Full text of impeachment trial of CJ Corona

8/9/2019 Full text of impeachment trial of CJ Corona

1/20

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINESHOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

House of Representatives ComplexConstitution Hills, Quezon City

IN THE MATTER OF THE IMPEACHMENT OF RENATO C. CORONA AS CHIEFJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES,

REPRESENTATIVES NIEL C. TUPAS JR., JOSEPH EMILIO A. ABAYA, LORENZO R.TANADA III, REYNALDO V. UMALI, ARLENE J. BAG-AO (othe !o"#$%&'%'t!o"#&&') %t $e%t o'e-th&* (+ o the tot%$ Me"/e o the Ho0e oRe#ee't%t&1e %e &'*&!%te* /e$o23, Complainants.

VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR IMPEACHMENT

Undersigned COMPL!""#$ most respe%tfully &le t'is duly (eri&ed Complaint for t'e!mpea%'ment of t'e Honora)le Renato C. Corona, %urrently t'e C'ief *usti%e of t'e$upreme Court +'ereafter, Respondent-, upon t'e grounds of /etrayal of Pu)li% #rust,Culpa)le (iolation of t'e Constitution, and 0raft and Corruption, as follo1s2

PREFATORY STATEMENT

"ever 'as t'e position of C'ief *usti%e, or t'e standing of t'e $upreme Court, as aninstitution, )een so tainted 1it' t'e per%eption of )ias and partiality, as it is no12 noteven in t'e dar3 days of martial la1, 'as t'e %'ief magistrate )e'aved 1it' su%'arrogan%e, impunity, and %yni%ism. nd yet, for t'e aut'enti% rule of la1 to prevail, t'epu)li% must 'ave a)solute trust and %on&den%e in t'e 4usti%e, pro)ity, integrity, andimpartiality, of t'e mem)ers of t'e $upreme Court. #o 'ave any 4usti%e, mu%' more, aC'ief *usti%e, 1'o does not live up to t'e expe%tation of )eing li3e Caesar5s 1ife 6)eyond reproa%'7 is to fatally impede t'e a)ility of our institutions to fun%tion anddispense true 4usti%e to t'e people.

#'e Constitution provides a pro%ess for 'olding t'e 4udi%iary to a%%ount, on t'eprin%iple t'at sovereignty resides in t'e people and all government aut'orityemanates from t'em-. #'e Constitution provides for a me%'anism to remove 'ig'

o8%ials 1'o )etray pu)li% trust, %ommit %ulpa)le violations of t'e Constitution, andgraft and %orruption.

On May 9:, ;iosdado Ma%apagal, inorder to appoint a C'ief *usti%e 1'en )y any measure 6 t'e 'istory of t'e Court, ass'o1n )y t'e delicadezaof former C'ief *usti%e Manuel MoranF t'e landmar3 %ase ofytonaF t'e 9DE: Constitution itselfF and t'e "ovem)er D, 9DDE en bancResolution oft'e $upreme Court voiding President Ramos5 midnig't 4udi%ial appointments 6 su%' anappointment 1as vie1ed as dangerous and inimi%al to aut'enti% demo%ra%y.

#'e de%ision of Mrs. rroyo 1as premised on Respondent5s proven usefulness, and 'is

am)itions %om)ining 1it' 'er politi%al %al%ulations to ma3e 'im a 1illing partner inMrs. rroyo5s plan to evade and avoid a%%ounting for 'er o8%ial a%tions. His usefulnessand rut'lessness 1ere proven from t'e time 'e served as 'er Presidential C'ief of$ta=, Presidential $po3esman, and as %ting ?xe%utive $e%retary2 all positions of t'e'ig'est trust, %on&den%e, and utility to 'er in 'er o8%ial and personal a=airs.

His loyalty and su)servien%e t'us earned 'im an appointment to t'e $upreme Court assso%iate *usti%e at a time 1'en Mrs. rroyo 1as fa%ing numerous %'allenges and)esieged )y a pu)li% %lamor for a%%ounta)ility.

