The SC can stop the trial if there is grave abuse of power by any branch of government

The impeachment trial of Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona has certainly divided the sentiments of the Filipino people. There are Filipinos who side with the prosecution in condemning the Chief Justice despite the absence of hard evidence; there are Filipinos who side with upholding the rule of law and respecting the institutions; and then there are people who are still confused about which of the two sides they will believe.

In forums around the Net, it can be gleaned that there are still many Filipinos who are totally clueless about the law. This actually includes even our own legislators and Senators. To be fair, an impeachment proceeding is not something that Filipinos come across everyday. And this is part of the reason why applying the rules of the court seems to be a problem for both the Senator-Judges and the prosecutors, a reality that contributes to the mounting delays in the proceedings. Most of them either do not know how to follow the rules or are deliberately disregarding the rules. Not surprisingly, the defense team does not seem to have a problem with the court rules.

Some Filipinos get even more confused after the presentation of evidence from only one side is shown in court due to time constraints and more questions arise usually after the prosecutors discuss the merits of the case with the media. Now discussing the merits of the case with the media is supposed to be against the court rules but that doesn’t matter much to the prosecutors. Violating the court rules seems to come so naturally to the prosecutors much the same way that breathing does to most. They’ve been using the strategy of convincing the public of Chief Justice Corona’s guilt when the defense team is not around because they can get away with claims or suggestions without receiving any objections.

Since there are many Filipinos who are still confused about certain aspects of the case, I will try to address some “clarificatory” questions that keep popping up.

1. Why doesn’t Chief Justice Corona want to disclose his alleged dollar account?

At this point, the public is not sure if the Chief Justice really has a dollar account. The prosecution has provided illegally-obtained copies of the alleged dollar account but the witness, President of PSBank Pascual Garcia III could not confirm if that is indeed Corona’s. Due to the Foreign Currency Deposit Act of the Philippines, PSBank cannot disclose any of their client’s foreign currency deposits held in their bank. The bank can be held criminally liable if they disclose any information about their client’s account to anyone. A temporary restraining order (TRO) from the Supreme Court has been successfully granted to PSBank to protect them from being forced to surrender information about their client’s foreign currency deposits.

2. What would be the effect of allowing the illegally obtained evidence from the bank on the banking institution and the economy?

The effect could have devastating consequences. The banking industry is built on trust. Individuals and corporations “trust” their banks to handle their funds safely and with confidentiality. Once the banks lose their customers’ trust due to a breach in their confidentiality agreement with them, a bank run can occur. A bank run is when their customers panic and withdraw their funds from the bank. This can actually cause the bank to collapse.

For those who are not aware, much of the funds in a bank are actually tied up in investment portfolios and cannot be withdrawn all at the same time. A bank run does not only affect the bank alone, it can also affect other industries whose funds are tied up with the bank. Even individuals who can’t get their money once a bank’s reserves dry up will experience financial distress.

A breach in confidentiality agreements can also result in foreign and local investors who have dollar accounts packing their bags and moving elsewhere the minute they see that they could also become victims of individuals or agents who are “fishing” for information. The exodus of investors can destroy our already ailing economy and wreak havoc in our society. Business Mirror columnist, John Mangun made an observation which he shared on his Twitter account that the Philippine Stock Exchange (PSE) is indicating high net foreign currency selling, which could mean that the impeachment trial is affecting investor confidence.

3. Is it true that violating the Foreign Currency Deposit Republic Act 6426 can land people in jail?

Perhaps anticipating the dire consequences of such possible bank run scenarios as mentioned above, the law is clear about strict confidentiality. So the answer is yes; any person who violates the law can be jailed or fined. For everyone’s information, here is what’s stipulated in the law:

Section 8. Secrecy of foreign currency deposits. – All foreign currency deposits authorized under this Act, as amended by PD No. 1035, as well as foreign currency deposits authorized under PD No. 1034, are hereby declared as and considered of an absolutely confidential nature and, except upon the written permission of the depositor, in no instance shall foreign currency deposits be examined, inquired or looked into by any person, government official, bureau or office whether judicial or administrative or legislative, or any other entity whether public or private; Provided, however, That said foreign currency deposits shall be exempt from attachment, garnishment, or any other order or process of any court, legislative body, government agency or any administrative body whatsoever. (As amended by PD No. 1035, and further amended by PD No. 1246, prom. Nov. 21, 1977.)

4. Why can’t Chief Justice Corona simply disclose his dollar account if he has any?

That is a very hypothetical question, which I will answer hypothetically.

The Chief Justice probably does not want to disclose his alleged dollar account because for one, the presentation of his “alleged” dollar account and his existing peso accounts are not covered by the articles of impeachment. The impeachment court resolved earlier that that evidence for Article 2.4 would be disallowed. Article 2.4 pertains to the alleged “ill-gotten wealth” of the Chief Justice. Therefore, when the Senators allowed the subpoena of bank accounts, they violated their own ruling on Article 2.4. In short, the court judges contradicted themselves. It was only Senator Miriam Santiago who remembered their resolution but her appeal to stop the subpoena was junked by the rest of the Senators.

5. Why did Chief Justice Corona through his lawyers file for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to stop the trial?

According to defense team spokesperson Tranquil Salvador III, the TRO is “not intended to kill the trial, but to temporarily stop it.” The defense also claims that the events in the last few weeks of the trial have made them realize that the whole impeachment trial is degenerating into a persecution of the Chief Justice. The defense and many people also observe that the prosecution is violating the Chief Justice’ rights.

“We’re asking to pause and think about these events … while the Supreme Court is still determining the legality of the impeachment court’s resolution,” he said. “This is respect for the rule of law.”

Rico Paolo Quicho, another defense lawyer, said the decision to seek relief from the Supreme Court was a “wholistic approach” and a “culmination” of events, which happened during the first three weeks of Corona’s impeachment trial.

According to Quicho, they opted to file the petition “because we cannot just let the prosecution trample on the rights” of the Chief Justice.

6. In what way does the prosecution “trample” on the rights of Chief Justice Corona?

The very first time the Chief Justice’s rights were violated was when the impeachment complaint was passed despite not going through the verification process. Two lawyers have in fact, pointed out that the articles of impeachment against the Chief Justice were not verified as per the Constitution’s Article XI Section 3(2):

Lawyer and former Misamis Oriental governor Homobono Adaza and and Atty. Alan Paguia filed their petition as they pointed out articles of impeachment, which the House submitted to the Senate, fail to comply with the Constitution’s Article XI Section 3(2).

According to such provision, “a verified complaint for impeachment may be filed by any Member of the House of Representatives or by any citizen upon a resolution of endorsement by any Member thereof, which shall be included in the Order of Business within ten session days, and referred to the proper Committee within three session days thereafter.”

The impeachment complaint wasn’t verified as required so this is merely a scrap of paper which the Senate can’t assume jurisdiction over, however, Adaza and Paguia noted.

Their claim validates the allegation by some members of Congress that the impeachment complaint was rushed and railroaded and that the 188 Congressmen who signed the impeachment complaint may not have read and understood the articles of impeachment properly.

Other blatant violations on the Chief Justice’s right to due process include, the prosecution team lying about the Corona’s alleged “45 properties” to the media, the prosecution’s presentation of illegally obtained evidence, prosecution members conducting a trial by media, and the prosecution team’s fishing for evidence by seeking to subpoena bank accounts; all of which indicate that the impeachment complaint had no basis. More importantly, some Senator Judges showed their bias for the prosecution by helping the prosecution during the trial and not adhering to their own rules. These are just some of the violations that can also be criminal in nature, which members of the prosecution can be liable for.

7. Why must we strictly adhere to the law?

Laws exist to protect the individual from the potential abuse of the government and not the other way around. It is stipulated in our constitution in ARTICLE III of the BILL OF RIGHTS under Section 1:

No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.

Government officials tend to abuse their power in the Philippines, which is precisely the reason why we should ensure that the rule of the law is strictly adhered to.

8. Is it right for the Supreme Court to issue a TRO on the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Corona?

If there is a motion filed with the Supreme Court to issue a TRO on the impeachment trial, the members of the Supreme Court can act on it based on the merits of the complaint. Since they are the interpreters of the law, they will have to issue their decision based on whether or not the law has been strictly applied in the impeachment complaints and during the proceedings. It is stipulated in our constitution in ARTICLE VIII JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT:

Section 1:

The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be established by law.

Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government.

And Section 5, part 5:

Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the integrated bar, and legal assistance to the under-privileged. Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court.

It is crystal clear that the Supreme Court has the power to stop the nonsense that is going on in the Senate impeachment court. No less than noted constitutional expert Joaquin Bernas reiterated that the Supreme Court has last say on the meaning of the law.

“What all this means is that the Supreme Court can come in when needed to determine the meaning of the law,” Bernas said.

“This does not mean superiority of the [high court] over the the other departments. All it means is that the Constitution has placed in the [Supreme Court] the power to determine with finality the meaning of the law. It means the superiority of the Constitution, and it just so happens that in the constitutional structure of our government, there is separation of responsibilities.

“There is no superiority of one over the others; there is only superiority of the Constitution over all.”

The issuance of a TRO to stop the trial should not be seen as the seed of a “constitutional crisis” because even a regular person can interpret what is written in the constitution without difficulty. The trial has already wrought enough havoc in the daily lives of those involved, not to mention long-term damage to our economy. It would be sheer arrogance on the part of the members of the legislative and executive branches of government to refuse to recognize the Supreme Court’s authority on this matter. Just like how Congressman Rudolfo Fariñas is showing his arrogance by threatening to impeach the eight judges who granted a TRO against the subpoena of Chief Justice Corona’s alleged dollar accounts. Perhaps he needs to redeem himself after the comedy act he delivered on Day 13 of the trial.

