Corona Impeachment Trial Highlights

7/30/2019 Corona Impeachment Trial Highlights

1/157

The Corona impeachment trial: A GMA News primerJanuary 16, 2012 6:05pm

What is impeachment?

Impeachment is a political process dealing with the misconduct of specific high-ranking public

officials. Former Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban recently wrote that impeachment belongs more

to the people than to lawyers, more to public wisdom than to legalisms.

It is a power of Congress and part of the checks and balances of the legislative branch with the

executive branch and the judicial branch, as well as other independent bodies of government.

The House of Representatives has the exclusive power to initiate all cases of impeachment, while

the Senate has the sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment.

Impeachment is not a criminal proceeding. The only penalties are censure or removal from office.

However, once removed from office, the impeached officer can be prosecuted criminally through the

regular courts.

Who can be impeached?

Only 31 public officials can be impeached. These are the:

President

Vice President

15 justices of the Supreme Court (including the Chief Justice)

Ombudsman

Members of the:

Civil Service Commission (one Chairman, two Commissioners)Commission on Elections (one Chairman, six Commissioners)

Commission on Audit (one Chairman, two Commissioners)

What are the impeachable offenses?


2/157

Culpable violation of the Constitution

Treason

Bribery

Graft and Corruption

Betrayal of public trustOther high crimes punishable under the Revised Penal Code and other laws

What are articles of impeachment?

This refers to the legal document drawn up by the House of Representatives charging an official with

specific impeachable offenses.

What punishment can be imposed on an impeached public official?

Censure, which is basically a reprimand and allows the impeached official to stay in office; or

Removal from public office, which includes disqualification to hold any other public office.

Who has been impeached in the Philippines?

The first official to be impeached in the country was former President Joseph Ejercito Estrada, in

November 2000. His impeachment trial at the Senate was cut short by a popular uprising in January

2001 that deposed Estrada and catapulted his then vice president, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, to thepresidency.

The second is former Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez, who was impeached in March 2011 for

alleged betrayal of public trust due to the low conviction rates during her term and her supposed

inaction on five high-profile cases. However, she resigned a few days before the start of her

impeachment trial in May, prompting the Senate to archive her case.

The third is Chief Justice Renato Corona, who was impeached in December 2011 for alleged

betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution, and graft and corruption.

(In 2003, an impeachment attempt against former Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. did not push

through because the Supreme Court ruled that the second impeachment complaint filed against him

was prohibited by the one-year ban under the Constitution. Interestingly, Davide was the presiding

officer during the Estrada impeachment trial. This was because when the President is impeached,


3/157

the Chief Justice presides not in the Supreme Court, but rather in the Senate sitting as an

impeachment court.)

What is the significance of the Corona impeachment trial?

If the impeachment trial runs its full course and the House prosecution panel succeeds in getting a

conviction, Corona will become the first Philippine official to be removed through impeachment.

How many times can a public official face impeachment?

The Constitution provides that No impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same

official more than once within a period of one year.

The Supreme Court has clarified that the term to initiate refers to the filing of the impeachment

complaint coupled with Congress taking initial action of said complaint. That means, in the case of

Chief Justice Corona, no other impeachment proceeding can be initiated against him until December

12 this year because he was impeached on December 12 last year.

Who gets to file impeachment complaints?

The 1987 Constitution provides that: A verified complaint for impeachment may be filed by any

Member of the House of Representatives or by any citizen upon a resolution or endorsement by any[House] Member.

At least one-third of the entire membership of the House has to endorse the complaint before it is

deemed to constitute the articles of impeachment and goes to the Senate for trial. In impeaching

Chief Justice Corona, only 95 votes out of 284 Representatives in the 15th Congress were needed.

But those who endorsed the impeachment complaint numbered 188 .

Who gets to prosecute Chief Justice Corona in the impeachment case?

The House of Representatives has designated 11 of its members to constitute the prosecution panel

in the impeachment case. The panel is assisted by private counsels who shall remain under the

control and supervision of the panel of prosecutors.

Who will defend Chief Justice Corona during the trial at the Senate?


4/157

Corona has secured the services of his own lawyers to defend him at the impeachment trial.

What are the Articles of Impeachment against Corona?

1. partiality and subservience in cases involving the Arroyo administration;2. failure to disclose to the public his statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN);

3. his role in the issuance of flip-flopping decisions in final and executory cases, the appointment of

his wife to a public office, and discussing pending cases in the SC with litigants;

4. his role in the issuance of the status quo ante order against the House of Representatives in the

case concerning the impeachment of Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez;

5. his vote in the decision in favor of gerrymandering in the cases involving 16 newly-created cities,

and the promotion of Dinagat Island into a province;

6. improper creation of the SC ethics committee;

7. granting a temporary restraining order in favor of former President Arroyo; and

8. failure and refusal to account for the Judicial Development Fund and special allowance for the

judiciary collections.

What is needed to remove Corona from office?

Conviction in just one of the eight articles of impeachment filed against him would be enough to

remove Corona from office.

How many votes are needed to convict Corona?

At least two-thirds of all the members of the Senate must vote in favor of conviction.

Normally, this would mean 16 senators out of 24-member upper chamber. However, in the 15th

Congress, there are only 23 Senators because Senator Benigno Aquino III did not finish his term of

office after being elected President in 2010. Moreover, Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago is set to

leave the Senate later in the year to assume her new post as Judge in the new International Criminal

Court, which would further reduce the membership of the Senate to 22.

Thus, it is possible that only 15 votes are needed to convict an impeached official. Put another way,

acquittal of the impeached official would require at least seven votes or one vote less as compared

to a 24-member Senate.


5/157

Is there a deadline for Corona's impeachment trial?

Since the Senate of the 15th Congress is trying Corona's impeachment case, that means the trial will

have to end before the officials of the 16th Congress assume office in June 2013.

Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto has said the impeachment trial may be over by March

23 , before Congress takes its Holy Week break.

Is the Senate's decision in an impeachment case subject to appeal?

No. The Senate Rules in impeachment trials states that after a vote for conviction or acquittal, there

can be no motion for reconsideration. Moreover, the accused cannot ask the Supreme Court to

overturn the judgment because the Constitution gives the Senate the sole power to try and decide

all cases of impeachment.

- HS/YA, GMA News

This primer was prepared by Marlon Anthony R. Tonson , a lawyer who once worked for the

Supreme Court Public Information Office during the failed impeachment attempt against former Chief

Justice Hilario Davide in 2003. He also served as a Journal officer of the Senate, summarizing

portions of the impeachment trial of former President Joseph Estrada in 2000-2001. Additional inputs

and editing by GMA News Online managing editor Yasmin Arquiza.

Sources:

1987 Philippine Constitution, art. XI.

Rules of the 15th Congress:

Senate Rules of Procedures on Impeachment Trials

House of Representatives Rules of Procedures in Impeachment Proceedings

Supreme Court decisions

Gutierrez vs. House of Representatives, G.R. No. 193459, 15 February 2011.

Francisco, Jr. vs. House of Representatives, G.R. No. 160261, 10 November 2003.


6/157

Day 1: Highlights of Coronaimpeachment trial at the SenateJanuary 16, 2012 8:24pm

Call to order

At 2:10 p.m. Monday, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, as the Presiding Officer,called to order the Senate sitting as an Impeachment Court.Only 21 out of 23 senators answered the roll call. Senators Miriam Defensor Santiagoand Loren Legarda were absent.Enrile delivered a short statement stating the role and function of the Senate in theimpeachment trial.

Introduction of panels and a plea of not guilty

Members of the House prosecution panel led by Rep. Niel Tupas Jr. made their entry of appearance for the impeachment courts record.Private prosecutors entered their appearance, stating that they are under the directsupervision and control of the public prosecutors from the House of Representatives.Retired Supreme Court Associate Justice Serafin Cuevas, head of the defense team,

made a manifestation for the record. He said the defendant, Chief Justice RenatoCorona, was present in the gallery of the session hall to show his respect for the Senatesitting as an Impeachment Court.Cuevas also manifested that Corona was entering a plea of not guilty to all charges inthe articles of impeachment. Senator Franklin Drilon, however, told Cuevas that he isonly being asked to enter the appearance of the defense team and not makemanifestations yet.The remaining members of Coronas defense team made their entry of appearance.

Impeachment court denies Coronas motion for a preliminary hearing

Upon the motion of Majority Floor Leader Vicente Sotto, the Senate tackled the motionfor a preliminary hearing filed by Coronas defense team regarding the verification of theimpeachment complaint, which Corona claims was "fatally defective."


7/157

Presenting the arguments of the defense, Cuevas said the defect in the verification of the complaint goes into the jurisdiction of the impeachment court, stressing the moreimportant element of due process because procedures were not followed.Presiding Officer Enrile denied the request of Rep. Tupas to allow private prosecutor

Mario Bautista to argue for the prosecution panel regarding the verification of theimpeachment complaint.Speaking for the prosecution panel, Tupas argued that the impeachment process wasdone in accordance with the rules of the House of the Representatives. He presented acopy of the House journal showing that the 188 signatures in the impeachmentcomplaint were verified by House secretary-general Marilyn Baura-Yap.Ruling on the motion, Presiding Officer Enrile denied Coronas motion for a preliminaryhearing for lack of merit.