Ba%ed 1it' a va%an%y in t'e position of C'ief *usti%e, s'e t'en 1ent one step furt'erand %onspired 1it' Respondent Corona to maneuver 'is appointment as C'ief *usti%e2)y )rea3ing pre%edents esta)lis'ed )y 'er o1n fat'er 1'i%' premised midnig'tappointments as mali%ious interferen%e in t'e a)ility of a ne1ly7ele%ted president to'ave a free 'and in ful&lling 'is mandate.
http://wp.me/p10moZ-bL3http://wp.me/p10moZ-bL3http://wp.me/p10moZ-bL3


2/20

!n t'e $upreme Court, Respondent 'as %onsistently a%ted in a manner t'at prote%tsMrs. rroyo, 'er legal maneuvers 1'ile in o8%e, and t'e legal and administrativelandmines s'e left )e'ind, so as to impede t'e government5s e=orts to exa%ta%%ounta)ility and 4usti%e.

His leaders'ip of t'e $upreme Court 'as severely eroded pu)li% %on&den%e in t'e veryde%ision7ma3ing pro%ess of t'e Hig' Court, due to t'e manner in 1'i%' t'e Court 'as'anded do1n de%isions, only to re%onsider, overturn, and overturn again, t'osede%isions2 resulting in an unpre%edented state of Gux in terms of t'e verdi%ts of t'e'ig'est %ourt in t'e land.

s C'ief *usti%e, Respondent 'as )een lavis' in t'e spending of pu)li% fundsF )lind toet'i%al standards of )e'avior expe%ted not only of 'im, )ut 'is familyF intrigued and%onspired against 'is fello1 4usti%esF and )e'aved more li3e a s%oa1 t'an C'ief

*usti%e in refusing to dis%lose 'is assets and lia)ilities. "ot only 'as 'e )e'aved in amanner t'at is in%onsistent 1it' t'e dignity and pro)ity expe%ted of a mem)er of t'e'ig' %ourt, )ut 'as used 'is administrative po1ers for partisan politi%al ends, toprote%t ot'er o8%ials put in o8%e for t'e same reason 'e 1as appointed2 to Mrs.President 0loria Ma%apagal7rroyo and ensure s'e evades a%%ounta)ility for 'er a%ts.

His et'i%al )lindness, introdu%tion of politi%al partisans'ip at t'e expense of duepro%ess, and intrigue into t'e %ourt at t'e expense of t'e reputation of 'is fello1

4usti%es, 'is undermining )asi%, and %'eris'ed prin%iples of intelle%tual, &nan%ial, andet'i%al 'onesty )y using 'is po1ers not to arrive at t'e trut', or 'old t'e %ourt to t'e

'ig'est standards, )ut instead, to %over up and ex%use t'e s'ort%omings of t'e %ourt,'as )etrayed pu)li% trust )y eroding pu)li% %on&den%e in t'e administration of 4usti%e.

Pu)li% o8%e is premised on t'e maintenan%e of pu)li% trustF 'aving )etrayed t'attrust, Respondent Renato Corona is manifestly un&t to %ontinue as C'ief *usti%e. Hemust )e impea%'ed.

NATURE OF THIS ACTION

#'erefore, t'is a%tion for impea%'ment is )roug't against C'ief *usti%e Renato C.Corona in a%%ordan%e 1it' t'e provisions of $e%tion ;, rti%le I! of t'e 9DE:Constitution, on t'e grounds of2 +a /etrayal of Pu)li% #rustF +) Culpa)le (iolation oft'e ConstitutionF and +% 0raft and Corruption.

THE PARTIES

Complainants are %urrent Mem)ers of t'e House of Representative, responsi)le Bilipino%itizens and taxpayers, and are all of legal age. Bor purposes of t'e instant (eri&edComplaint for !mpea%'ment, %omplainants may )e served 1it' pleadings, noti%es andpro%esses %t the Ho0e o Re#ee't%t&1e, Co't&t0t&o' H&$$, B%t%%'Co"#$e4, 50e6o' C&t7. #'ey )ring t'is a%tion for and on )e'alf of t'e People of t'eRepu)li% of t'e P'ilippines )y aut'ority of t'e 9DE: Constitution, %onsistent 1it' t'eir%ivi% and %onstitutional duties as %itizens, pu)li% servants, mem)ers of t'e )ar, andMem)ers of t'e House of Representatives as agents of t'e People, t'e various se%torsof t'e nation and ot'er people5s organizations.