Now don’t get me wrong, I am all for uncovering the truth. I just hate the way the legislative and executive branches of government are depriving an individual, one who just happens to be a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, of due process. After all, if Chief Justice Renato Corona were really guilty, it would be a shame that he would get away on the grounds of the prosecution’s incompetence.

print

139 Comments on “The SC can stop the trial if there is grave abuse of power by any branch of government”

  1. little boy p-noy dares corona..!
    if he wants to reduce the rule and process of law to the playground then i dare him
    to make public who he sold his hacienda luisita shares to and show he did not simply transfer to one of his sisters
    to publicly support the SC ruling on hacienda luisita and commit to its distribution to the farmers
    to deny the general knowledge that he is gay/bisexual
    to disclose his psychiatric report and admit that his father sent him for counselling in boston
    to include PDAF in FoI bill

    hypocrite of the first order. go and hide behind some-ones skirts. a poor excuse for a man.

    1. Grace Lee’s skirt? great timing right?
      The chikadoras are sure to be distracted by this. And look how grace lee shoot up because of this. A plus for the both parties.
      Such a shame.

    2. Good idea on disclosing the whereabouts of his HL shares but I don’t know if I agree with the disclosure of his sexuality. 😉

        1. From http://www.tribuneonline.org/headlines/20120204hed6.html

          (This is for lawyers-commenters in this blog.)

          “Justice Secretary Leila de Lima is now backing down on her incendiary remarks against Chief Justice Renato Corona who De Lima in one instance has described as a lawless “tyrant.”

          De Lima and another outspoken lawyer in the Aquino administration, presidential spokesman Edwin Lacierda, have been directed to answer a petition seeking their disbarment or suspension as LAWYERS FOR MAKING CONTEMPTUOUS REMARKS AGAINST THE CHIEF MAGISTRATE IN VIOLATION OF THEIR LAWYER’S OATH.

          “It’s called free expression, a constitutional right the Chief Justice himself has publicly exercised in at least two occasions before an assembly of court sympathizers,” De Lima told reporters in reply to a Supreme Court resolution last Tuesday requiring the two government officials to submit comment on the disbarment case filed against them.

          A private lawyer Agustin Sundiam filed the complaint which De Lima and Lacierda are required to answer within 10 days.

          Sundiam had asked the high tribunal to take disciplinary action against De Lima and Lacierda for their “utterances and remarks on national television which were bannered by all newspapers” in support of President Aquino’s criticism of Corona during a criminal justice summit last Dec. 5.

          During the event, Aquino slammed Corona for being a “midnight appointee” and for supposedly being a roadblock in his reform agenda.

          The lawyer said the two secretaries violated their oath as lawyers, the Code of Professional Responsibility and the Rules of Court which require all lawyers to “observe and maintain the respect and dignity due to the courts of justice and judicial officers.”

          He cited De Lima’s strongly worded statement last December where she described Corona “a tyrant who holds himself above justice and accountability.”

          The petitioner alleged that the same remarks made by De Lima and Lacierda against Corona also constitute indirect contempt defined and punishable under the Revised Rules on Civil Procedure.

          “There is no gainsaying that the subject remarks were calculated precisely to degrade or tend to degrade the administration of justice, and erode and undermine the people’s confidence in this Honorable Supreme Court and the judicial officers,” read the petition obtained from a source.

          Sundiam asked the high tribunal to start appropriate proceedings “for the disbarment and/or suspension of respondents from practice of law” and other disciplinary action against the two.

          “These contemptuous remarks of the respondents are violative fo the Lawyer’s Oath, the Code of Professional Responsibility and Section 20(b), Rule 138 of the Rules of Court which direct the respondents-lawyers to observe and maintain the respect and dignity due to the courts of justice and judicial officers,” Sundiam stressed.”

        2. Ilda is correct. The SC interpret the meaning of the laws and constitution. That is their task. If the Senate abuses its power and duties as granted by the constitution, then the Supreme court can come in certainly. It cant be that the Senate can do anything it wants. It lends to abuse.

  2. Ilda, Jeez…

    I would say I’ve been reader of your posts in this blog for almost a year and there were times I was critical with some of them. (Just to dispel the notion that I always agree with you and benign0.)

    This one is the best I’ve read. Well written and very insightful!

  3. Understandably, quite a number of people either already have withdrawn or are in the process of withdrawing their money from PSBank (a bank run as feared?) Whether Corona agrees to disclose whatever account he may have or not, the damage—consequence of this illegal access to information the prosecution and supporters, like Ma Ressa (still washing her hands), Malacañang, or moneyed connections have caused—cannot be undone.

    1. Hopefully the PSBank president’s display of integrity can repair their damaged reputation. But if the Senators insists on the subpoena of the dollar deposits, they’ll not only cause a constitutional crisis, they might even cause a financial crisis.

  4. drilon, osmena& pangilinan are now the acting prosecutors? akala namin sila ang senator-judges? obvious na kakampi sila ng prosecution. Sa Defense pa rin kami ng family & friends ko

      1. hi ms. ilda,
        i think they are well aware of the law. in my opinion they needed to step-up for the prosecutors (sabi ni bossing kase) kasi palagi palpak sila. sila na ang naging politicians/prosecutors/lastly judges (order of priority & self interest).

        the procedures that i’m seeing on this trial is alarming. it seems that they will do anything to impeach corona even through illegal means. then BRAND IT as “IN PURSUIT of TRUTH & JUSTICE.”

        the defense has every right to file that petition to the supreme court.

    1. Editorial of Manila Standard has this to say about Drilon:

      “But then, what can we expect from the erstwhile ally of the former President that the current administration now loathes? Was this not the same senator who once told former President Gloria Arroyo that she should consider moving Malacañang to his hometown of Iloilo “where we love you”? Is such a judge to be taken at his word? Or is that, too, all for show? “

  5. Hi Miss Ilda,
    This is one of your best articles yet. Engaging read.

    Whatever the outcome of this trial would be, it would be a pyrrhic victory (a good thing that comes at great cost).

    Meanwhile, the rest of the country is still going down the drain, and is poised to slide down for some time. PNoy apparently couldn’t care less, since he’s on cloud nine and all.

    I thought I could share a link from one of GRP’s “favorite” punching bags. You’ll see exactly who it is in the link below. Makes you go hmm.

    http://www.ellentordesillas.com/2012/02/10/corona-is-finished/

    1. Hi FallenAngel

      Thank you. Unfortunately, only rational people will agree with you.

      PNoy has managed to keep everyone busy while he goes on his date.

      Thanks for the link but usually these so-called investigative journalists are not worth my time. 😉

  6. osmena? yon nagwalanghiya sa mga senior citizen? si manong serge? di ko na iboboto yan! pangilinan? yon may akda ng batas sa pagiging konsentidor na pumatay at masangkot ang menor de edad sa karumaldumal na krimen ay ok lng? dahil wala daw muwang? hehehe, di rin kita iboboto kahit kantahan pa ako ni sharon.

      1. ilda, your beautiful. can we be textmates? im a lawyer and pro-corona too. If the senate commits abuses and violats the guidelines set by the constitution, then the supreme court has to come in as part of its duty to interpret the law and the Constitution.

        1. Thank you, mike. I am not pro-Corona per se. I am for upholding the rule of law.

          Sorry, but I do not have enough time for text messages. Cheers 😉

  7. To the writer:

    May I ask you some “clarificatory” questions on some of your points?

    P-1. Am I right with this statement that the reason why he doesn’t want to disclose his alleged dollar account is because he really doesn’t have said accounts? Follow-up question: Why won’t he just say, I don’t have any dollar accounts? What is he up to?
    P-2. Do you have any articles to show that bank run is indeed happening? Because from what I know, isolvency is the main reason why they run for their money. During Erap’s impeachment trial, the court also examined his bank accounts. Did a bank run happen then? For ordinary citizens, that is highly unlikely.
    P-3. Pretty clear on that.
    P-4. Article 2.3 is about properties allegedly not in the SALn of Corona in violation of the anti-graft law. So probably the reason why they subpoenad the banks was to find information on how much he really has in comparison to what he declared in his SALn.
    P-5. TRO if I understand correctly is temporary. Now, given your reason, how then will they be sure the prosecutor won’t “trample on the CJ’s rights” once it resumes? Is it possible that that’s not their only reason?
    P-6. That is your opinion. I respect that.
    P-7. I agree.
    P-8. They absolutely have the right to issue a TRO on the impeachment trial. Follow up question: Do they know the purpose behind the Foreign Currency Deposit Republic Act 6426? How did they interpret that law?

    1. @twoface –

      Your “clarificatory” questions:

      P-1. Am I right with this statement that the reason why he doesn’t want to disclose his alleged dollar account is because he really doesn’t have said accounts? Follow-up question: Why won’t he just say, I don’t have any dollar accounts?

      (You want Ilda to be mind reader so that she can answer your “clarificatory” question. I, myself, won’t have an answer to that one. I can only speculate that if Corona answer it with anything, it will be a “dignification” of a non-issue item.

      The Senate court has ruled that since the Articles of Impeachment do not “accuse” Corona of having committed bribery or graft and corruption, the prosecution cannot introduce any evidence to prove such charge.)

      P-2. Do you have any articles to show that bank run is indeed happening? Because from what I know, isolvency is the main reason why they run for their money. During Erap’s impeachment trial, the court also examined his bank accounts. Did a bank run happen then? For ordinary citizens, that is highly unlikely.

      (It is not happening yet as this point of time.

      According to the FFCCCII official, the impeachment court should strongly consider the debilitating impact of their decision on the country’s banking industry, in particular, and the national economy, in general.

      “The members of the FFCCCII are afraid that it might trigger a bank run, just like what happened during the impeachment trial of former President Estrada where massive withdrawals by depositors of then Equitable PCI Bank occurred,” the FFCCCII executive warned.

      Googling Equitable bank run is just a couple of mouse click away and an exampole is –

      Before Ocampo’s testimony, Vice President Arroyo herself had said on radio that Equitable-PCI was experiencing bank runs nationwide following the expose on the Velarde/Valhalla account. United Opposition operatives led by Pastor Saycon had also picketed bank bracher in Metro Manila urging depositors to pull out their deposits in protest over the said secret accounts.

      Take note that GMA might already be salivating the presidential position during the time when she said that and she sounded like she’s defending Erap.)

      Follow up question: Do they know the purpose behind the Foreign Currency Deposit Republic Act 6426? How did they interpret that law?

      (I would say that you are taunting Ilda. Don’t tell me you don’t know how to google.)