Motion for indirect contempt denied

The Senate tackled the motion filed by lawyer Fernando Perito to cite the members of the prosecution team for indirect contempt for presenting at a press conference the deedof sale of Coronas condominium unit at The Bellagio in Taguig.Presiding Officer Enrile denied the petition because Perito does not have standing inthe impeachment court, pointing out that [Perito] is neither a lawyer for the defense or lawyer for a participant in this proceeding.

Action on presentation of evidence noted

Presiding Officer Enrile noted Coronas motion to take appropriate action against theprosecution team regarding the presentation of evidence to the media. Enrile requestedall parties to refrain from making public statements, stressing that the impeachment caseis for the Senate to decide and not the general public who are not under oath.

Opening statements

Lead Prosecutor Rep. Tupas delivered the opening statement for the House panel. Helaid down the eight articles of impeachment that he said would show that Corona hadcommitted betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the law, and graft and corruption.He said Corona failed to file his statements of assets, liabilities and net-worth (SALNs)


8/157

and showed partiality to former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo in several high courtdecisions. He also presented a slide show on the properties allegedly owned by Corona.

Atty. Eduardo delos Angeles delivered the opening statement for the Corona defenseteam. Delos Angeles denied the accusation that his client failed to file SALNs properly,

and dismissed the slide-show presentation of alleged Corona properties as irrelevant tothe case because these were not included in the articles of impeachment. He pointedout that in decisions of the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice has only one vote andcannot tell the other 14 justices how to vote.

Adjournment

At 3:37 p.m., the Presiding Officer adjourned the impeachment trial of Chief Justice

Renato Corona until 2:00 p.m. the following day.

- Marlon Anthony R. Tonson/YA/HS/KG, GMA News


9/157


Call to order

At 2:04 p.m. Tuesday, Presiding Officer Juan Ponce Enrile called to order the Senatesitting as an Impeachment Court. Two of the 23 senators were absent during theproceedings: Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago is on sick leave while Senator LorenLegarda is in the United States .

Denial of request to subpoena Belmonte, 5 others

The Presiding Officer ruled that the request of the defense panel to subpoena HouseSpeaker Feliciano Belmonte, chief prosecutor Rep. Niel Tupas Jr., former DeputySpeaker Jesus Crispin Remulla, House Secretary General Marilyn Yap, Batangas Rep.Herminaldo Mandanas, and Navotas Rep. Tobias Tiangco had been rendered mootbecause the Senate had upheld the verification of the articles of impeachment theprevious day.

Denial of request to subpoena Corona and family

Presiding Officer Enrile announced that he has a written ruling on the Houseprosecutors request to subpoena the chief justice, his wife, their children, and their son-in-law.Corona defense counsel Justice Serafin Cuevas manifested his camps intentionto block the move , but when Enrile said his written ruling was in favor of the defense ,Cuevas desisted.

Senate Secretary Emma Lirio-Reyes, acting as the Clerk of Court of the impeachmentbody, read the ruling denying the prosecution panels request on the following grounds:

o On Chief Justice Corona - because of the constitutional guarantee that no person canbe compelled to be a witness against himself, because of established Philippine and

American jurisprudence, and because the Senate Rules of Procedure in Impeachment


10/157

Trials does not require the impeached official to appear at the trial;

o On Coronas wife - because of spousal privilege embodied in the maritaldisqualification rule under the Rules of Court;

o On Coronas children - because parental and filial privilege under the Rules of Courtprovides that no child may be made to testify against a parent; and

o On Coronas son-in-law - because under the doctrine of necessary implication, he isalso covered by parental and filial privilege.

House prosecutor appeals, then withdraws appeal on subpoena ruling

House lead prosecutor Rep. Niel Tupas Jr. manifested that the prosecution panel wouldbe filing a written motion for reconsideration of the Presiding Officers ruling to deny their subpoena request.The Presiding Officer reminded Tupas that the right to compel witnesses to appear atthe trial pertains to the defense and not the prosecution.Tupas then withdrew his objection to the Presiding Officers ruling.

Senator Cayetano objects to denial of subpoena for Corona family

Although he agreed to the ruling denying the issuance of a subpoena for Corona,Senate Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano put on record his reservations regardingthe ruling on Coronas wife, children, and son-in-law.Cayetano said the proper procedure was to issue a subpoena first, then allow the restof Coronas family to claim the marital and filial privileges afterwardsIn particular, Cayetano appealed to the Presiding Officer to amend his ruling as regardsCoronas son-in-law because the Supreme Court has held that in-laws are not coveredby parental and filial privilege.

Senate votes to uphold ruling on denial of subpoena for Corona family


11/157

To resolve the issue, the ruling was submitted to a vote. With 14 voting in favor and sixvoting against it, the ruling to deny the House prosecutions subpoena request wasupheld .The senators who voted in favor were: Senate President Pro Tempore Jinggoy Estrada,

Senate Majority Floor Leader Vicente Sotto III, Senators Edgardo Angara, Joker Arroyo,Franklin Drilon, Francis Escudero, Gregorio Honasan, Ferdinand Marcos Jr., PanfiloLacson, Lito Lapid, Sergio Osmena III, Francis Pangilinan, Ralph Recto, and RamonBong Revilla Jr.Those against the ruling were: Alan Peter Cayetano, Pia Cayetano, Aquilino Pimentel III,Teofisto Guingona III, Antonio Trillanes IV, and Manuel Villar.

Subpoenas issued for Registers of Deeds, titles to 45 alleged Corona properties

The Presiding Officer said he had granted the request to subpoena the certificates of ownership, as well as the respective Registers of Deeds of the various cities, as regardsthe 45 alleged real estate properties of Corona.The properties are worth more than P200 million, which is deemed as grosslydisproportionate to Coronas income as Supreme Court Justice.

Private prosecutors allowed in impeachment trial

Presiding Officer Enrile dismissed the defense teams motion to exclude privateprosecutors from the impeachment trial, pointing out that the Senate Rules of Procedureon Impeachment Trials specifically allow private prosecutors to assist the House publicprosecutors.

On the similarity between an impeachment and a criminal case

The House prosecution panel took exception to the Presiding Officers statement on thecriminal nature of the impeachment proceedings.Lead prosecutor Tupas explained that the position of the House prosecution panel wasthat the impeachment trial is not akin to a criminal proceeding, but rather is sui generis or in a class of its own. He said that his camp would submit a legalmemorandum to bolster their arguments.


12/157

In response, the Presiding Officer read into the record a statement on the sui generis nature of impeachment proceedings which, however, does not conflict with hisobservation that impeachment is akin to a criminal case.

Prosecution ready to present evidence on Article II

House prosecutor Rep. Elpidio Barzaga Jr. said the prosecution panel was prepared totackle Article II, which accuses Corona of nondisclosure of his statement of assets,liabilities and net worth (SALN). But lead defense counsel Serafin Cuevas said thedefense camp was not prepared to tackle Article II yet.Barzaga insisted that their camp had the prerogative to determine the sequence of presentation. But Cuevas argued that the prosecutions choice to determine the

sequence of presentation is merely discretionary and not a matter of right.The defense team said it wanted to tackle Article I, which accused Corona of partialityand subservience in cases involving the Arroyo administration.

Debate on the sequence of presentation of Articles of Impeachment

The Presiding Officer asked Barzaga why the prosecution panel was tackling the secondarticle of impeachment first, instead of article I.Barzaga said all eight articles of impeachment were equally important to theprosecution.Senator Joker Arroyo suggested that the prosecution disclose the order by which theyplan to tackle the eight articles of impeachment to allow the defense team and thesenators to know what to study beforehand.

House panel to submit sequence of presentation

Senator Angara said the senators and their staff also want to know which article of impeachment to prepare for. He reiterated the motion of Senator Arroyo to have theprosecution submit a document detailing the sequence for tackling the articles of impeachment.The Presiding Officer adopted Arroyos suggestion.Lead public prosecutor Tupas said their camp will submit a written manifestationrevealing the sequence of presentation of the articles of impeachment.


13/157

Prosecution only has computer-generated documents

The Presiding Officer asked the House prosecutors whether they would be marking

documentary evidence, presenting evidence, or asking for a postponement.Barzaga said the prosecution was in possession of computer-generated land titles of Coronas assets. But he admitted that he wants the trial postponed so that they couldfurther prepare their pieces of evidence.

Adjournment

To give the prosecution more time to prepare evidence, the Presiding Officer suspended

the session and adjourned the impeachment trial at 3:57 p.m. Tuesday.The trial will resume at 2:00 p.m. Wednesday.