Respondent RENATO C. CORONAis t'e in%um)ent C'ief *usti%e of t'e $upreme Courtof t'e P'ilippines, and is )eing sued in 'is o8%ial %apa%ity. He may )e served 1it'

summons and ot'er pro%esses at 'is o8%e address at t'e $upreme Court /uilding, Cityof Manila.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

A'en Respondent assumed o8%e as C'ief *usti%e on May 9:, ;iosdado Ma%apagal argued,represented mali%ious sa)otage of t'e expressed 1ill of t'e peopleF and despite t'e$upreme Court5s o1n 'istory, 1'i%' presented t'e sterling example of a former C'ief

*usti%e, Manuel Moran, 1'o de%lined reappointment to t'e %ourt )y President ?lpidioQuirino as it %onstituted a midnig't appointment, Respondent eagerly a%%epted 'isposition. #'is 1as not1it'standing t'e fa%t t'at of t'e t'ree )ran%'es of 0overnment,t'e *udi%iary 1as t'e most greatly dependent upon moral as%endan%y and et'i%alintegrity as t'e foundation of its po1er and legitima%y. Ho1ever, 'e attempted to

%amouGage 'is )razen am)ition )y ta3ing 'is oat' of o8%e )efore t'en President0loria Ma%apagal7rroyo in se%ret, supposedly at ten in t'e morning of May 9:, ;


3/20

%ontrast to t'e stringent standards expe%ted of ordinary %ollege students andtea%'ersF and even reportedly engaging not only in illi%itly a%@uiring assets of 'ig'value )ut even resorting to petty graft and %orruption for 'is o1n personal pro&t and%onvenien%e.

#'e Complainants 'ere)y a%%use Respondent of numerous a%ts t'at %omprise2 +a/etrayal of Pu)li% #rustF +) Culpa)le (iolation of t'e ConstitutionF and +% 0raft andCorruption, t'at render 'im a)solutely un&t for t'e position of C'ief *usti%e of t'e$upreme Court.

GROUNDS FOR IMPEACHMENT

Re#o'*e't /et%7e* the P0/$&! T0t, !o""&tte* C0$#%/$e V&o$%t&o' o theCo't&t0t&o' %'* G%t %'* Co0#t&o' &' the o$$o2&') "%''e8

ARTICLE I

RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST THROUGH HIS TRAC9 RECORDMAR9ED BY PARTIALITY AND SUBSERVIENCE IN CASES INVOLVING THEARROYO ADMINISTRATION FROM THE TIME OF HIS APPOINTMENT ASSUPREME COURT JUSTICE AND UNTIL HIS DUBIOUS APPOINTMENT AS AMIDNIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE TO THE PRESENT.

ARTICLE II

RESPONDENT COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTIONANDOR BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST :HEN HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE TO THEPUBLIC HIS STATEMENT OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES, AND NET :ORTH ASRE5UIRED UNDER SEC. +;, ART. ; CONSTITUTION.

ARTICLE III

RESPONDENT COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATIONS OF THE CONSTITUTIONANDOR BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST BY FAILING TO MEET AND OBSERVETHE STRINGENT STANDARDS UNDER ART. VIII, SECTION ; (3 OF THECONSTITUTION THAT PROVIDES THAT ?@A MEMBER OF THE JUDICIARY MUST

BE A PERSON OF PROVEN COMPETENCE, INTEGRITY, PROBITY, ANDINDEPENDENCE IN ALLO:ING THE SUPREME COURT TO ACT ON MERELETTERS FILED BY A COUNSEL :HICH CAUSED THE ISSUANCE OF FLIP-FLOPPING DECISIONS IN FINAL AND E


4/20


5/20

9.9K. /elo1 is a ta)le t'at tra%3s Respondent5s voting pattern in %ases 'ig'lyimpressed 1it' pu)li% interest and involving t'e rroyo government5s frontal assaultson %onstitutional rig'ts prior to 'is appointment as C'ief *usti%e. s t'e ta)le 1ill s'o1,Respondent5s vote is di%tated not )y 'is %ons%ien%e )ut 'is loyalty and su)servien%e to'is appointing po1er2