      BTW, twoface, your commenting style is similar with JCC, I call him the disconjunctive boy, who is not commenting here lately. Maybe I call you the clarificatory dude.

        1. Trosp

          What is wrong with you? My comment was addressed to the writer in the first place. I didn’t ask you to reply so please spare me your ire with this JCC. If you don’t want me posting comments, just say so. Because you’re acting like you own this site. If you feel like I’m a threat to the readers here, I will respect your space and leave.

        2. @twoface

          Hey dude, what happen to your reading comprehension?

          I’m telling the commenters here that you want Ilda to be a mind reader to answer your nonsensical question.

          (You want Ilda to be mind reader so that she can answer your “clarificatory” question. I, myself, won’t have an answer to that one. I can only speculate that if Corona answer it with anything, it will be a “dignification” of a non-issue item.)

          I’m telling the commenters here that my interpretation of your comment is a taunt to the writer.

          I’m telling the commenters here that I’m perflexed that you don’t know how to google for the facts.

          I’m also expressing my opinion based on your questions.

          Read my comment again.

      1. Ihave speculations that if some banks get bancrupt, the Pnoy cronies will buy it and thereby controlling the banking system in the country.

    2. @twoface

      P-1. Does Corona have a dollar account? I do not know. Do you know? According to the prosecution, he does. How did they find out about it if it’s illegal for banks to disclose information about their client’s accounts?

      Corona cannot say anything about his alleged dollar account now because the trial has started and he is not on the witness stand.

      P-2. Isolvency is NOT the main reason why customers run for their money. Threat to confidence in the banking system in the country among other things, can also cause a bank run. The PSBank President who belongs to the banking industry is aware of this and like I said in my article, even some economists are worried about the effect of this impeachment trial on the economy.

      There probably was no bank run but Erap sued the bank for violating the bank secrecy law. Are we going to risks it just because there was no bank run during Erap’s time?

      Here’s an article with a statement from the members of the FFCCCII fearing a bank run.

      Traders warn vs. opening of Corona’s bank records

      P-4. In other words, the prosecution does not have any evidence of “ill-gotten wealth” that is admissible. They are just fishing.

      P-5. I did say in my article that, “Violating the court rules seems to come so naturally to the prosecutors much the same way that breathing does to most.” So there is no guarantee that they will not trample on CJ’s rights after the TRO is lifted. Which could justify the defense eventually asking for a mistrial or put an end to it.

      P-8. Well according to the news, this was the reason given by the SC:

      The bank said the subpoena violates Republic Act 6426 or the Foreign Currency Deposits Act, which states that there is confidentiality as far as foreign bank deposits are concerned and only the depositor can authorize opening of the bank records.

      The bank said the Senate impeachment court committed “grave abuse of discretion” when it asked the bank to release Corona’s bank records.

      It said the bank will incur criminal liability for violating RA 6426 and risk being suspended by the Central Bank from accepting new foreign currency deposits if it grants the subpoena.

      As far as the purpose of the bank secrecy act, I think it was to encourage foreign deposits to increase our dollar reserve.

      Cheers

      1. No matter much badly we want to know about Corona’s account we cannot just simply trample his rights (which is uphold by the law).

        It seems that some people want to break a LAW to gain JUSTICE which is uphold by our LAWS. Thats taking the easy way and the easy way is most of the time the wrong way.

        1. That is the essence of Miranda rights and search warrants. Laws exist to protect the individual not the abusive government.

        2. ilda please spare your readers about miranda rights..this is the right of suspected criminals when apprehended by the police to keep silent, anything he says may be used against him the courts of law, has the right for attorney, etc..

          corona is not a criminal, yet.. he was not arrested and place under police custody… he was being processed for betrayal of public trust, among others, and this is known as impeachment proceedings. the documents of his alleged ill-gotten wealth were being asked to produce by the prosecution and the senate. the senate can subpoena those documents if they are relevant to prove that he is a thief. miranda right is on the other side of the constitutional spectrum.

        3. I know what Miranda rights is for. The purpose of reciting the right of an individual before interrogation is to preserve the admissibility of their statements against him or her in criminal proceedings.

          You missed the point, JCC. What I’m trying to say is that everyone has rights even criminal suspects.

          The prosecution in Corona’s case is trampling on his rights. They are asking the impeachment court to get the evidence for them through subpoena. They are so lame. A lot of people can see through them. Only gullible people believe them.

        4. JCC is always missing the point. He is allegedly a lawyer as he claimed but I see him as a full-fledged abogado de patola.

          (Ilda, if I may come back to your post, I haven’t read the Miranda thing there and I was assuming that it’s your mentioning it in the comment thread is an afterthought.)

          To JCC’s mind, Corona is not a criminal yet (and he was vilifying his name repeatedly in this blog as already guilty as charged. I’ll go back to this later on this comment.) and he is using the Miranda Doctrine as defined by US law.

          In our constitution as highlighted in http://jlp-law.com/blog/arrests-and-the-miranda-rights/

          “This doctrine is enshrined in Article 3, Section 12 (1) of the Constitution, which provides:

          Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice. If the person cannot afford the services of counsel, he must be provided with one. These rights cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of counsel.

          Compared to what is originally laid out in Miranda v. Arizona, Philippine law provides for more stringent standards – where the right to counsel was specifically qualified to mean competent and independent counsel preferably of the suspect’s own choice. Waiver of the right to counsel likewise provided for stricter requirements compared to its American counterpart; it must be done in writing, and in the presence of counsel. Any confession or admission obtained in violation of the requirements under the Miranda rights shall be inadmissible in evidence against the accused (Art. 3, Sec. 12 [3], Constitution).”

          (We can debate later on if impeachment case is included on the above doctrine.)

          JCC, read it slowly and with feelings, I’m sure your mind operates like the mind of this Pia Cayetano about benchmarking a US of A federal case jurisprudence.

          You have commented this one – “he is being impeached because he is corrupt”.

          Clearly, you’re vilifying the name of an accused who is not convicted yet!

          As I’ve just recently commented in this post –

          “These contemptuous remarks are violative for the Lawyer’s Oath, the Code of Professional Responsibility and Section 20(b), Rule 138 of the Rules of Court which direct the respondents-lawyers to observe and maintain the respect and dignity due to the courts of justice and judicial officers,”

          But then, one does not have to wonder. What can one expect from you, you’re an abogado de patola, isn’t it? You can violate it because you’re just an abogado de patola.

          (And you’re not involved in the prosecution’s legal team heh…)

          Or perhaps, just a legal researcher who read law books…

        5. the law allows the service of subpoena to validate that indeed in the hands of the govt agencies (likemland registration, bir etc.) or private agencies(like banks) are documents to prove that cj corona is a thief. it is not illegal. in case of impeachment, the senate has the right to issue subpoenas for these documents and for it to summon the person/s incharged of the documents and testify about those documents. no constitutional issue can be raised in this process because this are lawful process.

        6. ilda,

          he is already given whatever rights he has under the constitution. his lawyers already filed their answer against the articles of impeachment. they already filed a motion dismiss because the complaint was not verified; they already filed a motion to prevent bir commissioner, the coronas and the members of the court not to appear at the hearing. some of their motions were granted by the Senate but others were rejected. it seems that only when their motions were rejected that they claim that the acts of the senate and the prosecution were unconstitutional but not on those where their motions were sustained.

        7. Ikaw naman, JCC. You should have watched yesterday’s trial when Sen Santiago enumerated the prosecution’s violations. You can watch it again on YouTube. And Like what I said in my article:

          “Other blatant violations on the Chief Justice’s right to due process include, the prosecution team lying about the Corona’s alleged “45 properties” to the media, the prosecution’s presentation of illegally obtained evidence, prosecution members conducting a trial by media, and the prosecution team’s fishing for evidence by seeking to subpoena bank accounts; all of which indicate that the impeachment complaint had no basis. More importantly, some Senator Judges showed their bias for the prosecution by helping the prosecution during the trial and not adhering to their own rules. These are just some of the violations that can also be criminal in nature, which members of the prosecution can be liable for.”

        8. @jcc

          I think we can establish that subpoenas may be issued for public and private institutions to produce the documents, however, these should be LEGALLY OBTAINED and VERIFIED. As with the case of the bank account used to pay for the condo, it was clearly there as part of evidence (although it should have already been part of the initial evidence, but what the hell, we are being lenient on what is being presented as long as it is legal)

          So the route towards the bank account in question could be based on the check and the checking account it is connected to. As such, they have a legal basis for their subpoena. However, in the case of the Time Deposit Acconts and Dollar Deposits, they have no legal and verified basis on their request, only an anonymous source that obtained it illegally (this is assuming they were not party to it but hey, it’s an entirely different matter).

          As such, these evidence that will be presented based on this will suffer technical setbacks which we are clearly seeing now, and will most likely and almost surely be inadmissible as evidence. Given the case, why bother presenting them? Just to show you have evidence with disregard for our law hoping that everyone will turn a blind eye to what we uphold as the rule of law and not of man? That is a joke and it is completely irrational. Just because you want to prove you are correct you will do anything to obtain it regardless of the what is trampled on and ignored? Laughable I say!

          You can also see from JPE’s statement that he has in fact realized that his leniency in issuing the subpoena has already crossed the fine line of what should be done, as such offered himself as the only party that will be answerable and not the whole impeachment court to prevent tainting of the whole institution/process. These actions of the presiding officer clearly show it eventhough he might not say it verbally. But his actions were of course without malice and I believe he will not be cited for anything but merely warned/informed that he should still maintain and observe the rules that we must all abide by, eventhough we try to be lenient in our actions.

          Going to the SC to exercise your rights is not illegal. It is not affecting whatever verdict of the trial in the end but it does however delve into the merit of the case, and how it was filed/approved and unverified with little to no smidgen of evidence. If it is in fact shown that the articles of impeachment were just signed with little to no evidence, what do we do then? The Impeachment Court did not explore this further but the SC can certainly step in to check based on what is required by law, interpret it and clear the air once and for all.

          If we let it slide, then our congressman can really be made/forced just to manufacture articles of impeachment and forward it to the court at their own leisure with no evidence on the matter. This will clearly be abuse of the powers given to them and will set a bad precedent if it is not corrected. Would you want that?