- Marlon Anthony R. Tonson/YA/HS, GMA News


14/157

Day 3: Highlights of Coronaimpeachment trial at the SenateJanuary 19, 2012 12:34am

Call to order

Wednesdays session begins at 2:05 pm with a roll call.Senators Loren Legarda and Miriam Defensor-Santiago are absent.

Re-ordering of articles of impeachment

House lead prosecutor Rep. Niel Tupas Jr. informed the impeachment court that theprosecution panel will first tackle article II, which deals with Chief Justice RenatoCoronas supposed nondisclosure of his statements of assets, liabilities and net worth(SALNs) from 2002 until 2011.Next, the prosecutors will present evidence to support allegations under Article I, whichaccuses Corona of partiality and subservience in cases involving the administration of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, who had appointed him as chief justice.The third to be tackled will be Article VII, which deals with alleged irregularities ingranting a temporary restraining order to Arroyo last November.

SC Clerk of Court refuses to submit SALNs of Corona

The prosecution panel presented as its first witness SC Clerk of Court EnriquetaEsguerra-Vidal. Private prosecutor Mario Bautista conducted the questioning of thewitness.Vidal said the Justices submit their SALNs to the Clerk of Court every year before April30. However, she said her office did not keep a logbook of all the SALNs filed.

Initially, Vidal refused to produce Coronas SALNs, saying the documents are kept in afiling cabinet in the office of the Clerk of Court. Vidal said only she and her Deputy Clerkof Court had the keys to the cabinet.Vidal said the impeachment courts subpoena for her to produce the SALNs partakes of a request of the SALN. She said a resolution issued by the SC en banc in 1989restricted her from releasing the SALNs without authorization from the high court.


15/157

Since 1989, there have been less than ten requests to see the SALNs of justices andnone have been granted, Vidal said. She added that as Clerk of Court, she alwaysincludes requests for the SALNs in the SCs agenda for the approval of the justices.

Tug-of-war on submission of Coronas SALNs

Senator-judge Franklin Drilon asked Vidal if she would produce the SALNs in case theSC would deny the request of the Senate subpoena. Vidal said she would if theimpeachment court required her to, adding that she believes the SC would grant therequest and she simply needed time to get the high courts approval.Upon the Presiding Officers inquiry, Vidal admitted that she had brought CoronasSALNs with her. However, producing Coronas SALNs placed her in a quandary:

although she is covered by the rules of the impeachment court, she is also covered bythe rules in the SC en banc resolution.Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano told Vidal that the subpoena is not a request but anorder of the Impeachment Court.Senator-judge Francis Pangilinan said it is the duty of the Impeachment Court to avoiddelays. He added that seeking the Supreme Courts authorization to release CoronasSALNs would diminish the impeachment courts authority.Senator-judge Teofisto Guingona said that although the judiciary is co-equal to thelegislature and the Senate is but half of a bicameral Congress, the Senate was nowsitting as an impeachment Court in the trial of the chief justice.Senator-judge Joker Arroyo warned that producing Coronas SALNs during the sessionwould trigger a constitutional crisis between the SC and the Senate sitting as theImpeachment Court. He asked that Vidal be given just one more day to get theclearance of the SC.

SC clerk of court finally surrenders SALNs

Senator-judge Panfilo Lacson was about to have the matter put to a vote, but thePresiding officer ruled that Vidal must submit the SALNs. Presiding Officer Enrile pointedout to Vidal that the subpoena was addressed to her and not to the Supreme Court.The Presiding Officer instructed lead defense counsel Serafin Cuevas to ask his client,CJ Corona, to make sure that Vidal would not be sanctioned for releasing his SALNs tocomply with the Senate subpoena.


16/157

Vidal finally complied and turned over Coronas SALNs to the Senate secretariat. TheHouse prosecution panel, then Coronas defense team, marked Coronas SALNs asevidence.

No public disclosure of Coronas SALNs as SC Justice

In reply to a query from defense counsel Cuevas, Vidal agreed that Corona hadsubstantially complied with the constitutional provision on SALNs by regularly filing therequired document.However, when asked by Pangilinan if there was ever any public disclosure of CoronasSALNs, Vidal replied in the negative. Escudero pointed out that the second article of impeachment states failure to disclose the SALNs.

Malacaang Records Officer submits Corona's previous SALNs

The House prosecution panel called as its second witness Malacaang Records Officechief Marianito Dimaandal. He was examined by private prosecutor Jose Justiniano,who said Corona's 1992-2002 SALNs would show a pattern in the chief justices allegedamassing of wealth.The Presiding Officer noted Coronas defense teams objection to Dimaandal as aprosecution witness. On cross-examination by defense counsel Cuevas, Dimaandaladmitted that he cannot attest to the accuracy of the entries in Coronas SALNs .Dimaandal produced Coronas SALNs during the years that Corona had worked inMalacaang. The marking of the SALNs was scheduled at 10 am Thursday, January 19,before the resumption of the trial.

Adjournment

At 7:09 pm, the trial was adjourned until 2 pm Thursday.

- Marlon Anthony R. Tonson/YA, GMA News


17/157


Call to order

Thursdays trial began at 2:03 pmSenator-judges Teofisto Guingona III, Loren Legarda, and Miriam Defensor-Santiagowere absent.

Taguig Register of Deeds produces Corona condo title

The prosecution panel presented as its third witness Taguig-Pateros Register of DeedsRandy Rutaquio. House prosecutor Rep. Elpidio Barzaga Jr. conducted the directexamination.Barzaga said subpoenas were sent for certificates of title to 12 real estate properties inTaguig purportedly owned by Corona and his wife, Ma. Cristina, and that the prosecutionwould present six of the titles.Rutaquio produced the certificate of title to a 330-square meter condominium unit with

three parking lots in The Bellagio in Taguig, valued at P14.6 million, under the name of Chief Justice Renato Corona and his wife Cristina.Rutaquio also produced the deed of sale on a property sold by Megaworld Corp. toCorona which was subsequently sold to the magistrates daughter, Ma. Charina Corona.In response to questions from Senator-judge Franklin Drilon, Rutaquio said the name of the chief justice appeared as the attorney-in-fact of his daughter. Enrile asked if theproperty no longer belonged to CJ Corona because it was transferred to his daughter Charina, and Rutaquio said yes.

Defense blocks presentation of evidence on Corona property

Upon cross-examination by defense counsel Serafin Cuevas, Rutaquio admitted that hewas not present when the certificates of title and deeds of sale were processed.However, he was quick to add that the documents would not have reached him unless


18/157

these had passed through the normal registration process of the Registry of Deeds of Taguig.Cuevas said the allegation that Corona amassed ill-gotten wealth while in the SupremeCourt was based merely on suspicions , and that the presentation of evidence on the

properties of Corona and his relatives violates the chief justices right to due process.The Presiding Officer ruled that the presentation of evidence on Coronas properties wasproper since these assets pertain to Coronas SALNs, which are the subject of ArticleII.

Confusion regarding Article II

Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano noted that Article II of the Articles of Impeachment

accuses Corona of three things: that he failed to file his SALNs, that he did not includeall his assets in his SALNs, and that he amassed ill-gotten wealth.Cayetano asked Barzaga how the House prosecutors came up with the charges whenthey had not yet seen the SALNs. Barzaga said the charges were based on reports.Senator-judge Francis Escudero asked House lead prosecutor Niel Tupas Jr. about theauthorship of the Articles of Impeachment, pointing out that Article II accused Corona of not one but three separate acts. Tupas said he and several legislators wrote the Articlesof Impeachment.Escudero expressed confusion and said each article of impeachment must accuseCorona of a singular act. He asked both the prosecution and defense panels to submittheir legal memoranda to clarify what are the charges under Article II. Both panels saidthey would comply with the request.

Speeding up the proceedings

Tupas manifested that the lead counsel was not only objecting to the evidence but alsolecturing to the prosecution and raising technicalities, which he said was a waste of time.However, Presiding Officer Enrile said he has made a ruling to allow arguments so thatthe impeachment court will not be accused of railroading the proceedings, and also for the sake of the public.Enrile suggested that the prosecution meet with the witnesses and pre-mark thedocuments before the hearing to speed up the process, and also to mark evidence for the entire document to avoid confusion over too many markings.


19/157


20/157

Adjournment

Thursdays session adjourned at 6:03 pm.

The impeachment trial will resume at 2 p.m. Tuesday, January 24.

- Marlon Anthony R. Tonson with reports from Kimberly Jane Tan and Andreo

Calonzo/YA, GMA News


21/157


Call to order

The trial resumed on Tuesday at 2:03 p.m.

Senator-judge Loren Legarda was absent.

Corona still presumed innocent

Senator-judge Gregorio Honasan asked both the prosecution and defense panels to puton record whether the presumption of innocence was applicable in the trial.

House panel lead prosecutor Rep. Neil Tupas Jr. affirmed that Chief Justice RenatoCorona was still presumed to be innocent until proven guilty in the impeachment trial.