6/20


7/20

9.9. side from t'e spe%i&% %ases 'erein dis%ussed, t'e follo1ing %ases de%ided )yt'e Court 1it' Respondent as C'ief *usti%e furt'er )etray 'is %onsistent la%3 ofindependen%e and )ias to1ards prote%ting rroyo2


8/20

II. RESPONDENT COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTIONANDOR BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST :HEN HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE TO THEPUBLIC HIS STATEMENT OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES, AND NET :ORTH ASRE5UIRED UNDERSEC. +;, ART. ; CONSTITUTION.

;.9. !t is provided for in rt. I!, $e%tion 9: of t'e 9DE: Constitution t'at a pu)li%o8%er or employee s'all, upon assumption of o8%e and as often t'ereafter as may )ere@uired )y la1, su)mit a de%laration under oat' of 'is assets, lia)ilities, and net1ort'. !n t'e %ase of t'e President, t'e (i%e7President, t'e Mem)ers of t'e Ca)inet,and ot'er %onstitutional o8%es, and o8%ers of t'e armed for%es 1it' general or Gagran3, t'e de%laration s'all )e dis%losed to t'e pu)li% in t'e manner provided )y la1. -

;.;. Respondent failed to dis%lose to t'e pu)li% 'is statement of assets, lia)ilities, andnet 1ort' as re@uired )y t'e Constitution.

;.J. !t is also reported t'at some of t'e properties of Respondent are not in%luded in

'is de%laration of 'is assets, lia)ilities, and net 1ort', in violation of t'e anti7graft and%orrupt pra%ti%es a%t.

;.K. Respondent is li3e1ise suspe%ted and a%%used of 'aving a%%umulated ill7gotten1ealt', a%@uiring assets of 'ig' values and 3eeping )an3 a%%ounts 1it' 'uge deposits.!t 'as )een reported t'at Respondent 'as, among ot'ers, a J


9/20

%aused and allo1ed t'e violation of t'e adverse party5s %onstitutional rig't to duepro%ess.

J.J.9. #'e matter is made 1orse sin%e t'e re%all is reported to 'ave )een at t'einstan%e of Respondent Corona, 1'o admitted t'at in ;ire%tors, all of1'i%' %'roni%le t'e serious irregularities %ommitted )y Mrs. Corona, are atta%'ed'ereto as A''e4e ?G, ?H %'* ?I, respe%tively.

J.K.;. !nstead of a%ting upon t'e serious %omplaints against Mrs. Corona, Mrs. rroyoinstru%ted all mem)ers of t'e *HMC to tender t'eir %ourtesy resignations immediately.fter t'e resignations, Mrs. Corona 1as retained and even promoted after President

rroyo expressed 'er desire for Mrs. Corona5s ele%tion as O!C C'airman of t'e *HMC/oard.

J.K.J. >espite t'e numerous ot'er %omplaints against Mrs. Corona, in%luding one from/aguio Mayor Reinaldo /autista 1'ere 'e protested Mrs. Corona5s move to repla%e t'emem)ers of t'e *HMC Management #eam, in violation of t'e terms of City Coun%ilResolution "o. J; 1'i%' prote%ts t'e se%urity of tenure in t'e *HMC of lo%al residentso%%upying 3ey positions in t'e %orporation +a %opy of 'is letter dated *uly ;, ;


10/20

J0*)e h%$$ 'ot 0e o $e'* the #et&)e o the 0*&!&%$ oK!e to %*1%'!ethe& #&1%te &'teet, o thoe o % "e"/e o the& %"&$7 or of anyone else,nor s'all t'ey %onvey or permit ot'ers to %onvey t'e impression t'at anyone is in aspe%ial position improperly to inGuen%e t'em in t'e performan%e of 4udi%ial duties.-$e%. E, Canon KF emp'asis and unders%oring suppliedS

J.K.. #'e "e1 Code of *udi%ial Condu%t furt'er provides t'at it is unet'i%al for amagistrate and mem)ers of 'is family to as3 for or re%eive any gift in ex%'ange for anya%t done or to )e done )y t'e 4udge in t'e %ourse of 'is 4udi%ial fun%tions2

