Thank God, the Impeachment trial hearings has ended with a judgement tomorrow!

We are relieved that the impeachement trial is soon to end with a decision expected tomorrow. Yet we are alarmed at some developments:

Rumours are circulating that defense will appeal any decision to the Supreme Court, of all places!, in case a verdict of "Guilty" will be pronounced tomorrow. This is a waste of time. Only the Senate is allowed to hold impeachment trial, its decision is final. It will provoke a real constituional crisis if Corona's camp will use the Supreme Court as a safe refuge of scalawags in government, which may include the highest officials of the land, from presidents to supreme court justices.

On the other hand, there is news that a second impeachment trial will be prepared by the lower house with lessons learned from current impeachment trial in case a verdict of "Not Guilty" will be given. We hope that the lower house will wait for a few years. This will be too much to muster for the common Filipinion people.

Give the people a break! Respect the decision of the Senator-judges!


For more informaiton.

Speech by Feliciano Belmonte, for the prosecution.

Reading lists: Is Corona telling the truth?

We gather for documentary historical purposes the following news items which should give us a clearer picture on the Corona Impeachment Trial.

• rappler.com, march 16: Corona negotiated for guidote-basa property. Corona claims he has nothing to do with his wife's corporation properties.
  
  
• abs-cbn, march 17: Corona worth 80 million Chief Justice Renato Corona's could be worth at least P80 million, which is way higher than what he has declared in his statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net worth (SALNs) through the years, the prosecution said on Friday.
  
  
• Ombudsman asks AMLC for Corona’s bank records Ellen Tordesillas reports that Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales has asked the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) for a copy of the records of impeached Chief Justice Renato Corona’s bank deposits, including dollar accounts that are the subject of a temporary restraining order issued by the Supreme Court.
  
  
• abs-cbnnews,march 18:Defense to present SALN samples, character evidence?
  
  
• abs-cbnnews, march 18:CJ should be ‘whiter than white’ - prosecution
  
  
• abs-cbn, march 16:Defense sees no reason for Corona to testify
  
  
• abs-cbn, march 16: Even PNoy's men violate SALN law - CJ defense
  
  
• philstar, march 19: Supreme Court: No double standard in trial witnesses
  
  
• philstar, march 19:Defense lines up more witnesses
  
  
• inquirer.net, march 19: Enrile tells defense: Explain Corona deposits
  

Two developments showing Corona is very unfit to be Chief Justice.

The first item is rapplers.com explosive article that Corona embellished his resume, especially on getting awards in his educational background.


This shows the exttent of sheer dishonesty of Renato Corona to get what he wants, by resorting to lies and fantasy, about his supposed academic honors during his grade school up to law school years in Ateneo.

For full details, please click on Corona lied about academic honors?

Hey a lot of prospective employees, including public officials abroad get caught and are kicked out of institutions, including a Thai minister who said he obtained a degree in some Republic School.


The second item bordering on disgust, is Cuevas of the defense panel claiming it was NOT Renato Corona who prepared his SALN reports. Really, the impeachment court hearings have shown Corona to be a self-centered person intent on magnifying his own wealth by claiming so much allowances and emoluments. Corona is simply responsible for the preparation of his SALN no matter who performs it. He is simply evading responsibility on so an important document, a document established by taxing offices precisely to avoid graft and corruption, and obtaining illegal gotten wealth.

Corona has no more integrity and has been exposed indirectly by even his disarming defense panel( if you think Cuevas is cute) and a parade of witnesses.

It is time for him to resign before the people gets tired of the devious legal means (like having secret dollar bank accounts.)

We dare the impeachment court to open even without the permission of Corona, since the bank secrecy laws apply only to foreigners. Do the impeachment court believe that Corona is a foreigner? The world wonders!

Incredible Statements and comments in the Impeachment trial

• Deed of sale notarized by SGV lawyer, says Corona wife.
  
  So what? The important thing is that the notary public must be qualified by the city.
  It is also strange that the notary public is in Makati whereas the transaction was done in Marikina (deed of sale).
  
  So what if the lawyer, Beth Montoya is an SGV lawyer??! Does that automatically empower her to notarize a document? Or cloak her with special aura of prestige to perform a notary public function?
  
  Heaven and earth may fade away but NOTHING will erase the fact that the notarization, witnessed himself by the great Chief Justice Corona was not BINDING! In other words the document should be thrown in the trash can!
  
  
  
  
• "Sraightforward" replies of Vicente was "proof that he was telling the truth" says Corona lawyers, one of them T. Salvador. Added the latter:
  
  
  One can tell if he was telling the truth with the way he testified. (Vicente) was there for some time and he was consistent with his testimony. He knows the documents involved and even guided the lawyers to identify those."
  