          Would you want to have an annual impeachment case without evidence and have the same song and dance play where the prosecution will keep on stumbling because they do not have any smidgen of evidence but just a signed impeachment complaint by the House? This is not limited to Corona, CJ or Justices, but also to any of our impeachable officers from now to the undetermined future. If you do not stop this from being set as a basis for the joke of a complaint, then other can follow suite citing this as occasion as a basis.

          I rest my case for now jcc.

          Cheers!

      2. P-1. “…foreign currency deposits shall be exempt from attachment, garnishment, or any other order or process of any court, legislative body, government agency or any administrative body…”

        The disclosure of the existence of said accounts is not illegal. What is illegal is for the court to examine it. The court subpoenaed Pascual to bring all of Corona’s bank accounts and for him to explain to the court why he didn’t bring the dollar accounts is proof of the existence of these accounts. This was not an illegal evidence.

        P-2. You’re right in saying that banking is built on trust. But what depositors, like me, meant with trust is for the bank to keep our money safely. That I can just get it back whenever I want. The reason why people put their money in the bank in the first place is to keep it safe and away from theft. I haven’t heard of any incident where there was a bank run because the bank is giving out account information to the public. You’re also right when you said that this can affect the economy but only when there a lot of banks suffering runs simultaneously. Not just PSBank. Probably those who fear lawsuits are the only people who would run for their money. Because that’s the only case where account information can be disclosed.

        P-4 No, they don’t have evidence against “ill-gotten wealth” because that has already been removed from the articles of impeachment. What I’m saying is that they didn’t violate their ruling to subpoena the banks because that evidence was for the discrepancy of his SALn. Not being able to fully disclose the SALn would be a violation to the anti-graft and corruption law.

        P-5 Okay. What I fail to understand is how they would just let the impeachment trial go unresolved if they really are for the truth? People would never really know whether Corona is guilty or innocent. That would be quite frustrating to see him in office with doubts in the minds of the people. So maybe a TRO is okay but to stop it would be unacceptable.

        P-8. I agree. It’s a good thing though that this act is at the works of being amended. Some esp politicians are maybe using this law to keep their wealth from review. Especially now that the US dollar is at its high, keeping dollar accounts is questionable. I earn in peso so I spend in peso. I’m honestly quite disappointed with some of the Senators for penalizing Pascual. That’s why as a Filipino citizen and taxpayer, I encourage Corona to step up to the plate and grant the court permission to examine his accounts.

        1. @twoface

          P-1. The law is very clear:

          All foreign currency deposits authorized under this Act, as amended by PD No. 1035, as well as foreign currency deposits authorized under PD No. 1034, are hereby declared as and considered of an absolutely confidential nature and, except upon the written permission of the depositor, in no instance shall foreign currency deposits be examined, inquired or looked into by any person, government official, bureau or office whether judicial or administrative or legislative, or any other entity whether public or private; Provided, however, That said foreign currency deposits shall be exempt from attachment, garnishment, or any other order or process of any court, legislative body, government agency or any administrative body whatsoever. (As amended by PD No. 1035, and further amended by PD No. 1246, prom. Nov. 21, 1977.)

          So therefore, disclosure by the bank without consent from the depositor is illegal.

          P-2. Just because you “haven’t heard of any incident where there was a bank run because the bank is giving out account information to the public’ doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened.

          A bank run can have a domino effect. It can affect the economy. You need to have foresight to understand this can happen.

          You need to read the link I provided you earlier about members of the FFCCCII fearing a bank run.

          Are you saying that you are ok with the idea of your bank releasing information about how much money you have to whoever wants to know? I personally do not want my bank telling everyone how much money I have.

          P-4. If they didn’t have a copy of his bank accounts prior to the subpoena, what was their basis in saying he has discrepancies in his SALN? Obviously they violated the law by getting copies of his peso accounts prior to the granting of the subpoena. You have to agree that Corona is not getting a fair trial.

          Your view that “Probably those who fear lawsuits are the only people who would run for their money. Because that’s the only case where account information can be disclosed.” is a bit narrow-minded.

          P-5. “People would never really know whether Corona is guilty or innocent”

          Guilty of what? Don’t forget that prior to the poorly crafted articles of impeachment, the public weren’t bothered by Corona’s personal details at all. It was only PNoy and his minions who kept playing with the public’s mind.

          What the prosecutors can do is to do things properly. If they find enough evidence that Corona has “ill-gotten wealth”, that’s when they should file a criminal case against him. They can’t file a case against a person and then ask the person for some evidence. Basically, that is what they are doing to Corona.

          P-8. Why does Corona need to grant the court permission to examine his alleged dollar accounts?

        2. Why can’t people be open-minded even once in a while. And most of these people are only good in rhetoric but poor in comprehension.

          They are also very good in playing dumb.

          They are also fond of gotcha queries.

          Plain and simple.

        3. Ilda

          P-1. I will repeat firmly this time that the disclosure of the EXISTENCE of the dollar accounts is not illegal. —in no instance shall foreign currency deposits be examined, inquired or looked into by any person, government official, bureau or office whether judicial or administrative or legislative, or any other entity whether public or private—-> it didn’t say, in no instance shall “the existence of” foreign currency deposits be disclosed by the bank…The court didn’t examine it yet and the bank didn’t disclose any information other than its existence which is not illegal.

          P-2 It hasn’t happened ever. I would like to know of an incident where a bank run occurred because of this reason. I need evidence please. I bet you can’t find one. I did a survey about this to my family, friends and colleagues. I asked all those who follow the impeachment trial whether they lost confidence and trust in their banks. I asked them: Do you plan on withdrawing your money from the bank? My colleague said “The only time I will lose my trust in my bank is when they can’t give me my money back.” Another said “I’m not going to withdraw my money because of something someone said. As long as no one steals from me then, I’m good.” No one. And I mean NO ONE withdrew their money from their bank.

          Did you withdraw your money from the bank?

          The FFCCCII fears a bank run. Well they won’t fear for long because it will not happen. Bank runs will only affect the economy when all banks suffer from it. For example, ChinaBank, MetroBank, BDO, BPI, UnionBank etc. and not just PSBank. I’m willing to bet on this. I accept PayPal.

          I’m okay releasing info on how much I have if this info can help me solve my case. If the purpose of the inquiry is just out of curiosity then that’s a different story.

          P-4 Corona’s properties like the penthouse, condo etc. were their basis in saying he has discrepancies in his SALn. Also, what Corona failed to do was to present his SALn to the public. That view —-Probably those who fear lawsuits are the only people who would run for their money.—-> for you maybe a bit narrow-minded but doesn’t necessarily mean that it is a lie.

          P-5 Like I said, I can’t imagine letting this trial go unresolved. There will always be doubts in the minds of the people about his honesty in office. This trial has already started. They have to finish it. That is a demand made by me, a taxpayer and probably all other people who paid for the CJ’s salary. Once again, TRO is okay but not a stoppage.

          P-8 He needs to grant the court permission to examine his dollar accounts because he owes this to the Filipino citizens and taxpayer like me.

        4. @twoface

          I don’t really want to ride your merry-go-round anymore. You asked for my opinion but then you came back to tell me the same things. I want to get off now because I’d hate for you to think that I am shoving my opinion down your throat. Anyway, while you were busy with this article, I already wrote another one:

          President Noynoy Aquino meddling in Corona impeachment trial

          Here’s an article from blogger, Arche who discussed the bank run during Erap’s time:

          Collateral Damage

          Cheerio!

        5. Trosp

          Oh but I’m very open minded. Some of the articles here changed my views and I even agreed to some of the comments by other readers. Are you open minded Trosp? Because it seems like your only source is the FFCCCII. You revere every statement they make. THERE WAS NO BANK RUN DURING ERAP’s IMPEACHMENT TRIAL!!!!!!

        6. @twoface

          I want to inject something into your discussion if I may

          P-1 To ask of an accounts existence is in fact an inquiry into it. But just as well, even if you know if it exists or not, you also need to know the owner of the account which again is an inquiry, hence, illegal by law.

          P-2 A bank run did happen to Equitable-PCI bank which is why the bank suffered and needed to be restructed. It was then bought by BDO, hence, all former Equitable-PCI accounts are now BDO accounts.

          You may want to believe in your heart that disclosure of bank details and its total value is irrelevant but that is not entirely true. If it is so easy to release details of a Person X without his knowledge to anyone, this could be released to someone who has ill intentions like kidnapping, blackmail etc. You may not agree with that, but it is a possibility.

          P-4 Stop on the issue on disclosure to the public of the SALN. For one, you don’t even know the SALN of all the congressmen, although I know yearly there are public releases for senators in terms of total networth. But still, his submission to the SC is a disclosure in itself to a public institution. It is the SC that withheld the information. If you are going to slap him for a resolution made before he was even part of the SC, then you should have slapped everyone with a case, regardless of whether or not they submitted to the SC Clerk-of-Court.

          P-5 If in fact it is proven that the case does not hold water, TRO or not, then that is the prosecutions’ fault. If they want, they can file a more proper case against him next year or at the end of the year. You cannot blame the system for the mistakes made by the prosecution. The system existed before they made their complaint, it is THEIR FAULT. I am not saying Corona is completely innocent, but the complaint should have had basis/evidence. But look what they have done. They should step back and make their case properly but not have to resort to illegally obtained sources/evidence which is not the way to do it.

          We are still lucky that impeachment can happen the following year. If this were a criminal clase, he could apply for the a case of double jeopardy.

          P-8 He doesn’t need to grant the court anything. It is his right against self-incrimination and you nor I can do anything about it. If they really need to examine the accounts, they should do it in the proper court to obtain permission, or prove that they really need to show it based on their complaint (but this won’t do because the complaint was not well done which is causing all of the legal problems).

          So what would happen if you did everything illegally to obtain the so-called “justice”? Then it would be a case of injustice and disrespect to the rule of law which you claim to uphold. It is what will cause the disruption in the system.

          There might not be an easy way for the impeachment to proceed but there is in fact a LEGAL AND PROPER WAY to go about it.