*udges %'* "e"/e o the& %"&$&es'all neit'er as3 for, nor a%%ept, any gift,)e@uest, loan or favor in relation to anyt'ing done or to )e done or omitted to )e done)y 'im or 'er in %onne%tion 1it' t'e performan%e of 4udi%ial duties.- $e%. E, Canon KFemp'asis and unders%oring suppliedS

*udges s'all not only )e ee o" &'%##o#&%te !o''e!t&o' 2&th, %'*&'0e'!e /7, the e4e!0t&1e %'* $e)&$%t&1e /%'!he o )o1e'"e't, )ut mustalso appear to )e free t'erefrom to a reasona)le o)server.- $e%. , Canon 9Femp'asis and unders%oring suppliedS

J.K.:. Clearly, a grossly improper +alt'oug' personally and mutually )ene&%ialrelations'ip )et1een t'e Respondent and Mrs. rroyo 1as %reated 1'en Mrs. Corona1as appointed to t'e *HMC. #'e *HMC is a 0OCC under t'e ?xe%utive >epartment'eaded )y Mrs. rroyo. #'e appointment of Mrs. Corona in *HMC as its 'ig'estmanagement o8%er is %learly intended to se%ure t'e loyalty and vote of Respondent int'e $upreme Court. !n a similar %ase, t'e $upreme Court found it unet'i%al for t'e

4udge to allo1 'is daug'ters to a%%ept t'e )usiness o=er of persons 1'o 'ave apending %ase )efore t'e 4udge5s %ourt2

#'e "e1 Code of *udi%ial Condu%t for t'e P'ilippine *udi%iary pres%ri)es t'at 4udgess'all ensure t'at not only is t'eir %ondu%t a)ove reproa%', )ut t'at it is per%eived to)e so in t'e vie1 of a reasona)le o)server. #'us, 4udges are to avoid impropriety andt'e appearan%e of impropriety in all t'eir a%tivities. Li3e1ise, t'ey are mandated not toallo1 family, so%ial or ot'er relations'ips to inGuen%e 4udi%ial %ondu%t or 4udgment, nor%onvey or permit ot'ers to %onvey t'e impression t'at t'ey are in a spe%ial position toinGuen%e t'e 4udge. #'e Code %learly pro'i)its 4udges or mem)ers of t'eir familiesfrom as3ing for or a%%epting, any gift, )e@uest, loan or favor in relation to anyt'ingdone or to )e done or omitted to )e done )y 'im or 'er in %onne%tion 1it' t'e

performan%e of 4udi%ial duties. Respondent 4udge failed to live up to t'ese standards.>espite 3no1ledge of Onofre and Mariano5s intentions in o=ering t'e )usiness to 'isdaug'ters, respondent 4udge allo1ed 'is daug'ters to a%%ept t'e o=er of )usinesspartners'ip 1it' persons 1'o 'ave pending %ases in 'is %ourt.-;

J.K.E. Respondent s'ould )e 'eld to even 'ig'er standards )e%ause 'e is t'e C'ief*usti%e of t'e $upreme Court. $in%e 4oining *HMC, Mrs. Corona re%eived a su)stantialsalary, aside from ot'er per3s of t'e 4o), in%luding %ars and various travelopportunities. !n ex%'ange, as dis%ussed a)ove, t'e voting re%ord of Respondent in t'e$upreme Court indi%ate an unmista3a)le pattern of favoring rroyo in %ases )roug't)efore t'e $upreme Court %'allenging 'er poli%ies and a%tions. ll t'ese foregoingfa%ts )etray t'e Respondent5s la%3 of @uali&%ation as C'ief *usti%e as 'e 'asdemonstrated a la%3 of %ompeten%e, integrity, pro)ity, or independen%e.