Defense team lead counsel Serafin Cuevas agreed that everyone must adhere to theprinciple and cannot deviate from observance of due process.

The Presiding Officer, Senate President Juan Ponce-Enrile, appealed to both parties tolimit their arguments because the public was becoming impatient in waiting for theimpeachment court to find out the truth.

Justice delayed is justice denied

Senator-judge Miriam Defensor-Santiago pointed out the quasi-political and quasi-

judicial nature of the impeachment trial, which dictates the need for a speedy trial thatwould satisfy the public while adhering to the applicable rules of court. But she said theRules of Court do not apply totally to the impeachment proceedings.

After asking the House prosecutors how many witnesses and documents they intend topresent during the entire proceedings, Santiago chided the panel for being unprepared


22/157

and suggested that they come up with a trial brief to avoid waste of time. House leadprosecutor Niel Tupas Jr. said they had intended to present seven witnesses Tuesdaybut could not yet tell how many would be presented during the entire trial, nor how manydocuments they would submit to the impeachment court.

The Corona defense panel said they will present a total of 15 witnesses and havealready marked 23 documents so far. Lead defense counsel Serafin Cuevas said theywould present no less than 25 documents during the entire trial.

Upon the suggestion of Santiago, the court ordered the prosecution and defense panelsto each submit a list of their witnesses and documents to be presented until the end of the trial.

Standard of proof

Santiago raised the question on which standard of proof to use in deciding the Coronaimpeachment case: preponderance of evidence as used in civil cases, or proof beyondreasonable doubt as required in criminal proceedings.

Santiago then suggested that the standard of substantial evidence as used inadministrative cases be the standard of proof in deciding the impeachment case, towhich the prosecution agreed.

But the defense panel pushed for proof beyond reasonable doubt instead, consideringthat the penalty for conviction is almost a death sentence if the impeached official getsbarred from holding public office forever.

Upon motion of Santiago and without any objection from the senator-judges, theimpeachment court decided to resolve the issue in caucus behind closed doors.

Defense says ill-gotten wealth in Article II mere allegations

The Presiding Officer recalled that on day 4 of the trial, the prosecutors and the defenseteam were ordered to submit their respective memoranda on what either side


23/157

considered as covered by Article II (non-disclosure of SALNs, ill-gotten wealth). Tupasasked that the House prosecutors be given more time to submit their memorandum.

But the defense team submitted its memorandum and Cuevas was allowed to expound

on their arguments. Cuevas said allegations on ill-gotten wealth were conjectural andspeculative and did not merit a denial.

Tupas, however, maintained that strict court rules on pleadings were not applicable inimpeachment proceedings, adding that pleadings must be liberally construed and thatthe defense team filed no Motion to Dismiss in response to the ill-gotten wealth charge.

Cuevas argued, however, that pleadings can only be liberally construed when they are

vague, and not when they are based on suspicions or reports as was the allegation of ill-gotten wealth.

Miriam: Admit evidence, avoid 2nd envelope scenario

Santiago said that whenever there is doubt, the Senate must admit the evidencepresented by the panels. She proposed that the rules be liberally construed in admittingevidence to avoid suspicions by the public, recalling the recriminations heaped onsenator-judges who voted against opening the second envelope in the impeachmenttrial of former President Joseph Estrada.

Santiago proposed that since there was already sufficient notice given to Corona thatthe Commissioner of the Bureau of Internal Revenue would be called to testify in thetrial, then the defense team should be given three days to answer the ill-gotten wealthcharge.

Prosecution asks for flexibility in presenting evidence

Tupas noted that the trial has been conducted similar to a criminal proceeding, and thatthe strict application of the technical rules had unduly restricted the prosecution panel spresentation of evidence. In particular, he objected to the defense team raisingobjections 30 times and making the prosecutors revise their questions at least 20 times.


24/157

The Presiding Officer asked the House prosecutors to what extent they wanted therules of the impeachment court to be relaxed. Tupas said the prosecution panel was justasking for flexibility to ask questions, but could not offer specific suggestions.

Senator-judges Alan Peter Cayetano, Francis Pangilinan and Manny Villar stood up toconvey their sentiments but in the end, they expressed support for the PresidingOfficers handling of the trial.

The Presiding Officer reminded everyone that the Senate sitting as an ImpeachmentCourt was neither for anyone nor against anyone.

Adjournment

The Presiding Officer reminded the House prosecutors to first submit no later than 10a.m. Wednesday their memorandum regarding the coverage of Article II, consideringthat the defense team had already complied with the Impeachment Court order for submission of memoranda.

Tuesdays hearing was adjourned at 3:41 p.m.

The trial will resume at 2 p.m. Wednesday.- Marlon Anthony R. Tonson/YA, GMA News


25/157


Call to order

Wednesdays session started at 2:06 pm.

Senators Loren Legarda and Koko Pimentel were absent when Senate President andPresiding Officer Juan Ponce Enrile declared the resumption of the trial of theimpeachment case of Chief Justice Renato Corona.

Evidence on alleged ill-gotten wealth disallowed

Enrile announced that after meeting in a caucus, the senator-judges decided that theimpeachment court would allow the introduction of evidence on impeachment Article II,paragraphs 2.2 and 2.3, but not the introduction of evidence for paragraph 2.4.

However, Senator-judge Franklin Drilon clarified that the impeachment court had not yetruled on Article II paragraph 2.4, which alleged ill-gotten wealth. Instead, he stated that

evidence for paragraph 2.4 was merely subject to admissibility.

House lead prosecutor Rep. Niel Tupas Jr. said his panel reserved the right to file amotion for reconsideration upon receipt of the courts written resolution. But Senator-

judge Francis Escudero pointed out that only senator-judges can seek reconsideration of a ruling of the Presiding Officer, and not any of the parties to the impeachment case.

Enrile said that with respect to the subpoenaed income tax returns (ITRs) of Corona and

his family, the prosecution panel must first show the connection of the ITRs to theimpeachment case.

BIR commissioner takes witness stand


26/157

Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) commissioner Kim Jacinto-Henares took the witnessstand. Private Prosecutor Arthur Lim conducted the direct examination.

Lim said the prosecution offered Henares testimony to show that Corona had acquired

properties declared in his Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALNs) butnot justified by his income as reported to the BIR, and that Corona had tried to hidesome of these properties under the names of his children.

Defense lead counsel Serafin Cuevas objected to the purpose of the offer, stating thatHenares had to testify on personal knowledge of the documents and that any evidencewould be immaterial, irrelevant, and impertinent, and thus inadmissible as evidence toprove Article II.

Lim explained that the prosecution wants the witness to authenticate public documentssubmitted to her office. He said this would show that the Corona couple cannot justifytheir acquisition of condominium units and other properties after considering the couplesincome.

Cuevas said that if the only purpose of Henares testimony was authentication, then thedefense team would admit all documents relating to the Coronas ITRs as genuinedocuments in the BIR records.

As Lim and Cuevas were deliberating loudly, Senator-judge Miriam Defensor Santiagoset them straight about proper court decorum.

Coronas income from SC

Enrile asked Lim to state the purpose for presenting Coronas ITRs. Lim replied that theincome the Coronas declared under oath in their ITRs from 2002 to 2010 would showthat the couple cannot justify their acquisition of expensive properties.

But Enrile pointed out that the trial dealt with Coronas SALNs, and that whatever Corona did before becoming Chief Justice had no relevance to the impeachment trial.He told the prosecutors that if they had evidence to show that Corona had properties notdeclared in his SALNs, then they should now produce such evidence to the court.


27/157

Lim said Corona had not filed income tax returns from 2002 to 2010 because he was onthe alpha list of employees whose income taxes are withheld by the SC. The list issubmitted annually to the BIR, which classified Corona as a local employee of the

Supreme Court whose income came solely from his government salaries and did notearn any income from business.

Henares was presented to authenticate the alpha list of the Supreme Court. Sheexplained that the filing of the alpha list was in lieu of individual filing of ITRs under Sec.51 of the National Internal Revenue Code. Henares said that from 2002 to 2005, theSupreme Court did not file its alpha list; hence Corona had no ITRs for those years.

In reply to a question from Senator-judge Ralph Recto, the BIR commissioner said thatin 2006, the SC withheld P109,000 in taxes from Coronas income of P400,000, addingthat Coronas gross income in 2007 was P488,000; in 2008, it was P604,000; in 2009, itwas P621,000; and in 2010, it was P657,000.

Mrs. Coronas income and properties

Coronas wife, Cristina, did not file any ITR but had registered as a taxpayer in 2003,when she bought property in La Vista, Quezon City, Henares said. Mrs. Coronaregistered as a one-time taxpayer after paying capital gains tax and documentary stamptax for the property.

Henares said the certificate authorizing registration of the La Vista property indicated asale price of P11 million. She said the BIR would further investigate the sale becauseMrs. Corona did not file any income tax return that year, and the origin of the funds usedto purchase the property was unclear.