          THE END WILL NEVER JUSTIFY THE MEANS. Keep that in mind at least.

        7. Sphynx

          Yes you may inject something. I appreciate as much insights as possible.

          P-1 To ask or inquire is different from disclosing or giving out information. Pascual, when subpoenaed in court, gave out an explanation that he didn’t bring Corona’s dollar accounts. Tell me how that is illegal considering they didn’t ask for it specifically.

          P-2 I repeat, there was no bank run. The bank did not suffer at all. PCIBank was merged with BDO. And at that time, PCIBank was richer and bigger than BDO. To acquire PCIBank was what BDO envisioned for their company. That has been their dream for five years. People doubted that a smaller bank – BDO – could acquire a much bigger bank -PCIBank. That was the only controversy regarding E-PCIBank and BDO. They didn’t suffer at all.

          P-4 Okay, you got a point. But what I meant was FULL DISCLOSURE to the public.

          P-5 The case does hold water. Especially with regards to Corona’s SALn. HUGE discrepancy. Illegally obtained evidences? Like what?

          P-8 You’re right. It is his right against self-incrimination. But he owes that to the Filipino people. He is not an ordinary citizen like you or me. He is a public official, A Chief Justice. The highest position in the judiciary. Those accounts,peso or dollar, are where he put taxpayer’s money as salary – or ill-gotten wealth. So I hope you won’t blame me for asking that from him.

          I heard Cayetano requesting Corona to grant the court permission. Wouldn’t you consider that as proper? They didn’t examine the accounts yet right?

          —–THE END WILL NEVER JUSTIFY THE MEANS. Keep that in mind at least.—–> I know. I wouldn’t say otherwise.

        8. @twoface

          P-1 to release any information to what is deemed confidential is in fact illegal so I think PSBank president’ hands were tied by the law. If the SC would allow it, it would be a different matter.

          P-2 I recall it being different because my dad’s business had an account in EQ-PCI and after Ms. Clarissa Ocampo’s revelation during Erap’s impeachment, the bank had problems releasing funds because people were running away from the bank. We weren’t moving our business out of EQ-PCI but others certainly were. This caused instability in the releasing of funds which affected payments to and from the bank. I can’t recall the exact circumstances but I also recall shares of EQ-PCI also dropped which lowered its value and allowed BDO to take it over. (This is as far as I can recall. I’m sorry if documents prove otherwise, but I recall these series of events being related and occuring in succession)

          P-4 If it is full disclosure, then the SC must amend or superceed their existing resolution preventing full disclosure although I think there will be problems if this happens. Secure addresses will be publicly available to good and bad individuals and I know the events have a possibility of turning bad for any justice that may rule unfavorably to a big case (this is for either side) If they do remove the resolution, the government must take it up to secure these justices and their immediate family with bodyguards/security as they are like the jury in America’s judiciary. They must not be influenced by outside sources.

          P-5 The mere fact of the “small lady” source makes it illegal. Accounts were not obtained through a subpoena or a proper investigation but were obtained through unknwn/questionable source which makes them illegal as the information did not come from a legitimate and legal source (even if they are true it just makes them inadmissible). They should also have evidence that supported their case before filing/approving the complaint but it is the exact opposite (which I believe is also illegal). Even if the allegations may be true, the problem is they went with a rando shotgun approach and a to hell with it attitude which remove any legitimacy to their complaint. If they did it properly, then there would be no problem and no legal remedy (at least not this strong) for the respondent (any respondent for that matter).

          P-8 If he in fact owes it to the Filipino People, then every politician should do the same, from barangay level up to the President (peso or dollar). This should not be through a trial but rather done immediately with no resistance from any of them if that is what we really expect from our public figures. We shouldn’t single him out as it becomes persecution.

          I agree, request can be made for him to release or give consent. But if he denies to give it, we should not hold it against him because it should not be expected of him and him alone. If he does it, it should be done by everyone else, regardless of it being peso or dollar in all levels and forms of our government.

          I’m glad we are having a mature and healthy discussion.

          I do not remove the fact that CJ may be guilty of something, but I would expect the prosecution/government to do it properly and legally. And also that they should practice what they preach (i.e. releasing of account information, details and contents, detailed SALN releases, removal of ties to any impressionable group/company through their posts etc).

          I support the cause of good governance and a fair government (the “matuwid na daan” idea), however, this current administration is just preaching the ideal without actually executing it.

          The LAW should apply to everyone, even his KKK. If minor mistakes are made, I will understand a slap on the wrist or a memo. If huge lapses are made, then I would expect proper action instead of coddling of subordinates with the excuse of “I can’t trust anyone else for that post”.

        9. @twoface

          And please comment more. I have the Exhibit A of how Penoy’s lap dog mind works and you’re the Exhibit A on how an anti Corona mind works.

        10. Sphynx

          P-1 Therefore, it’s not the prosecution’s fault.

          P-2 Probably the reason was insolvency and not distrust. To be honest with you, to withdraw money from the bank because of the impeachment trial is – pardon my saying so – stupid. Be honest, do you plan on withdrawing your money from the bank?

          P-4 There is no resolution against full disclosure to the public. Public officials are REQUIRED to include ALL their properties and assets which the CJ allegedly failed to do. That is what I meant by full disclosure. Not the address or telephone number or any other data very personal in nature.

          P-5 I’m not a lawyer so I admit I don’t know how one can consider a source as questionable or illegal. What I do know though is that their basis for Article II was that Corona didn’t include all of his properties in his SALn. Inquiring another person on who lives in – for example – room 123 is not illegal. The bank accounts were just added evidence as they have found out that the properties owned by Corona needs some serious dough to acquire. They do have evidence. Yesterday, branch manager said that the document the prosecutor has is fake. My theory is that they are trying to protect their bank. So, I think Diongzon may have committed perjury. She can’t even answer a simple question.

          P-8 —-We shouldn’t single him out as it becomes persecution.—-> Well he is in court. But outside of court, that is just wrong. That’s the difference.

          If he denies to give it, I will be disappointed. His denial would just add more doubt. Once again, he is in trial. This is a special case.

          I understand your sentiments on good governance but I can’t help but notice that those who hate the president will do anything to spite him. They are for those people who are against him. They have this “if you’re not with us, then you’re against us” attitude. It’s just childish and ridiculous. This somehow created a blind spot and I actually feel sad to see people blaming others for voting, in their opinion, an incompetent leader. It’s unfair and disrespectful. I just hope that people realize that we all want the same thing and that is a good life for everyone. It just so happens that we see the same things differently. We have our own beliefs. And that’s the reason behind the clash of opinions.

        11. Trosp

          Hahaha. You make me laugh. Although I couldn’t care less about your exhibits, I will be kind to you and wish you good luck on your search for B to Z. Haha.

        12. @twoface

          P-1 Assuming they had nothing to do with the leakage, the continous prodding for inquiry/information was from their end. Again, since the TRO is issued for the dollar accounts, it is temporarily an issue that needs to be cleared up before the SC. But again, after the air is clear (no matter what the verdict), the issue of admissibility of evidence because of the questionable source will be another technicality which will arise later on. (not siding with anyone on this, just stating facts)

          P-2 Personally for me, I wouldn’t pull out. In fact, my bank account up until present was originally an Equitable PCI account. We never really ran away from Eq-PCI, however, others did so. As Sen. Miriam said, can it be guaranteed by the prosec that there will be no bank run? Can anyone guarantee it? The answer is no. Which is why any requests or information pertaining to bank accounts should originate from legal sources/grounds. It does cast a doubt in mind pertaining to how PSB handles these information because the fact remains, the information is solely stored in their end and the depositor yet it somehow was divulged outside these walls without actions from the depositor. Is this a matter of simply strong arming within the bank or is it an entirely different matter? I can not say nor answer that. But I as well am doing my business with the bank as properly as I can and I do not think this trial will affect me as a depositor as long as it is done properly and legally by both sides (prosec and defense).

          P-4 Well, technically speaking, the addresses of all properties (which includes residences) will be included in the SALN which is why I think it is the reason of the SC of past times to write the resolution to prevent these from reaching undesirables. Again, I do not mean to say this is the only way to protect the integrity of the SC. I would however suggest to the executive that they should provide security escorts and funds for securing their immediate family members from any undesirable action brought about by their position as final arbiters/interpreters of law should these SALN be fully disclosed.

          The matter, however, of why the cash-on-hand by the CJ is unequal to the ones declared by the CJ in his SALN still remains to be questioned and/or explained by the defense once it is their turn. I want to ask these questions because I believe there is an issue which is not clear even with the rules established by the government. They are:
          (1) If a property is bought but not finished/turned over to the owner, does it mean it is yours? But you cannot use it yet so how is it your asset? (this is a question I have in my mind)
          (2) If I have the cash on a checking account but I have already issued any/all relevant checks that will be debited from my account does that mean the cash within the checking account already set aside for payments is still my asset or no?
          (3) If in fact I was a conduit to perform transactions for a friend/family member and they used my account to facilitate quicker transactions or obtain a more favorable interest rate, would I be guilty of totalling our cash to obtain this more favorable interest rate yet my actual cash is what I have actually declared?
          (4) If it is a long term time deposit, I know it is non taxable if it goes beyond 2 years. It is also a long term commitment meaning if I agree to a 5 year tie-up period, I cannot withdraw the cash that is tied up, do I need to declare the end of 5 year value or declare year 0 value when it started? Keep in mind, when you withdraw before the agreed upon term, the interest rates will no longer be based on a TD account but rather on a lesser rate like a savings account (as far as I can remember). Also since it is already tied up with the bank, should I not declare year 0, not year 2, 3, or 4 which is still earning based on the TD 5-year rate?

          These are my questions that I think need to be address once the actual methodology of filling up the SALN is clarified. There are various types of assets, but they must also established the liquid assets from the non-liquid ones, so how is that approached?