J.K.D. Respondent reportedly dipped 'is 'ands into pu)li% funds to &nan%e personalexpenses. "umerous personal expenses t'at 'ave not'ing to do 1it' t'e dis%'arge of

'is o8%ial fun%tions, su%' as lavis' lun%'es and dinners, personal travels andva%ations, and fetes and parties, 'ave reportedly )een %'arged )y t'e Respondent to

4udi%ial funds. !n essen%e, Respondent 'as )een reportedly using t'e 4udi%ial fund as'is o1n personal expense a%%ount, %'arging to t'e *udi%iary personal expenditures.;

J.K.9espite t'ese stri%tures, Respondent 'as dire%tly, deli)erately, and s'amelesslyattempted to destroy t'e %redi)ility and standing of t'e $upreme Court 1it' respe%t toone important and pu)li%ly7%ele)rated %ase t'at 1as )efore it on automati% appeal2t'e %ele)rated (iz%onde Massa%re %ase.J9

J..J. $ometime in early $eptem)er ;uring t'e %ourtesy %all, (iz%onde as3ed t'e Respondent a)out t'e status of t'emultiple murder %ase against Hu)ert Ae)) and t'e ot'er a%%used, 1'i%' 1as at t'etime pending appeal )efore t'e $upreme Court. >espite t'e o)vious impropriety,Respondent, instead of re)u8ng (iz%onde for as3ing t'e @uestions, engaged (iz%ondein a personal and ex7parte %onversation regarding a %ase t'en pending %onsideration)efore t'e $upreme Court.

J... Aorse, in t'e %ourse of t'e %onversation, Respondent told (iz%onde, in t'epresen%e of *imenez, t'at fello1 *usti%e ntonio Carpio 1as allegedly lo))ying for t'ea%@uittal of Hu)ert Ae)). %%ording to (iz%onde in a s1orn 8davit dated *anuary ;:,;


11/20

J... #'e fa%t t'at Respondent spo3e 1it' (iz%onde regarding a %ase pending )eforet'e $upreme Court is in itself already a serious )rea%' of t'e rule of %on&dentiality t'atmust )e maintained )y t'e Court 1it' respe%t to %ases pending )efore it, as 1ell ast'e deli)erations of t'e mem)ers of t'e Court. $u%' %on&dentiality is a)solutelyne%essary in order to ensure t'at mem)ers of t'e Court are insulated from lo))yingand pressure %oming from any of t'e litigants of a pending %ase. Respondent5s a%tion,as C'ief *usti%e, is in itself un)e%oming and un1ort'y of a C'ief *usti%e.

J..:. !ndeed, in Re> 7etter o$ )residin+ J(stice Conrado M. &as9(e',J;t'e$upreme Court san%tioned a 4usti%e of t'e Court of ppeals for a similar a%t of

dis%ussing a pending %ase 1it' interested parties for 'aving failed to maintain t'e'ig' standard of independen%e and propriety t'at is re@uired of 'im.- #'e $upremeCourt furt'er 'eld2

#a3ing 'is %onversation 1it' 'is )rot'er and 'is en%ounters 1it' Mr. de /or4atoget'er, *usti%e $a)io gives t'e impression t'at 'e is a%%essi)le to lo))yists 1'o1ould unfairly try to manipulate %ourt pro%eedings. ?ven assuming arguendo t'at

*usti%e $a)io 1as not moved )y 'is )rot'er5s re@uest and t'at 'e re4e%ted Mr. de/or4a5s )ri)e o=er, t'e Court feels %ompelled to %all *usti%e $a)io5s attention to 'is o1ns'ort%omings under t'e %ir%umstan%es. t t'e very least, *usti%e $a)io s'ould 'averealized t'at 'is dis%ussions of %ourt matters, espe%ially t'ose t'at 'ave not yet )eenmade of pu)li% re%ord, 1it' persons 1'o are interested in t'e %ase 1ere in%redi)lyindis%reet and tended to undermine t'e integrity of 4udi%ial pro%esses. Ae see noreason to reverse t'e Panel5s &nding t'at *usti%e $a)io5s %onversations 1it' 'is )rot'erand Mr. de /or4a 1ere indis%reet and imprudent5.-

J..E. $igni&%antly, Respondent signed and %on%urred 1it' t'e a)ove7mentionedResolution of t'e $upreme Court. et, Respondent Corona %ommitted t'e sameperni%ious a%t of dis%ussing a pending %ase 1it' interested parties.