  So facetious these defense lawyers are. In a trial, documents take precedence over oral statements.
  
  Only stupid people can accept these statement from the defense panel without thinking. One telling information which came to light is that Vicente is a second cousin of Corona, the Chief Justice who is on trial. The fact that it was the prosecution discovering this tells a lot about the legal IQ of the defense team.
  
  
• Corona's vow: "Whether or not there was a TRO from the Supreme Court, I said I will open it in due time and the due time is next week. I have always said there is no problem with my dollar deposits because I can explain it.", (interview over dzBB on March 7 as printed in the March 15 issue of the Phil. Daily Inquirer, p. A.10
  
  His words does NOT carry weight, so telling of his credibility. Let's read what Cuevas response was:
  
  Cuevas , however feigned ignorance , saying that he"may be asleep or elsewhere" when the Chief Justice issued this assurance.
  
  Wow, the client speaks, the lawyer disagrees. Really the defense has feigned enough! This is a ploy to confuse the impeachment court, prosecution panel and the General Public.
  

Enough rants for now ......

Corona knew what he was doing in filing his SALNs!

Raissa Robles' latest article
Corona’s “not intentional” mistakes in his SALNs

The above article is again an eye-opener, and describe the educational and previous work/employment background of the Chief Justice Renato Corona:

1. Corona has an MBA degree from Ateneo de Manila University, and Master of Laws degree from Harvard, and a PhD degree(without dissertation) from the University of Santo Tomas.
   
   
2. Corona wrote on tax and commercial law issues for his column “Tax Corner” in the Manila Chronicle many years back!
   
   
3. His work experiences:
   
   1. Worked as a lawyer for the Development Bank of the Philippines.
      
      
   2. Worked as senior vice-president and general counsel of the Commercial Bank of Manila.
      
      
   3. Worked as a senior officer of the Tax and Corporate Counseling Group of the Tax Division of Sycip Gorres and Velayo (SGV & Co).
      

Raissa reminds us that

One can safely assume that CJ Corona knows what the word “cash advance” means. He knows all about and can distinguish the assessed value, fair market value and the acquisition cost of real properties. He knows all about the life and death of corporations. In fact, the proof of his knowledge on these subjects stare us right in the face. He was the ponente or the magistrate who penned that very thorough ruling on why the Marcos wealth was both ill-gotten and unexplained. That particular ruling demonstrated CJ Corona’s absolute mastery of the SALN and income tax returns (ITRs).

And Raissa let us also hear again the words of a speech of Chief Justice Corona:

The fact remains that at the heart of our sovereign mandate is the people’s trust in the courts. The people’s trust, however, is not confined to physical infrastructure. Improving human infrastructure is essential in maintaining integrity which in the final analysis gives us the right to judge. Hence, corruption in the judiciary, whether real or perceived, is particularly insidious and reprehensible.

A corrupt judiciary is totally unacceptable as it severely handicaps the legal and institutional mechanism designed to curb abuses in government. As such we shall continuously cleanse the court’s ranks by strengthening the integrity of the judiciary and raising it to the highest level possible. I believe that a member of the judiciary who is found guilty of dishonesty should not only be dismissed from the service but also disbarred. No ifs, no buts.

So any discrepancies of filing his SALNs and ITRs were intentional! The Prosecution should be prepared to use this knowledge of the background of Corona, including his speeches when discussing the SALNs next time.

Let Corona be hoisted in his own petard of public legal pronouncements and knowledge of financial matters, including taxes and SALNs.

Defense afraid of tackling the 2nd article of impeachment. Trial might be over sooner than later.

Chief Justice Corona has opened a Pandora's box when he allowed the Clerk of Court to "surrender" his SALN (Statement of Accoounts, Liabilities and Net Worth) to the Impeachment Court.

Now we have the prosecution panel perusing over the summarized statements and they are being helped indirectly by independent investigative journalism outfits such as RaissaRobles.com and Rappler.com with free DETAILED information and even advice.

We also are inspired to insinuate in some ways that real estate companies may have given the Chief Justice perks and advantages in exchange for favorable court decision!

Only when complete records such as taxes will be divulged will we get the full story and to fill in gaps to have a clear and convincing proof(s) that CJ Corona has lied even with his wife's and children's financial activities.

It is not a wonder that defense that is vehement about NOT allowing the 2nd article of impeachment to delve into the nasty meaty details for the sordid details clearly shows Corona has committed graft and corruption! (like claiming his wife had a government position later than what he wrote, and the worth of the properties are way way below the sum total of what he could earn as a government employee/manager (Chief of staff, Associate Justice, Chief Justice).