          P-5 Well, I agree with you that PSB is hiding something and her actions (the branch manager) is a sign of nervousness as she can’t answer very simple questions and the way she always smiles eventhough being asked properly and directly. We cannot yet establish though who among PSB started the leak and if there is any connection with anyone from the prosec which will affect the prosecutions integrity altogether. But again, I think they should have stayed within the limits of the properties as they were trying to tread a thin line with the bank laws that we have in the country. Because, eventhough these properties may cost high amounts, once they are explained, then there is no need to even push for the bank accounts as these may even be used to answer for how they paid for the properties. This is what I believe. And I feel we are wasting our time with Article 2 when in fact, Article 1 and 3 seem to be more important as it is directly affecting a SC Justice’s functions.

          P-8 What I am referring to here though is that people seem to say he should show it because he owes it to the people. I am just dumbfounded by this statement, because if he owes it to us because of his post (not because of the trial), then every politician should follow suit or make the first step as an example. This is what I believe.

          Well, I have not pre-judged PNOY although I really did not vote for him because I have my beliefs as well as to who I thought would do a better job. I do not agree with the KKK concept though that PNOY seems to enshrine for those around him claiming they are irreplaceable even after their wrong doing which is just wrong.

          I understand also that previous/past leaders have also something of a similar nature and I also do not approve of such actions. It just degrades the institution and the integrity of the person-in-charge of being objective in his decision making.

          I do not comment really on the HL issue as I think the courts will do what is right (although it really is taking a long time) and it would not be affected by outside forces (just delayed or hampered). But it is what it is. I do wish the judiciary can decide on these things more promptly and that the executive sticks to executing the law instead of making their own laws as it is not their main function.

          Cheers! And I do not think we are really clashing but merely engaging in a discussion with views of disimilar means but a common end. =)

        13. Sphynx

          Sphynx

          P-1 You’re right. I couldn’t comment on that because I also believe that what you just said is true. But the original argument was whether Corona has the dollar accounts and whether this information was illegaly obtained. And in my belief, Garcia wouldn’t have to explain about anything if they were non-existent. And the disclosure of the existence of those dollar accounts wasn’t illegal as it was part of a subpaona. We are talking about the dollar accounts here not the peso which Tiongson claimed to be fake. And I wouldn’t say that the peso account is an illegal evidence either because they haven’t even presented it as evidence yet, right?

          P-2 No, I don’t think anyone can guarantee that there will be no bank run but it is very unlikely to happen. Sen. Santiago is truly a lawyer in playing with words. It’s like asking the question, can you guarantee that it wouldn’t be the end of the world in 12-21-2012? There are no evidences or data in world history to back up that theory. However, there is a possibility of a bank run – or the apocalypse – but to let the people think that one bank run can cause financial crisis is unnecessary and inaccurate. I believe people are making this an excuse why Corona’s accounts shouldn’t be touched at all. It’s frustrating to think that people are disseminating inaccurate information to the public just to protect one man. Like Guingona and probably everyone else, I am only after the truth.

          P-4 I’m not questioning their resolution to prevent their SALns to reach undesirables. I’m questioning as to why Corona didn’t include all of his properties. For example, he only declared 3 properties for 2008 when in fact he had 7 properties. Those aren’t accurate figures, just an example. That is what I meant by FULL disclosure. Not necessarily to present it to all Filipino people.

          As for your questions on the rules, I can’t say much because you have a very good point. But for questions 1,2 and 4, it all boils down to one question I have in my mind: How much does a chief justice earn monthly or annually? Question 3, however, is a very good question and I can’t contest to that.

          I’m really glad too that you raised these issues because I haven’t thought much about them. And I find it really interesting.

          P-5 You’re right. Cuevas said at one point in the trial that one bank account is enough. I think the prosecution is trying too hard to stand by their statement that they can convict Corona with Article II alone. We all know that the defense team are so good at what they do, and I think it’s not bad at all that the prosecution has to present as much evidence as possible. There’s no turning back once it’s the turn of the defense panel.

          Yes, we do have our own beliefs on who would do a better job and I respect you for that. What I don’t understand is the constant bashing on people who voted for him. Saying disrespectful things like yellow army, yellow cronies, Aquino lap dogs, dumb, bobo etc. I know I can’t stop those because criticism will always be part of our society but can they at least do it without prejudice? Just because the president has the surname Aquino doesn’t mean he is like Benigno and Corazon Aquino or that he has much control over HL. The Cojuangcos own it in the first place. It would be very prejudiced of me to drag Gibo in the HL issue, wouldn’t it? He is after all a Cojuangco and the second cousin of PNOY. Just an example.

        14. @twoface

          P-1 If they will not be presenting the data/testimonies based on these illegally obtained/questionable/anomalous sources then why are we wasting our time if these would not be presented/offered for objection/acceptance by the court if ever?

          P-2 Yes, I know. It is something no one can guarantee, but as I have stated, although no one can really publicly acknowledge that EQ-PCI did have bank run back in the Estrada impeachment. But we, my family, as depositors had trouble during that turbulent time of EQ-PCI as some people did opt to withdraw (eventhough we didn’t), hence a bank run did occur (although we were not a party to it) which disrupted regular operations which includes releasing of funds and people were hesitant to deposit funds into the bank to fund them as well, which again is a sign of a bank run.

          P-4 With regards to inclusion or exlcusion of properites, we still have to wait for the defense to present its side as to why they were included or excluded. Hence, we are not yet party to that information. Also, we must also remember, among the 24 properties, some are already under the name of their children and their respective spouses. So an explanation may be warranted for this but again, we have to wait for it to be explained. So I can not yet decide on the matter as a clarification from the respondent/defense is in order.

          As for the questions we both do not have the answer to, I wish this trial will enlighten us on it. It may not help in convicting or acquitting anyone but it will give way to a clear idea on what in fact is a SALN and how it should be done properly by everyone, with no further exceptions that “they did not know” in the future as this trial serve as the reference.

          I avoid any of the bashing as best I can. For reference though, I voted for Mr. Gibo Theodoro for I believe he is a good candidate among the rest.

          I am happy to have this healthy discussion with you and I do not think you are what is deemed by others as “yellow mob” or “yellow zombie”. I would admit however that with the case of Vincenzo it is actually to avoid it as he cannot be expected to be of the thinking kind based on his comments/reactions. So I am not perfectly clean in avoiding any bashing of a commentor

          Cheers sir! I hope our questions will be answered with regards to the issues arising from the trial as it progresses.

          =)

      3. ilda, you can take the words of Senator Santiago like a gospel truth, but others don’t.

        its a question as to whom you would like to believe, but it does not resolve those constitutional issues. this matters is for constitutional scholars.

        subpoenas are issued as a matter of course. search warrants are issued only after the magistrate is convinced of the basis of their issuance after examining an affiant. however, enrile exercises his discretion when such subpoena can be issued. if on the bases of erroneous claim that certain accounts exists and such accounts were given by an anonymous little lady, such does not invalidate the subpoenaed records. the one who leaked it may be subject to criminal prosecution, but the admissibility of those documents produced by the witness based on the request of the prosecution even unverified is not impaired so long as they are relevant to the issue that cj corona has wealth he did not declared in his SALNs.

        this is not a search warrant the erroneous issuance of which will bar its admission. the documents produced by the subpoena even if it was based on erroneous information will not bring it under the poisonous tree doctrine because it was not a search warrant.

        santiago herself said that “subpoena” is different from “search warrant.”

        that the senate can subpoena unverified accounts is similar to the authority of the ombudsman to investigate a public official on a complaint of any form, even from anonymous complainant.

        Sec. 26, par 2) Ombudsman Act of 1989, RA 6770: “The Office of the Ombudsman shall receive complaints from any source in whatever form concerning an official act or omission . It shall act on complaint immediately and if it finds the same entirely baseless, it shall dismiss the same and inform the complainant of such dismissal citing the reasons therefore.”

        1. @ Nutzi jcc

          Since when did you become an expert in Constitutional and Remedial law?
          Why don’t you just adhere to black propaganda and trial by publicity? You are a funny guy trying to advertise your mediocre blog. LoL!

        2. Manong JCC

          its a question as to whom you would like to believe, but it does not resolve those constitutional issues. this matters is for constitutional scholars.

          Even before Santiago gave that awesome lecture yesterday, I already knew the essence of what she was saying. And this is evident in the fact I wrote it down on this very article above. You just need to scroll up and you will realise that Santiago and I are basically saying the same thing. And you said so yourself, “this matters is for constitutional scholars” well constitutional experts agree with us.

          the one who leaked it may be subject to criminal prosecution, but the admissibility of those documents produced by the witness based on the request of the prosecution even unverified is not impaired so long as they are relevant to the issue that cj corona has wealth he did not declared in his SALNs.

          First, they are not even relevant because the impeachment court resolved earlier that that evidence for Article 2.4 would be disallowed. Article 2.4 pertains to the alleged “ill-gotten wealth” of the Chief Justice. Therefore, when the Senators allowed the subpoena of bank accounts, they violated their own ruling on Article 2.4. In short, the court judges contradicted themselves. It was only Senator Miriam Santiago who remembered their resolution but her appeal to stop the subpoena was junked by the rest of the Senators.

          Second, the bank manager from PSBank already stated under oath that the bank accounts provided by the prosecutors are fake. So Subpoena or no subpoena, they seem useless.

          Pretend they didn’t have a copy of those fake accounts, how do they know he has ill-gotten wealth to begin with? They have no idea. They are just baiting him, that’s all.

    3. @twoface

      P-6. That is your opinion. I respect that.

      It’s more than a matter of opinion. The prosecution trampled on Corona’s rights and continues to do so no matter how keen you are at denying this simple FACT.

      1. Very good article, though do not expect yellow advocates to take this lying down. Expect them to present their “reasons and justification” as to why the reverse should occur.

        1. Thanks, Lord Chimera. I know they will just dismiss this as propaganda. They see people who disagree with them as the enemy.

  8. The Senate Impeachment Court is not infallible nor above the power of checks and balances. This is a universal truth enshrined in the 1987 Philippine Constitution. Ignorance(gross) or deliberate disinformation shows… Mr. Aquino, some senator judges and members of the prosecution cannot admit an unfounded premise that they are above the Constitution, its underlying principles and provisions. For truly, ours is a rule of law and not of men. We adhere to the principles of co-equality, co-independence and checks and balances. Due process and the presumption of innocence of the accused. The rules of the Senate Impeachment Court are also subject to the same powers of checks and balances. Thus, should a rule or ruling thereof be interpreted as a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the government, this can be remedied by the Supreme Court. The final arbiter of the law. Perhaps Mr. Aquino and his followers have been reading the wrong Constitution or are grossly ignorant, totally disregarding the same or in the final analysis setting up their own set of dictatorial rules in contravention of the Fundamental Law.

