for years.  Their demand for justice encompasses fairness, accountability, and respect for due process in addition to monetary reparations.  Now, it is up to BSP to make sure that its words and deeds match and to finally end this protracted financial nightmare.

The AMA Bank depositors are demanding justice that has long been deserved, not just their money back.  Their demand that the BSP take immediate action is more urgent than ever.