On the alpha list of John Hay Management Corp. from 2007 to 2010, when CristinaCorona had served in the corporations board of directors, Henares said Mrs. Coronasincome for 2007 was P623,000; for 2008, it was more than P1 million; for 2009, it wasP1,106,000; and for 2010 it was P409,000.


28/157

Henares said President Benigno Aquino III had provided written authorization to releasethe Coronas ITRs and furnish the impeachment court with pertinent documents on theproperties allegedly owned by the Corona family.

Upon the query of Senator-judge Pia Cayetano, the BIR commissioner said Mrs. Coronareceived as directors fees P233,000 in 2006; P220,000 in 2008; P318,000 in 2009; andP240,000 in 2010.

Upon further inquiry by prosecutor Lim, Henares disclosed that the BIR also issuedcertificates to Mrs. Corona for the purchase of a P3.5-million condominium unit withparking space at The Columns in Ayala Avenue, Makati in 2004; a P9-million property inBonifacio Global City on Nov. 16, 2005; and the P14.5-million Bellagio One property in

December 2009.

Other Corona properties

In December 2003, a BIR certificate was issued to the Corona couple to purchase acondominium from Burgundy Realty Corp. for the acquisition cost of P2.5 million,Henares said.

In 2010, a BIR certificate was issued for a piece of property in Pansol, Diliman, QuezonCity, in which Mrs. Corona was listed as the seller while the buyer was her daughter Maria Carla Corona-Castillo, for the acquisition cost of P18 million, Henares added.

In March 2010, another BIR certificate indicated that the Corona couple sold the Pansolproperty for P8 million to Amelia Rivera, Henares said.

In December 2011, a BIR certificate was issued for the sale of P700,000 worth of sharesof stock in The Palms Country Club, Inc. from Filinvest Alabang to the Corona couple,Henares said.

The presiding officer ruled that all documents must be marked in the morning before trialhearings begin, so as not to delay trial with tedious marking.


29/157

Adjournment

The session adjourned at 5:13 p.m.

The trial will resume at 2 p.m. Thursday, January 26.

- Marlon Anthony R. Tonson/YA/HS, GMA News


30/157


Call to order

The trial resumed at 2:03 p.m. Thursday.

Presumption of unexplained wealth more relevant to trial

Senator-judge Miriam Defensor-Santiago asked the House prosecution panel whether

Chief Justice Renato Corona was being charged under the Anti-Graft and CorruptPractices Act.Private prosecutor Arthur Lim answered in the affirmative, saying the prosecution wasaccusing Corona of violating paragraphs (c), (e), and (f) of Section 3 of the law.However, Santiago said these provisions were irrelevant to Article II, which accusesCorona of not disclosing his Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net worth (SALNs).She said the more pertinent section of the law would be the presumption of unexplainedwealth when a government officials assets do not tally with his income. She said this

provision had more to do with the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for PublicOfficials and Employees (Republic Act 6713), which requires the faithful submission of SALNs.

Release of trial documents to the media

Senator-judge Joker Arroyo expressed alarm that documents marked the previous daysthat have not yet been admitted as evidence in the case, such as the income tax returns(ITRs) of Corona, have already been released to media. He said ITRs are not publicdocuments and should be held sacrosanct and very, very confidential.Henares said the ITRs were released only to the Senate pursuant to the subpoenaissued to her.


31/157

Senator-judge Pia Cayetano asked the prosecution panel or defense team if they hadreleased the documents to the public, noting that Coronas ITRs have been repeatedlyshown on television and the Internet.Cayetano said the public had to distinguish between the marking, the presentation, and

the offer of evidence before releasing documents to the public or the media. She saiddocuments merely marked as evidence should not be paraded around in media tomislead the public into thinking the documents have already been offered as evidence.

Arroyo stressed that the impeachment court has to admit the marked documents asevidence before these would become public documents.House lead prosecutor Niel Tupas Jr. denied having released Coronas ITRs to themedia. He said the only documents released by the prosecution panel to media were theones about the Corona properties in The Bellagio in Taguig City.

Lead defense counsel Serafin Cuevas said the defense team has never discussed thecontents of the marked documents with the media. He said the prosecution panelsspokesmen must avoid talking about the merits of the case.The presiding officer cautioned the prosecution panel and the defense team aboutdiscussing the contents of documents, especially the confidential ones, which have beensubmitted to the impeachment court.

Time frame of charges against Corona

Senator-judge Francis Escudero asked if the impeachment court would consider onlyCoronas acts as chief justice, as he noted that some documents marked as evidencebore dates before the magistrate occupied his current position.Presiding officer Enrile said the senator-judges should discuss in caucus whether or notto consider Coronas acts prior to his appointment as chief justice.

Properties of Coronas daughters

During direct examination, Henares said the BIR was surprised to find out thatCoronas daughter, Ma. Carla Corona-Castillo, only had a taxable income of P8,476monthly in 2009; yet, she was able to buy a year later from her mother, Cristina, an P18-million property in La Vista, Quezon City. Henares said Carla only filed ITRs for theyears 2008 and 2009.


32/157

Enrile asked Henares if the BIR has filed a tax evasion case against Carla, and Henaressaid the BIR was still investigating whether the property was donated to Carla by her parents or if it was illegally acquired.Prosecutor Lim asked Henares about the BIR certificate for the sale of a lot in McKinley

Hill, Taguig City, which was bought by another daughter of the chief justice, MariaCharina Corona, from Megaworld Corporation.Henares said Charina has never filed an ITR, but was a one-time taxpayer in theMcKinley Hills transactionHenares said it is possible that Coronas daughter, Charina, would be able to explainhow she was able to purchase multi-million-peso properties despite the lack of ITRs.Senator-judge Ralph Recto noted that the capability of Ma. Carla Corona-Castillo, to buythe La Vista property was being questioned because she did not file an ITR and, hence,

had no regular source of income. Recto was about to ask Henares if the BIR hasreviewed the ITRs of Carlas husband, but he withdrew the question because the BIRchiefs testimony still did not cover this matter.

Authorization from President Aquino

During cross-examination by defense counsel Serafin Cuevas, Henares said she wasauthorized by President Benigno Aquino III to divulge information regarding the ITRs of the chief justice, his wife, and their children and their childrens spouses.Henares said the chief justice was her colleague at the SGV auditing firm and that her husband was Coronas favorite student at the Ateneo Law School. She added that shewas also acquainted with Coronas wife.

Asked by Cuevas if the Secretary of Finance told her durugin mo na si Corona, kungmaaari, Henares replied, No.Senator-Judge Arroyo expressed his concern over the speed of the issuance of thepresidential authorization to release the ITRs of Corona and his relatives. He warnedthat a parallel BIR investigation along with the impeachment trial were twin movesagainst one person that represented a very potent combination. Henares said that thiswas the first time that the President had issued such authority.

Coronas SALNs and ITRS


33/157

Senator-judge Pangilinan asked whether or not the BIR may have overlooked the ITRsof the Corona spouses that recorded other income which could justify their assets.Henares replied that her agency conducted a diligent search and even checked thealpha lists.

Senator-judge Cayetano asked Henares if she saw any discrepancies in CoronasSALNs in relation to his ITRs. Henares said Corona did not fill up the acquisition costcolumn and that some properties were registered the year after acquisition.Upon Senator-judge Drilons inquiry, Henares explained that the regional district officer was made to produce the alpha lists from the Supreme Court. She said BIR recordsshow that Corona only had one source of income.Henares said Coronas wife also did not file ITRs, but she was included in the alpha listof the John Hay Management Corporation and has a little problem, with regard to

directors fees.

Fishing for evidence through subpoenas

The presiding officer requested both camps to make a request for subpoenas withspecificity as regards what documents they wanted to be brought before theimpeachment court.He said the buckshot approach in requesting for the issuance of subpoenas to produceall pertinent records was fishing for evidence and was not proper.

Spokespersons asked to moderate statements

Senator-judge Gringo Honasan asked that all the spokespersons of the prosecutionpanel and the defense team be advised to moderate their statements.Honasan lamented that the trial outside the courtroom was proceeding faster than thetrial inside the Senate session hall, and was destroying the honor of a good familyname.The presiding officer requested the spokespersons of both camps not to discuss theevidence and merits of the case outside the impeachment court. Enrile said they maydiscuss the procedure but not the content.Senator-judges Panfilo Lacson, Teofisto Guingona, and Alan Peter Cayetano agreedthat because the impeachment proceedings are considered a public trial, if the evidenceis not made available to the public then its purpose would be defeated.


34/157

Cayetano added that the sub judice rule which under the Senate Rules of Procedureon Impeachment Trials prohibits senator-judges, the prosecution, and the defense panelfrom discussing the merits of the case must be differentiated from a gag order asoften reported in the media.

Adjournment

Thursdays session was adjourned at 6 p.m.The trial will resume at 2 p.m. Monday, January 30.