Here is Article 2 of the Impeachment Copmplaint:


II. RESPONDENT COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION AND/OR BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST WHEN HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE TO THE PUBLIC HIS STATEMENT OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES, AND NET WORTH AS REQUIRED UNDERSEC. 17, ART. XI OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION.

2.1. It is provided for in Art. XI, Section 17 of the 1987 Constitution that “a public officer or employee shall, upon assumption of office and as often thereafter as may be required by law, submit a declaration under oath of his assets, liabilities, and net worth. In the case of the President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Cabinet, and other constitutional offices, and officers of the armed forces with general or flag rank, the declaration shall be disclosed to the public in the manner provided by law. ”

2.2. Respondent failed to disclose to the public his statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth as required by the Constitution.

2.3. It is also reported that some of the properties of Respondent are not included in his declaration of his assets, liabilities, and net worth, in violation of the anti-graft and corrupt practices act.

2.4. Respondent is likewise suspected and accused of having accumulated ill-gotten wealth, acquiring assets of high values and keeping bank accounts with huge deposits. It has been reported that Respondent has, among others, a 300-sq. meter apartment in a posh Mega World Property development at the Fort in Taguig. Has he reported this, as he is constitutionally-required under Art. XI, Sec. 17 of the Constitution in his Statement of Assets and Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN)? Is this acquisition sustained and duly supported by his income as a public official? Since his assumption as Associate and subsequently, Chief Justice, has he complied with this duty of public disclosure?


Defense conveniently forgets that this is in Artcle 2.4!

Is Mdias Marquez an "untouchable"?

Here are some pertinent parts of a news item regarding the world bank report:


The World Bank team also questioned Corona’s appointment of one man as court administrator, head of the Supreme Court’s public information office and chairman of the bids and awards committee.

It did not however name Midas Marquez as such official. Corona authorized Marquez to approve disbursements of up to P200,000, which was later increased to P500,000.

“This senior official due to the combination of his appointments and functions, was the requestor of services, the approver of the terms of reference, the end-users of services (requested), the authorizer of contract extensions, and the authorizer of payments,” it said.

The team pointed out that the situation presented a conflict of interest and did away with internal checks and balances in disbursements and procurement of supplies.


Shame, It takes a foreign institution review to bring attention to the lack of good manqement in the Supreme Court and Corona is currently under impeachment trial. they both should go! They wont be missed.

Midas Marquez denies impropriety, hits Palace

Opening statement for Defense in Corona Impeachment Trial

Here is the full text of the opening statement of the defense,in the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona at the Senate. It was read by Eduardo de los Angeles.


Your Honors,

My Countrymen:

Good afternoon.

During the past few days, Prosecutors happily displayed pictures of the Bellagio and a list of some 45 properties, supposedly owned by the Chief Justice, to create the impression that he accumulated ill-gotten wealth. In fact, the Chief Justice owns only 5 real properties.

Yet, the Complaint, which contains 8 grounds for impeachment, does not accuse the Chief Justice of acquiring ill-gotten wealth. He is accused of graft and corruption only for refusing to account for the Judiciary Development Fund or JDF. Even with regard to his statements of assets, liabilities and networth or SALN, the issue is whether or not the alleged failure to disclose violates the principle of accountability.

The pictures of the Bellagio and the bloated list of titles are, therefore, irrelevant to this trial.

This impeachment finds its roots in President Aquino’s fight against corruption and his perception that the Supreme Court is a hindrance to his quest. He believes that the Supreme Court protects former President Gloria Arroyo. On the other hand, the defense believes that President Aquino is antagonistic to the Court because of its ruling in the Hacienda Luisita case.

The nobility of President Aquino’s fight against corruption cannot be questioned. It is respectfully submitted, however, that in his fight, the President and the Executive Department are duty-bound to scrupulously observe an abiding respect for the Constitutional rights of every one of us.

The 8 Articles of Impeachment can actually be classified into 2 categories. First, those that involve decisions of the Supreme Court (Articles I, III, IV, V, VI, VII). And, second, those that pertain to the non-disclosure of the SALN of the Chief Justice, and his alleged refusal to account for the JDF. (Articles II and VIII).

Let me first address the latter. Complainants accuse the Chief Justice of allegedly refusing to account for the JDF. The documentary evidence will prove the contrary. And, with respect to his SALN, the defense will establish that in accordance with law, the Chief Justice annually files his SALN with the Clerk of Court of the Supreme Court, who has legal custody of such documents. We shall show that the Clerk of Court is restricted from disclosing the SALNs by resolutions first issued during the term of Chief Justice Marcelo Fernan way back in 1989. In ligt of current developments, the Chief Justice has already caused these resolutions to be included in the agenda of the Supreme Court for re-evaluation.