    1. I also believe that the SC has the power to define/interpret a matter of law for the Senate. Given that there is a possible situation/scenario wherein the Senate maybe made up of non lawyers, as such they would not be able to properly interpret the law with that handicap. As such, the SC , as interpreter of laws, can step in, as I can see. But in no way, I belive, does the interpretation of the SC on matters of law interfere with the proceedings but rather it is merely a corrective measure to avoid instances of what we see is happening now.

      1. The Yellow Executive does not want to be corrected, it want it’s whims to be rubber-stamped by a compliant Judiciary.

  9. Heil Der Nutzi Fuhrer EvilNoy! The greatest Nutzi genius of the master orange(yellow+red)race! His blitzkrieg Black Propaganda and Trial by Publicity is a continuing war! Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it! Such great Nutzi evil examples are now to be emulated! Ja! It is now an instrument of public policy! Der great Nutzi Fuhrer teaches even children how to lie! His cronies also lie! Everyone in the improved society who is mesmerized by his subliminal words also lie! Thus he lies that the Impeachment Court is supreme and above the rule of law. He lies about HLI. Ja! It is true that the CPP thru its People’s Democratic Government has ordered the NPA to hunt Retired General Palparan! Do we now have a shadow government and an unofficial police force? Der Nutzi Fuhrer BadNoy is too busy or too in love with his current Eva to care. He is silent in even defending the state! His silence is a lie!

    Beware the distractions of Der Nutzi Fuhrer! He is infuriated and mad! Mad at the slow closure against the pro-democracy CJ Corona! He may launch his people mob power putsch soon! Der Nutzi Fuhrer EvilNoy has pictures in nazi uniform! This was seen in the pro-democracy rally for the Supreme Court! Collectors item? Nein! I pity the tagged yellow star of David Arroyos, Mr. Abalos and all those associated with them. Guilt by association is the greatest lie of Der great Nutzi Fuhrer! Beware the madness for absolute power! For he is Der Nutzi Fuhrer EvilNoy! Truly the greatest Nutzi evil genius of the master orange race!

  10. For one thing, allowing someone else access to your bank records is like allowing someone to rape you. It’s basically mentioning willingness for someone to abuse you. It may even lead for the government to call for the bank secrecy law repealed, which in turn will lead to more abuse. That’s why Corona has to resist calls to open his bank accounts. If he did, it would mean, “when the gov’t tells you to jump off a cliff, you must submit. It you don’t, we will punish you.”

    1. Is it just my imagination, or are there a number of Pinoys who mistake/confuse “need to know” for/with “want to know”? They try to justify their “inggit”, “pakialamero” or voyeuristic tendencies “in the name of truth and justice”, so to speak.

      What makes it even sadder is that there are people like these in government.

      1. Also, isn’t the burden of proof on the prosecutor’s side? Or was the lack thereof started “small lady” business? And as the accused, why the hell should he bend over backwards and give them what they want? If those bafoons styling themselves as prosecutors have any smidgen of sense in them, quit the fishing and show that “explosive evidence”.

      2. Also, isn’t the burden of proof on the prosecutor’s side? Or was the lack thereof started “small lady” business? And as the accused, why the hell should he bend over backwards and give them what they want? If those bafoons styling themselves as prosecutors have any smidgen of sense in them, quit the fishing and show that “explosive evidence”.

        Great article Ilda! Hope to read more!

      3. Which is why I sometimes go all “scorched earth” when it comes to certain things. Exempli gratia, my cell phone. Since sometimes my bros poke their noses into it, I make a habit out of erasing messages and dialed numbers to deny them their intrigue fuel.

    2. How do you expect some Filipinos to understand this simple concept, “tuyo’t sardinas lagi ang ulam, walang nutrients na pumapasok sa utak. At yan ang inaabuso ng nasa posisyon.”

      1. Well we shouldn’t expect much from the lower class but we should expect more from our so-called “elite” especially those who are in public office.

    3. Blinded countrymen are victims of the Yellow Propaganda. Usually or almost all victims are the so called ” Chismosa ” and ” KSP ” That is why they don’t understand the word Privacy.

  11. as teddyboy locsin et al were saying in their radio show: as per the constitution, the senate has the sole power to be an impeachment court, but the supreme court has the power to tell them HOW to conduct the trial to make sure that the constitution, and the respondent’s rights, are not trampled on. the bill of rights is there to protect the individual from the many. even marcos could not take it away during martial law, though there were many violations during that time. apparently, and ironically, the same seem to be happening now.

    thank you for the article, ilda. let’s continue to pray that people be more discerning and not be swayed by mere propaganda.

    1. Thank goodness more veteran journalists are speaking out. This is starting to become a nightmare with PNoy daring Corona to reveal his alleged dollar account. Totally unbelievable! Some people can not understand the concept of due process and individual rights.

      1. nightmare indeed! even worse, he’s even telling the senate to ignore the tro. just goes to show how small-minded he is.

        anarchy. tsk tsk.

  12. As what Fr. Bernas said, all branches of government are co-equal, only the constitution is supreme over all. Impeachment is not so spacial that such principle would be disregarded. While the Senate has the power to try and decide impeachment cases, the SC has the power to resolve questions ABOUT the impeachment proceedings. Now what is the role of Malacanang then? To borrow the term of one lawyer from the prosecution, CHUWARIWARIWAP.

    1. How We can check the supreme court? NO AT ALL they are high and above the law because they are the final arbiter and interpreter of the law so, we cannot check them because of that power. How dare to use that term? Please do not abuse that term its ambiguous.

  13. What I’ve learned from all these impeachment show: is that the President and his followers can just violate laws…they cannot be held in contempt. Because they’re above the law.
    If Corona will allow to disclose his Bank Account. It will be a precedent. That, you can sue people who have have bank accounts. Get the information of how much money they have; sell the information to bad ass Kidnappers…so that they will know how much ransom, the person can pay, once they kidnapped him or her..
    These prosecutor idiots do not care the bad effects of what they are doing. They just want to impeach Corona, at all cost.
    the Judiciary can stop the Impeachment proceedings…since it is co-equal to the Presidency. In other countries; the President or the Prime Minister can be summoned to appear in the Judiciary…
    Corona is being used by a Loving God, to wake all of us. Everything happens for a reason…

    1. I also fin this one insightful –

      http://casaveneracion.com/sassylawyer/corona-impeachment-day-4-the-parade-of-tcts-and-ccts/#more-26739

      “It then boils down to numbers. In the end, will there be more pro-Noynoy than anti-Noynoy? We have to consider that in extraordinary circumstances like this, political realignments happen. The left-leaning members of the Lower House, for instance, traditionally antagonistic toward the administration, have obviously aligned themselves with the administration lawmakers because they now share the same objective — eliminate Corona as a first step toward going after Gloria Arroyo.

      Yes, that is what this is. When the administration went after Gloria Arroyo, Corona’s sin was the issuance of a TRO that barred the Justice Department from preventing La Gloria to leave the country. The Luisita decision was only incidental because Corona’s role in it was only instrumental. The move to take Luisita from the Cojuangcos? Those wheels were set in motion by La Gloria. Gloria Arroyo has always been the prize catch.

      So, why bother with Corona? Look at it this way. How do you think the rest of the Supreme Court justices feel right now? If their chief can be impeached for allegedly trying to protect La Gloria and, in the process, having his private life AND FINANCES divulged for all the world to see, would they really take on a hardline stand in continuing to favor La Gloria?

      It’s a psy-war, after all. It always is in politics. In this case, the strategy is to intimidate and conquer.

      Still and all, none of that means that Corona is innocent or guilty.

      He may be innocent. His adult children and their spouses are not without financial means and they may have bought those properties themselves. Same with the “balaes” and the “bilas”.

      It is also possible that he is guilty. Lawyers are well-versed in the ins and outs of hiding properties.

      But that’s not really the point of this trial. This is about instilling fear in the Supreme Court so that the remaining Gloria Arroyo appointees there will know next time how to vote in cases that involve La Gloria and anything that he touched which may or may not include Luisita.”

      1. Thanks for pasting it here. I’m glad there are other folks writing against this madness in the Senate court.

        Malacanang has to stop saying that the people are behind them because the number of people getting fed up with this circus is increasing.

        1. We have to support the Judiciary to assert itself. You must go to the Supreme Court Justices to VOID the impeachment of Corona in Congress. The Congressmen who voted for the impeachment. Voted In Haste…Without any Due Process of Law. The due process of law is present, in any constitution of a Democracy. The impeachment of Corona, is unconstitutional. Any citizen of the Republic, is afforded the Due Process of Law, in any Court…before being : judged , convicted or impeached…

  14. this is a great read.. .i do hope more people will get to read and appreciate this article simply because it is objectively written.

  15. @Trosp

    Thank you for the info. Mr. Aquino likes numbers games in his mind only. But what about the silent majority? Total number of the present population less the 15 million who voted for him, less the very sane numbers who departed the madness of the yellows mass equals the silent majority.

    The reds who aligned with Mr. Aquino did so out of political opportunism. Their insidious deception is very apparent as they continue to infiltrate the very corridors of power. I believe GMA, CJ Corona and those tagged guilty by association are just distractions. The real objective may lead towards more informal power sharing ending in a People’s Democratic Government. Mr. Aquino is silent on this and his silence appears as a tacit approval of the NPA “police hunt” for retired General Palparan.

    The dictator is a political terrorist of sorts. Yes he uses fear, threats and intimidation against his perceived enemies. He continues to set aside the rule of law for his continuing kangaroo court black propaganda and trial by publicity. A pity that this man is destroying our society, culture, institutions, freedom and democracy. He is truly a dark soul. The sad thing is there are many Filipinos who are deceived by his straight and wide path to perdition.