Marlon Anthony R. Tonson/YA/KG, GMA News


35/157


Call to order

The trial resumed at 2:01 p.m. Monday.Senator-judges Miriam Defensor-Santiago and Sergio Osmea were absent.

Trillanes likens impeachment to PMA honor trial

Senator-judge Antonio Trillanes IV compared the impeachment trial at the Senate toHonor Committee trials at his alma mater, the Philippine Military Academy, where onlythe unanimous decision by an eight-man jury can convict an accused cadet, nottechnicalities or lawyers.He said will apply a basic sense of justice in determining the moral fitness of theimpeached chief justice who must possess the highest possible moral standards for public officials.Trillanes said the presentation of evidence even before Chief Justice RenatoCorona was appointed as head of the Supreme Court should be allowed.

Protecting constitutional rights of Corona, family members

The Senate Secretary, as the clerk of court of the impeachment court, read the Senateresolution disallowing developers from presenting evidence that are not related toCorona and members of his family, so as not to violate their right to privacy and notsubject them to unreasonable search and seizure.She also read the impeachment courts decision to disallow the introduction of evidence

on Article 2.4 on ill-gotten wealth. Instead, the court will rely on legal presumptions onthe properties of the respondent.

New order of presentation and list of witnesses


36/157

Presiding officer Juan Ponce Enrile allowed the request of lead House prosecutor Rep.Niel Tupas Jr. to tackle Article III which accuses Corona of lack of integrity,independence and competence before Articles I and VII, as the prosecution had earlier stipulated.

The prosecution team said the articles of impeachment against Corona will be presentedin this order:

o Article II (nondisclosure of Coronas statement of assets, liabilities and net worth),o Article III (Coronas alleged lack of integrity, independence and competence),o Article I (partiality and subservience to former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo,

who appointed Corona as chief justice)o Article VII (supposed irregularities in the granting temporary restraining order to Mrs.

Arroyo last November).

o Article VIII (failure and refusal to account for the Judiciary Development Fund andSpecial Allowance for the Judiciary),

o Article IV (disregard of the principle of separation of powers by issuing a status quoante order against the House of Representatives during the impeachmentproceedings against former Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez),

o Article V (deciding in favor of gerry-mandering in the cases involving 16 newly-created cities and the promotion of Dinagat Island into a province), and

o Article VI (creation of an ethics committee to probe the plagiarism case of AssociateJustice Mariano Del Castillo).

Senator-judge Vicente Sotto III read a letter from Senator-judge Miriam Defensor Santiago requesting both the prosecution and defense teams to provide a list of primaryand corroborating witnesses during the trial, as a prelude to cutting down the number toa manageable level. Senator-judge Ramon Bong Revilla Jr. also expressed concernabout the list of 100 witnesses submitted by the prosecution.Tupas clarified that the prosecution will not present all 100 witnesses.To avoid lengthy presentations of evidence, the presiding officer directed both panelsto stipulate elements of the case that do not need further authentication or proof.

Corona gets 40% discount from Megaworld

Megaworld Corp. finance director Giovanni Ng was called to the witness stand. PrivateProsecutor Joseph Joemer Perez, who conducted the direct examination, said Ngstestimony would focus on The Bellagio condominium penthouse of Corona and his wife,


37/157

and the McKinley Hills transaction with their daughter that the impeached chief justicefailed to disclose in his 2009 statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN).Ng produced the contract to sell Unit 38-B with 3 parking slots, which was sold for P14million by Megaworld to the Corona couple, and official receipts of the transaction. He

also produced the deed of absolute sale of the McKinley Hill property of Charina Corona,represented by her attorney-in-fact, Renato Corona, her father. Asked about the price of the Bellagio penthouse unit, Ng said he was not qualified toanswer the question because pricing was the function of the marketing department.Prosecutor Perez requested the impeachment court to subpoena Megaworld Corp.ssenior vice president for marketing.When asked by Senator-judge Aquilino Pimentel III why the prosecution was focusing onthe prices of the real estate, Perez said Ng had informed the prosecution that the

Coronas received a 40 percent discount amounting to P10 million on their purchases. Perez said receiving discounts falls under Article III.In response to a query from Senator-judge Jinggoy Estrada, Ng explained thatMegaworld Corp. usually gives 15-percent discounts to unit buyers if they pay on shorter terms. He added that Corona was given a bigger discount because the Bellagio unit hebought needed repairs.

Answering another question from Senator-judge Franklin Drilon, Ng said Megaworldgave Coronas daughter, Charina, a P2.3-million discount on the purchase of a P6.2-million McKinley Hill property in Taguig City which her parents paid for. Ng saidCharina's name did not appear in any of the receipts, and a single hand-written letterfrom the Chief Justice requested that the property be named under his daughter.

Corona paid in cash for P9.1-M Bonifacio Ridge condominium

Private prosecutor Jose Antonio Hernandez conducted the direct examination of realestate developer Aniceto Visnar Jr., formerly of the Fort Bonifacio DevelopmentCorporation.Bisnar confirmed the sale of a P9.1-million condominium unit on the 19th floor of theSpanish Bay Tower in Bonifacio Ridge in Taguig City to the Corona couple, which wasfully paid in cash on October 14, 2005.The prosecution noted that the Spanish Bay unit supports the claim that Corona failed toproperly disclose his properties in his SALN, as alleged in Article II. In his 2010 SALN,


38/157

Corona declared that he purchased a condominium unit in 2004 in Taguig City worthP2.3 million.During cross-examination, defense counsel Ramon Esguerra pointed out the absence of any notice of acceptance of the purchased unit by Cristina Corona. He also noted

Bisnar's unfamiliarity with the Spanish Bay Tower unit, and said Bisnar would not knowwhether the money used by Cristina to pay for the unit had been sourced from a loan.

Adjournment

Monday's sessions was adjourned at 5:55 pm.The trial will resume at 2 p.m. Tuesday, 31 January.

Marlon Anthony R. Tonson/VS/YA, GMA News


39/157


Call to order

The trial resumed at 2 p.m. Tuesday.

Price of Corona penthouse reduced due to damage, not discount

Witness Noli Hernandez, senior vice president for marketing at Megaworld Corporation,

testified that the Bellagio Tower I penthouse purchased by Chief Justice RenatoCorona's wife Cristina in 2008 had a steep reduction in price from P24 million to P19.6million because of water damage following a typhoon. The price was further slashed byP3 million, or the standard 15-20 percent discount, because Corona paid almost incash and on a shorter term of less than a year.Private prosecutor Joseph Joemer Perez asked whether it was the usual practice of Megaworld to sell damaged units, drastically reduce its prices, or give big discounts. Healso asked if the company had filed insurance claims after the condominium was

damaged by the typhoon.The presiding officer cautioned Perez about his manner of asking questions. Enrileclarified that a price reduction is different from a discount: the condition of the unit is areason for reducing the price, while a discount is a privilege extended to the buyer.During the cross-examination by lead defense counsel Serafin Cuevas, Hernandez saidMegaworld could have given the same price reduction to any customer. Hernandezadded that he did not know at the time that it was Chief Justice Corona who bought thepenthouse.

Senators ask: Whats the connection?

Senator-judges Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and Pia Cayetano questioned the relevance of the40-percent price reduction for the Corona condominium unit to Article II, which allegesCorona of nondisclosure of some properties in his Statements of Assets, Liabilities andNet Worth (SALNs).


40/157

The presiding officer said he allowed the prosecution to present Hernandez as witnessout of liberality.House prosecutor Rep. Elpidio Barzaga Jr. explained that Hernandezs testimony wasrelated to the valuation of the property, as Corona did not indicate the acquisition cost

of P14.5 million in his SALN. Instead, Corona said the current fair market value of theBellagio condominium unit was P6.8 million.Senator-judge Manny Villar said there are many factors considered in pricing, andvolunteered the information that another real estate company offered a 40 percentdiscount just last December.Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano said Hernandez's testimony was needed to explainthe "discount" alleged by the prosecution.

Zonal value vs. fair market value

Senator-judge Franklin Drilon cited jurisprudence where the Supreme Court held that thedisclosure in the SALN is not merely a ministerial act but must be done under oath, andbe truthful, accurate, and timely. Senator-judge Teofisto Guingona III asked the Houseprosecution panel if Corona had complied with these three elements of disclosure inSALNs.In reply, Perez said the P14.5 million purchase of the Bellagio penthouse was notreflected in Corona's 2009 SALN, despite the deed of absolute sale executed that year.

Although the property was later reflected in Corona's 2010 SALN, he said the fair marketvalue of the penthouse was written down as only P6.8 million which, it was surmised,was only the zonal value. He affirmed that Corona's SALN did not meet any of the threeelements of disclosure because the zonal value is different from fair market value.