With respect to the decisions, the complainants made a tally of selected cases to show that the Supreme Court was biased. This is not so. First, it is not fair to handpick decisions that supposedly favor the Arroyo administration; all the decisions of the Supreme Court must be considered. Second, there are several decisions against the former President and her administration. For example, in Islamic Da’wah Council of the Philippines v. Office of the Executive Secretary, the Chief Justice himself penned the decision declaring former President Arroyo’s Executive Order No. 46 null and void. Third, in any decision, the Supreme Court always bases its judgment on sound legal grounds.

Take the case of the Truth Commission. The defense will establish that the Supreme Court was not biased towards the Arroyo administration. Aming ipapakita na tama ang desisyon dito. Nilabag ng Executive Order No. 1 ang Equal Protection Clause dahil ang pag-imbestiga kay Ginang Arroyo ang tanging layunin ng Truth Commission. Moreover, the Supreme Court even suggested a cure for the defect by not limiting the probe to the Arroyo administration. But the Executive Department stubbornly refused to adopt such simple amendment.

The defense will also explain that when the Supreme Court issued a TRO enjoining Secretary Leila De Lima from enforcing her Watchlist Order, the Supreme Court acted in accordance with the Constitution and jurisprudence. Hukuman po lamang ang maaaring magbigay ng Hold Order kapag mayroon nang naisampang criminal case. Ngunit, noong panahong iyon, wala pang naisasampang criminal case si Secretary De Lima laban kay Ginang Arroyo kahit, bago pa dito, matagang nang naghain ng reklamo ang Akbayan for Plunder. Bakit naman po natin sinisisi si Chief Justice? Di po ba’t malinaw na ang Exective Department ang may pagkukulang sa kaso ni Ginang Arroyo?

I remember a Secretary of Justice who aimed to rid our country of corruption. His name is Jose W. Diokno. He secured several search warrants and raided the offices and homes of Harry Stonehill, a rich American businessman who was alleged to have bribed government officials. To set an example, Secretary Diokno sought to prosecute Mr. Stonehill. Using the search warrants, the raiding teams seizes truck-loads of incriminating documents, including a “blue-book” containing the names of the bribed government officials. Yet, after 3 days, the Supreme Court issued a TRO preventing Secretary Diokno from using all the seized documents. Tulad ng marami, nagtaka ako: paano ito nangyari? After I read the decision penned by Chief Justice Roberto Concepcion, I understood. The decision explained that the search warrants were void and the seized documents inadmissible in evidence because the warrants did not specify the things to be seized, as required by the Constitution.

The Stonehill case is strikingly similar to the crusade of President Aquino. In both, there are crusading officials who want to eliminate corruption. In both, the public overwhelmingly support these officials. In both, the officials unfortunately transgressed the Constitution. And in both, the Supreme Court stepped in and issued adverse and unpopular decisions because its task is to always uphold the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The House also complains that the Chief Justice betrayed the public trust when the Supreme Court decided on the cityhood of 16 municipalities, the creation of a new district in Camarines Sur, and the conversion of the Dinagat Island into a province. Aba, nakakalimutan na yata nila na sila ang naglikha nitong mga batas na ito. Now that the Supreme Court has upheld what they did, sila pa ang nagagalit at nagmamadaling magsampa ng impeachment case laban kay Chief Justice. Ano bang kalokohan yan?

At eto pa po, sabi nila, this impeachment is not against the Supreme Court but aimed to make the Chief Justice accountable for his personal actions. All decisions are, however, rendered by the Supreme Court, never by the Chief Justice alone. Isa lamang po ang boto ng Chief Justice at hindi niya kontrolado ang ibang mga mahistrado. Each Justice votes according to his own opinion. Taliwas sa sinasabi nila Congressman Tupas, wala pong voting bloc dito.

Your Honors, in performing its responsibility under the Constitution, the Supreme Court as a co-equal branch of government is now being assaulted and criticized. It is our humble submission that in upholding the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice cannot be considered as obstacles to clean government or to the President’s vision to realize his “daang matuwid.” In upholding the Constitution and in safeguarding individual rights, the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice cannot be considered the enemies of the people. Precisely, they protect individual rights and therefore do not betray public trust.

Today, the House of Representatives and the Executive Department have joined all their might, power and resources to impeach the Chief Justice. This impeachment sends a chilling threat to the Supreme Court to withhold the exercise of its judicial power and just let the President have his way.

Unfortunately, his obsessive pursuit of his goal has, at times, resulted in the infringement of the law. It has also brought the branches of government into collision, and now it divides the nation. During this crucial moment in history, we fervently pray that you, our Honorable Senators will listen, consider the evidence and as your solemn oath declares, do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws of the Philippines.

May God Bless us all.