  16. @Der Fuhrer

    Penoy is unquestionably a useful idiot. He has no ideology. It does not matter whether you are a communist or a scalawag. Foremost for him is you’re his KKK + K. (The last K is for katsismisan.)

    A PrEsident in Name onlY.

    1. @Trosp

      Beware of the enemy within. Mr. Aquino is a dangerous man. He uses political opportunism to promote his hidden agendas. His ideology is seen through the following truths:

      1.Ninoy Aquino had an informal alliance with Jose Maria Sison and networked with the reds. He gave them arms, funding and medical attention. He gave them sanctuary.

      2.Cory Aquino released Jose Maria Sison from captivity.

      3.The present Mr. Aquino released the Morong 43. He was reported by the free press as sleeping with the (red) enemy in the highest corridors of power.
      He is silent on the shadow government People’s Democratic Government and the NPA being used as a “police force” to capture and try retired General Palparan.

      Let’s add a final K(K stands for Komunista.)LoL!

    1. adviser for political affairs ronald llamas…he is the point man of the red group. i think its time to impeach Abnoy. this is an example of treason.

      after the red group has won the trust of Pnoy, they will fortified their line-up and eventually apply their ideology to role this country. perhaps Pnoy is doing some calculated risks in having an alliance to these groups. wake up AFP and PNP. the ideology of communism is can not be taken lightly…wake up before you have been butchered alive.

  17. I am quite disgusted with what is happening now in the impeachment, especially that Liberal party senators have shown their true colors.

    I have a feeling TRO will be ignored in caucus due to it will be done by voting and Corona’s dollar account will be forced opened.

    There’s a “justification” if it was ill gotten wealth, but what if it was all legally obtained, what now? Those senators are willing to crash the economy just for a fishing expedition that might ultimately fail.

  18. The truth is coming out. Mr. Aquino is playing a direct role in the Senate Impeachment Trial. His blood pressure may have gone up when he discovered the TRO issued by the Supreme Court. How I wish to have been there to see his famous mood swings! His henchmen in the prosecution, the bow well movement 188 and even Ronald Llamas are now trying hard at damage control, vindictive patently unconstitutional retaliation and even people mob power. Keep up your black propaganda and trial by publicity. White propaganda rules! Defend the Supreme Court! Defend Freedom and Democracy!

    1. there is no supreme court for Pnoy. he thought he is above the law. that’s is the problem of electing Pnoy to the highest office. his brain can not comprehend or understand what is the bill of rights definition. perhaps that is the effect of 5 hours telebabad with grace and to much exposure to computer games.. may be can radiation destroy brain cells. hehehe well, he is already a certified moron before he became a president via cory popularity and ABS-CBN chiwariwah-riwap.

      the impeachment court or even supreme court neither of them is above the law. the constitution itself is the highest law of the land and the supreme court is the sole body that is lawfully designated to interpret the constitution.

      these comments of Abnoy on TV confirmed his arrogance and ignorance of law. Talagang utak wang-wang..God forgive him for he know not what he is doing.

  19. Beware the coming days. The dictator Mr. Aquino is already drunk with power from his initial impeachment success in turning the bow well movement 188 of the lower house. The Philippine Senate and the Supreme Court are his next targets in his order of battle. It is clear from news reports that the dictator will ignore the rule of law. Hence his orders to the Senate to ignore the TRO of the Supreme Court. Divide and rule is the name of his new found real time war games. He will consolidate his bid for absolute power. Isolate and occupy the Supreme Court will happen should the senators allow themselves to be puppets of the dictator. Prepare for the worst as people mob power is launched. Democracy and freedom will fail only if the silent majority do nothing. We are truly living in dangerous times!

  20. I really have some strong contrarian views, so I’d like to play Devil’s Advocate here.

    How could we accept, in all our conscience in this democratic space of ours, for a Senator of the Republic, say Mr. Lito Lapid, who was elected by 10 million Filipinos, to be out-voiced by a senior citizen Supreme Court Justice, appointed by One, who may or may not have the wisdom in Law.

    So much for sovereignty residing in the people.

    1. @Phil Manila

      It will be proper if it is a case of INTERPRETATION OF LAW. If it is about the TROs or Supreme Court decision, this is not just one person, this was a majority vote by the 13 justices.

      Sure, Lito Lapid (or any other senator) may have his idea of what the law means, but his interpretation of it may be flawed, incomplete or incorrect. As such, when a motion is filed to intrepret the law properly, the the SC must intervene for clarification and enlightenment of the body concerned.

      This is I think a reason why Senators are not required to be lawyers yet they convene to become an impeachment court should the need arise. The final interpreter remains to be SC in matters of law, while the Senate serves as judges basing on juris prudence of how laws were interpreted.

      Cheers!

    2. This is why Filipinos need to vote wisely. This trial should make Filipinos realise that voting for an actor won’t help our country move forward.

  21. Ilda

    I see in CJ Corana’s impeachment trial several parallels in the trial by a Military Commission in the Philippines of General Tomoyuki Yamashita, the Tiger of Malaysia–In Re Yamashita (1946):

    “Assumption, imputation, loose association, and unproven accusation, are the hallmarks of the prosecution case. At its worst the Yamashita trial demonstrates victor’s vengeance with no credit to General Douglas MacArthur whose imperial triumph required, as it had in ancient Rome, the strangulation of the vanquished leader. At its best it is uneven justice, rough justice, and the best of Anglo Saxon fair play is absent. Murphy J.’s unpopular plea that the United Stated Fifth Amendment is there to give fair trial to all at the bench of United States justice was disregarded.

    “Proof of actual knowledge and proof of freedom of action to redress wrong were absent. Instead, a “should have known” basis for judgement became a “must have known”, and the defendant’s denial was rejected with contempt – for after all he was Japanese! Rutledge J. did not go too far when of the Yamashita trial he opined that it was “the worst in the Supreme Court’s history, not even barring Dred Scott.”
    http://www.waikato.ac.nz/wfass/subjects/history/waimilhist/1998/yamashita.html

    Below I quote the closing lines in the forceful dissent of Justice Rutlege:

    “I cannot accept the view that anywhere in our system resides or lurks a power so unrestrained to deal with any human being through any process of trial. What military agencies or authorities may do with our enemies in battle or invasion, apart from proceedings in the nature of trial and some semblance of judicial action, is beside the point. Nor has any human being heretofore been held to be wholly beyond elementary procedural protection by the Fifth Amendment. I cannot consent to even implied departure from that great absolute.

    “It was a great patriot [Thomas Paine] who said:

    “He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression, for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach himself.”

    On 23 February 1946, at Los Baños, Laguna Prison Camp … Yamashita was hanged.

    That travesty of justice on Philippine soil should belong to history–a precedent that should not be allowed to recur.

    (see also the separate dissent by Justice Murphy):
    http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/327/1/case.html

  22. In a nutshell, I dare to say that if these people can comprehend what they’re reading, even setting aside the rationalism, the debate will be only on the idiocy of the congressmen-prosecutors led by lap dog Tupaz Dayunyor.

    The other thing, all the like-minds commenters here, including me, are not making any claim that Corona is outrightly not guilty of what he is being accused of.

    It all boils down to the observance of due process and presumption of innocence.

    1. The other thing, all the like-minds commenters here, including me, are not making any claim that Corona is outrightly not guilty of what he is being accused of.

      It all boils down to the observance of due process and presumption of innocence.

      Exactly. Corona was under most people’s radar prior to the filing of the impeachment complaint. Meaning, we don’t know a lot about him. But the prosecution’s blatant disregard for the rule of law is quite obvious and should not be dismissed just because they say he is guilty of shenanigans. If they can disregard the rule of law just to convict Corona, then they can easily do it to anyone.

        1. Naman, naman…you did not take on board the fact that the prosecution is always conducting another trial through the media. Have you forgotten about the allegetions of 45 properties? C’mon. Kung ikaw nga na-convince na bad sya, lalo na yung mga lower class.

          his right to invoke his privacy to his dollar accounts according to the majority is absolute, the minority justice think it is not.

          Well it’s a good thing minority lang silang mga defiant. Otherwise, there would be anarchy if the majority voted to defy the SC.

        2. The defense does not discuss the merits of the trial unlike the prosecution. The prosecution always introduce evidence through the media that hasn’t even been introduced in court. And now Malacanang is working harder than usual to campaign against Corona as a sign of desperation.

        3. @JCC

          Further the minority said that the law cannot be used as a shield to conceal malfeasance and other misconduct

          But the prosecution hasn’t proven that Corona has committed “malfeasance” and other “misconduct”. In fact, they need to see his bank accounts to prove it. And why should Corona help them prove their claim?

          C’mon manong, JCC. As a lawyer, you should know that no one in their right might would incriminate themselves.

          while the majority position creates an atmosphere of impunity and makes the banking system a safe haven for crooks.

          Wrong again. It’s our legislators job to amend the law if they see a loophole. If they are scared that some “crooks” will take advantage of the loophole in the system, then they need to plug that hole. It’s as simple as that. They do not need to be afraid that “the banking system will become a safe haven for crooks”.

    2. I second the motion. I challenge anyone here to cite any passage in any GRP article where there is any sort of armchair judgment rendered as to the guilt or innocence of Corona. All we comment on here is with regard to the manner with which the proceedings are undertaken. It just so happens na ang laging sablay dito ay yung kampo ni Noynoy and his gestapo prosecution team.

    3. If the prosecution can’t do it the proper (legally compliant) way, or if they can’t stop resorting to dirty tricks, they should just stop.

      The verdict, ultimately doesn’t matter. We should be more concerned with the aftermath (and controlling it), I think. Because whichever way the trial ends, it won’t go over easy.

  23. Let us not be deceived by the dictatorial character of Mr. Aquino. Make no mistake about the true nature of his so-called reform program. The absolute dictatorship reform program is designed to stifle freedom, free men, women and even children. It is design to make subservient all branches of government to his absolute will. We are not his slaves! Long live freedom and democracy!

  24. Do hope the Decision of the Supreme Court on Absolute Confidentiality of Foreign Currency Deposit becomes doctrinal so our leaders need not stash away their wealth abroad.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.