Recto suggests change in order of trial presentation

Senator Ralph Recto asked if the defense panel could be allowed to present evidenceimmediately after each article of impeachment, without waiting for the prosecution topresent evidence for all eight articles.Presiding officer Enrile explained that under existing rules, the defense can only presentevidence after the prosecution finishes presenting theirs for all the eight Articles of Impeachment. He added that changing the Senate Rules of Procedure in ImpeachmentTrials would need an amendment and the republication of the rules.


41/157

Proof of damage

Senator-judge Sergio Osmea III asked Hernandez to produce proof of the damage in

the condominium unit bought by Corona, including photos. He also asked Hernandez toverify if Megaworld filed complaints against the firm who constructed the damagedcondominium unit. In addition, he asked for a price list of all condominium units at theBellagio Tower I.Senator-judge Francis Pangilinan told Hernandez to voluntarily submit to the Senate thebuilding engineers report on the damage sustained by the penthouse during thetyphoon.

Megaworld lost in SC cases

Senator-judge Francis Escudero asked the Megaworld executive if Bellagio was sold "ata loss" to the Coronas. Hernandez replied that Megaworld made a "little profit" from thesale.In response to further queries, Hernandez said Corona voted against Megaworld Corp.in at least two cases, even if the chief justice and his family had purchased propertiesfrom Megaworld twice. He said the Corona family bought Megaworld properties in 2006but the real estate company "lost a case right after 2007 and then he bought again from[the company] in 2008 and then [the company] lost again a case in the Supreme Court in2009.Senator-judge Panfilo Lacson, however, clarified that Megaworld only lost in one of thecases because they appealed the decision. He also pointed out that in the 2004 SCdecision where Megaworld had lost, the compromise agreement was reversed in thereal estate company's favor.

'Let go of the discount issue'

Responding to a question from Senator-judge Lacson, House prosecutor Barzagaadmitted that no one in the prosecution panel has the competence in determiningwhether the fair market value reflected in Corona's SALN is true and accurate. Lacsonpointed out that only the city assessor of Taguig City can give the fair market value of the unit.


42/157

Senator-judge Aquilino Pimentel III strongly suggested to the House prosecution panelto "let go" of the discount issue when Article III is taken up. He said the acceptance of adiscount has nothing to do with that article of impeachment.Replying to a query from Senator-judge Ramon Revilla Jr., Hernandez said Megaworld

extended an additional P1-million discount to Corona, bringing the final purchase priceof the Bellagio unit down to P14.5 million.

Del Castillo impeachment case still pending

Senator-judge Joker Arroyo asked whether there was another impeachment complaintat the House of Representatives. Tupas, as the House Justice Committee chair, saidthat the impeachment complaint against SC Associate Justice Mariano Del Castillo was

still pending at the committee level.

Adjournment

Tuesday's session was adjourned at 5:05 pm.It will resume at 2 pm Wednesday.

Marlon Anthony Tonson/VS/YA, GMA News


43/157

Day 10: Highlights of Coronaimpeachment trial at the SenateFebruary 1, 2012 6:45pm

Call to order

The trial resumed at 2 p.m. Wednesday.

Corona's P11-million loan

House prosecutor Rep. Reynaldo Umali conducted the direct examination of Director Benito Cataran of the Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) Company Registration& Regulatory Department, who testified on the P11-million loan that Chief JusticeRenato Corona got in 2003 from his wifes corporation; it was declared as his liability inhis Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN) from 2004 to 2009.Cataran produced the articles of incorporation of Basa Guidote Enterprises, Inc. (BGEI),which was registered with the SEC in May 30, 1961. He said neither Corona nor his wifeCristina Roco-Corona were listed as shareholders in the company, whose incorporatorsand officers had the surnames Basa or Roco.Director Cataran added that the SEC revoked BGEIs articles of incorporation and

considered the company dissolved in 2003 the year Corona got a loan from BGEI after it failed to file general information sheets (GIS) from 1991 to 1997, and financialstatements from 2000 to 2003 as required under the Corporation Code.However, presiding officer and Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile said the dissolutionof a corporation is not its end because it still has to undergo liquidation. He explainedthat the SEC can only suspend a non-compliant corporations license, but thecorporation can only be dissolved by its own stockholders or by the government througha case filed against entities that usurp authority. He directed Cataran to submit a legal

memorandum showing the authority of the SEC to dissolve non-compliant corporations.Umali said the prosecution panel was out to prove that Corona could not have borrowedfrom BSEI because the corporations franchise has already been dissolved or revoked[and] the only action that can be taken by [BGEI] is to liquidate, wind up and distributethe shares. He added the prosecution wants to prove that the P11-million loan obtainedby Corona is fictitious.


44/157

Senator-judge Francis Pangilinan noted that the prosecution was trying to prove aquestionable or "unexplained inclusion" which goes to the truthfulness of CoronasSALN.

Much ado about nothing

Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano said the SECs statement that BGEI is no longer operational is irrelevant because a corporation under process of dissolution can still lendmoney. Senator-judge Edgardo Angara agreed and said Catarans testimony was muchado about nothing. Senator-judge Pia Cayetano described it as a futile exercise.Senator-judge Lito Lapid noted that Coronas 2010 SALN disclosed an P11-million cashadvance and asked how this was different from a loan. In reply, Umali admitted that the

prosecution was wondering how a corporation thats no longer in operation could give acash advance to a non-stockholder like Corona.Senator-judge Francis Escudero explained that when a corporation is dissolved, theincorporators simply become co-owners in an association which can still do business,and the co-owners answer any claims if it gets sued in court.During cross-examination, lead defense counsel Serafin Cuevas got the witness toadmit that he had no firsthand knowledge about BGEI, its transactions, and the P11-million loan.Cuevas showed Cataran a check amounting to P34,703,800 that was supposedly paidto Cristina on behalf of BGEI after the firms properties were expropriated, but the SECdirector said he was not aware of this transaction.

Coronas P3M condo unit in Makati

Ayala Land assistant vice president Nerissa Josef testified that the Corona family madethree installments within one year for the full payment of Unit 31-B of The Columns, a48-square meter condominium unit in Makati City. She said a deed of absolute saledated October 1, 2004 was issued to the Corona family.Private prosecutor Winston Ginez, who conducted the direct examination, said Coronashould have declared the property in his SALNs for the years 2004 to 2009 but the chief

justice only declared the condominium unit in his 2010 SALN. Responding to a questionfrom Senator-judge Escudero, Ginez said the prosecutions position is that when the


45/157

absolute deed of sale was executed, then the property should have been included in theSALN.However, defense counsel Cuevas said there was a refusal on the part of the buyer for the delivery. Before conducting his cross-examination, defense counsel Ramon

Esguerra also had a handwritten note signed by Coronas wife marked as evidence. Asked by Esguerra whether she was aware of the Coronas' complaints that the unit hadundersized wires and damaged windows, Josef replied in the negative.Upon Escuderos motion, the presiding officer directed both the prosecution and defenseto submit by Monday their respective legal memorandums on that point of law: whenmust a property be declared in the SALN when there is already a deed of absolutesale or when the property is actually turned over to the owner?Responding to a question from Senator-judge Drilon, Josef said the Coronas took

possession of the unit sometime in 2008.Subpoena for documents on Bellagio penthouse units

Senator-judge Sergio Osmea III asked that the impeachment court also subpoena anydocument containing the date of acceptance and titling, plus the floor plans, of theBellagio penthouse units in Taguig.The presiding officer ordered the issuance of the subpoena.

Adjournment

At 6:15 p.m., the trial was adjourned.The trial will resume at 2 p.m. Thursday.

Marlon Anthony Tonson/YA/ELR, GMA News


46/157


Call to Order

At 2:04 p.m. Thursday, the trial resumed.Senators Miram Defensor-Santiago and Sergio Osmea were absent.

Cross-examination of registers of deeds

During cross-examination by defense counsel Ramon Esguerra, Quezon City Register of Deeds Carlo Alcantara produced the transfer certificate of title (TCT) for a P15-millionlot under the names of impeached Chief Justice Renato Corona's daughter, Ma. CarlaC. Castillo, and her husband.

Alcantara also produced registration certificates for the following properties of theCorona family:

o A unit at the Burgundy condominium with a market zonal value of P1.5 million and aselling price of P2.5 million

o A lot at the Ayala Heights with a market zonal value P13.8 million and a selling price

of P8 milliono A lot at La Vista with a market zonal value of P21.6 million and a selling price of P18

milliono Two properties at Xavierville SubdivisionEsguerra also cross-examined Marikina Register of Deeds Sedfrey Garcia. He saidseven Marikina lots under the names of Corona and his wife have already been sold,thus these were not included in Corona's SALNs.

SALN entries: zonal value, fair market value, or selling price?

Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano noted the confusion regarding property valuation.He said the fair market value is usually the price agreed upon by the buyer and seller,but in deeds of sale, either zonal value or municipal/city assessors' value is used.


47/157

Cayetano posed the question, which specific amount should Corona have put in hisstatement of assets, liabilities, and net worth (SALN) as the propertys acquisition cost the zonal value, the fair market value (FMV), or the assessed value? He requested theHouse prosecutors and Corona defense counsels to prepare legal memoranda on the

matter, considering that Article II charges Corona with non-disclosure of assets in hisSALN.Presiding officer and Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile said the assessed value isused in computing real estate taxes, while the market zonal value and the FMV are usedfor computing final capital gains tax.Senator-judge Ralph Recto asked the Corona defense team about their position on theQuezon City properties, which had been sold in 1990. Lead defense counsel SerafinCuevas replied that those properties have a new owner, the daughter of Corona who

was of legal age by then.

Wrong SALN entries betray public trust

Citing Rule 7 on public disclosure in the Rules of the Civil Service Commission, Cuevassaid the acquisition cost, fair market value, and assessed value all have to be stated inthe SALNs. However, if there are errors, civil servants are allowed to make correctionsafter filing and no criminal penalties are imposed if the inaccuracies are not intentional.House prosecutor Rep. Elidio Barzaga Jr. argued that Corona failed to state in hisSALNs from 2002 to 2010 all the values of his properties because the column onacquisition costs were left blank. He cited a Supreme Court ruling that false entries in aSALN filed under oath amounts to perjury.Enrile asked whether the House prosecution panel was introducing evidence on Article IIon culpable violation of the Constitution and/or violation of the public trust. Barzagareplied both and added that not stating entries in the SALN correctly constitutes thehighest betrayal of public trust.The presiding officer asked Barzaga if perjury is a high crime , to which the Houseprosecutor replied in the negative.Senator-judge Joker Arroyo said evidence submitted to the Senate must be of a higher bar that will prove and reach the level of an impeachable offense.House lead prosecutor Niel Tupas Jr. explained that Article II on untruthful disclosure inCoronas SALN did not pertain to other high crimes but rather betrayal of public trust.


48/157

He cited the opinion of constitutionalist Fr. Joaquin Bernas that betrayal of public trustwas a catch-all phrase covering offenses that may not even amount to crimes.

Only 24 Corona properties, not 45

Senator-judge Aquilino Pimentel III asked why the title to the Marikina propertiesremained under Coronas name when these were already sold to Demetrio 22 yearsago. Cuevas replied that Corona should not be faulted for the failure of the buyer totransfer the TCTs to buyers name.Senator-judge Francis Escudero noted that the deed of absolute sale of the Marikinaproperties named new owners, but the TCTs remained under the name of the chief

justice. He recalled that the previous day, the defense team argued that the Taguig

properties need only be included in Coronas SALN at the time of their physical transfer.He stressed that there cannot be a double standard where one argument is used whenfavorable but dispensed with when not favorable, saying there has to be consistency.Escudero said the prosecution enumerated 24 Corona properties so far, but he recalledthat the prosecution said it would present evidence on 45 properties.Tupas said it was the Land Registration Authority (LRA) that listed the 45 properties, andthe prosecution panel was not bound by the LRAs enumeration.Senator-judge Jinggoy Estrada asked him who announced to the media that Corona had45 properties using the LRA letter, saying he saw Tupas on television together with theHouse prosecution panel spokesmen presenting the LRA document on 45 allegedCorona properties.Tupas said the prosecutors did not release the list of 45 properties to the media. He saida few days before the trial started, the prosecutors filed their request for the issuance of subpoenas, to which the LRA letter was attached.Cuevas said the defense team found revolting the practice of showing to the mediaand the general public the documents that have been marked but not yet formallyoffered as evidence.

Coronas P3-M Burgundy condo unit

Prosecution lawyer Clarence Jandoc conducted the direct examination of BurgundyRealty Corporation Vice President Gregg Gregonia, who confirmed the sale of a P3.4-


49/157

millioncondominium unit at the 21st floor of One Burgundy Plaza along Katipunan Avenue in Quezon City to Corona in October 2000 through documents.Gregonia also confirmed that Corona bought a parking lot in the same building for P450,000.

During the cross-examination by Cuevas, Gregonia admitted that he had no personalknowledge on the transactions regarding the Burgundy unit.Senator-judge Estrada asked the prosecution what they were trying to prove regardingthe Burgundy unit. Jandoc said Corona did not disclose the Burgundy parking slots in hisSALNs and failed to make a timely disclosure of the condo unit itself.

Basis for subpoena requests

In response to a request from Rep. Tupas, the presiding officer reminded theprosecution team to justify requests to summon documents and individuals, stressingthat they must indicate the "relevancy" of those documents or testimony to theimpeachment trial. Enrile said the court cannot hastily decide onissuing summons because the prosecution needs to lay the basis for the subpoenafirst.The presiding officer cited the prosecutions request to subpoena some documents fromthe Supreme Court, explaining that the Senate has to observe the separateness andco-equalness of the three branches of government.

Adjournment

At 6:03 p.m. the trial was adjourned. The trial will resume at 2 p.m. Monday, February 6.

Marlon Anthony Tonson/YA/ELR/KG, GMA News


50/157


Call to Order

At 2:11 p.m., the trial was resumed.Senator-judge Miriam Defensor-Santiago was absent.

ITRs of Coronas son-in-law

Presiding officer and Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, over the objection of Chief Justice Renato Coronas lead defense counsel Serafin Cuevas, allowed privateprosecutor Arthur Lim to resume his direct examination of the Bureau of InternalRevenue (BIR) chief even though cross-examination had started.BIR commissioner Kim Henares produced the income tax returns (ITRs) from 2005 to2010 of Corona son-in-law Constantino T. Castillo III (husband of Carla Corona), whichwere marked in court.Enrile did not allow Lim to read the contents of Castillos ITRs for propagandapurposes, and chided Lim for pointing out unnecessary details in describing the

documents.The presiding officer Enrile added that the impeachment court will not accept evidenceon paragraph 2.4 on allegations of ill-gotten wealth because the Senate has disallowedthis.

After Enrile stressed that the prosecution must demonstrate the relevance of the ITRs to Article II on lack of disclosure in Coronas Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net worth(SALNs), Lim said they were trying to show that the La Vista property belongs to Coronabecause his daughter and her husband did not have the financial capacity to buy the

P18 million property.The prosecution also presented a deed of sale for shares at the exclusive The PalmsCountry Club from Filinvest in the name of Corona and his wife, that were not declaredin his SALN.


51/157

BIR investigating Corona

Henares said the BIR was in the process of investigating Corona in connection with his

tax declarations and SALNs from 1992 to 2010, and that a letter of authority notice wassent to Corona to tell him some revenue officers were auditing his ITRs.Continuing his cross-examination, Cuevas asked Henares if the inaccuracies inCoronas SALNs could be corrected in accordance with Civil Service rules. Henaresreplied that corrections cannot be made because the SALNs are made under oath and if these can be amended at anytime, then filing SALNs would be useless.Cuevas asked Henares if she did not find anything wrong in conducting the probe whilethe impeachment trial is ongoing, which he said smacks of persecution. In reply, she

told him it is the duty of the BIR to investigate any wrongdoing regarding taxes.

Discrepancies in Coronas SALNs and ITRs noted

Prosecutor Lim asked Henares to expound on the discrepancies found by the BIR .Cuevas challenged Henares credibility in drawing conclusions on Coronas assets, butLim pointed out that the lead defense counsel himself had asked the BIR chief for her opinion on the matter.Henares said the BIR used the net worth method in assessing tax deficiency. After comparing Coronas SALNs, ITRs, and Certificates of Authority of Registrations (CARs)on his properties, the following under-declarations were found:

o 2002: Corona did not declare nine properties in his SALNo 2003: He did not declare nine properties; the property in La Vista was valued at P3

million instead of P11 million; another property worth P2.5 million was declared asP821,080; his net worth was P7 million when it should have been P14 million

o 2004: Same discrepancies as previous year; another property in Diliman, QuezonCity was not included in the SALN; his net worth was reported at P7 million instead of P21 million

o 2005: Same discrepancies as previous year; his declared net worth was P8.3 millionwhen it should be P31.2 million

o 2007: His net worth should be P24 million but he only declared P11 milliono 2008: His net worth should be P25 million but he only declared P12 million


52/157

o 2009: His net worth should be P52 million because of the Bellagio I property but heonly declared P14.5 million

Enrile noted that the letter sent to Corona was issued on the basis of tentative datawhich gives the BIR the authority to examine the chief justice for possible tax deficiency.

Senate issues subpoena for Corona bank records

In a resolution read by Senator-judge Vicente Sotto III, the impeachment court grantedthe request of the prosecutors to subpoena two bank managers along with documentsrelated to Coronas alleged bank accounts. However, the court set limits, such asrequiring prima facie proof of relevance and specific documents closely related toCoronas filing of SALNs.

The Senate ordered the managers of the Philippine Savings Bank (PSBank) Katipunanbranch and the Bank of the Philippine Islands (BPI) Ayala branch to appear before thecourt on W

Documents

Corona Impeachment Trial Highlights