J..D. Aorse, 'o1ever, is t'e fa%t t'at Respondent intrigued against t'e 'onor andintegrity of a fello1 *usti%e in 'is a)sen%e, in t'e pro%ess, maligning and underminingt'e %redi)ility of t'e $upreme Court as an institution. /y painting for (iz%onde api%ture of a Court t'at is su)4e%t to t'e inGuen%e of one out of 9 *usti%es, and ma3ingit appear t'at t'e eventual de%ision of t'e Court in t'e %ase 1ould )e attri)uta)le tointernal arm7t1isting and inGuen%e, Respondent destroyed t'e %redi)ility of t'e veryinstitution t'at 'e 1as supposed to )e leading.

J..9


12/20

Canon !!!ntegrity

$e%. 9. *udges s'all ensure t'at not only is t'eir %ondu%t a)ove reproa%', )ut t'at it isper%eived to )e so in t'e vie1 of a reasona)le o)server.

$e%. ;. #'e )e'avior and %ondu%t of 4udges must rea8rm t'e people5s fait' in t'eintegrity of t'e 4udi%iary. *usti%e must not merely )e done )ut must also )e seen to )edone.

$e%. J. *udges s'ould ta3e or initiate appropriate dis%iplinary measures against la1yersor %ourt personnel for unprofessional %ondu%t of 1'i%' t'e 4udge may 'ave )e%omea1are.-

Canon !!!!mpartiality

x x x

$e%. ;. *udges s'all ensure t'at 'is or 'er %ondu%t, )ot' in and out of %ourt, maintainsand en'an%es t'e %on&den%e of t'e pu)li%, t'e legal profession and litigants in t'eimpartiality of t'e 4udge and of t'e 4udi%iary.-

Canon !(Propriety

Propriety and t'e appearan%e of propriety are essential to t'e performan%e of all t'ea%tivities of a 4udge.

$e%. 9. *udges s'all avoid impropriety and t'e appearan%e of impropriety in all of t'eira%tivities.-

J..J. #o restate in In Re> 7etter o$ )residin+ J(stice Conrado M. &as9(e' ,JKt'e$upreme Court 'eld t'at su%' %ondu%t amounted to a failure to maintain t'e 'ig'standard of independen%e and propriety t'at is re@uired of a 4udge.

J..K. Bor emp'asis, Respondent signed and %on%urred 1it' t'e a)ove7mentionedResolution of t'e $upreme Court. $urely, Respondent, as C'ief *usti%e, %annot )eexempt from t'e same rule and prin%iple. s C'ief *usti%e, 'e must in fa%t )e 'eld to a'ig'er standard. #'e $upreme Court furt'er said of 4usti%es2

A'ile it may )e true t'at from a psy%'ologi%al stand point ordinary persons %an 'avea 1ide variety of valid rea%tions to any given situation,J0t&!e S%/&o ho0$* /e% &'"&'* h& h&)h oK!e % % "%)&t%te o the %##e$$%te !o0t et h&" %#%to" o*&'%7 #eo'. Be&') the 0/e!t o !o't%'t #0/$&! !0t&'7,"e"/e o the /e'!h ho0$* ee$7 %'* 2&$$&')$7 %!!e#t /eh%1&o%$et&!t&o' th%t "%7 /e 1&e2e* /7 o*&'%7 !&t&6e' %/0*e'o"e.+emp'asis supplied

J... Moreover, Respondent not only s'ould 'ave s%rupulously guarded 'is reputationas a $upreme Court *usti%e, it )e'ooved upon 'im to 'ave done a positive a%t to

ensure t'at Campos and t'e latter5s emissaries )e dealt 1it' administratively for t'e)razen attempt to inGuen%e a magistrate of t'e $upreme Court.J#'is 'e utterly failedto do.

IV. RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST ANDOR COMMITTEDCULPABLE VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION :HEN IT BLATANTLYDISREGARDED THE PRINCIPLE OF SEPARATION OF PO:ERS BY ISSUING A?STATUS 5UO ANTE ORDER AGAINST THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES INTHE CASE CONCERNING THE IMPEACHMENT OF THEN OMBUDSMANMERCEDITAS NAVARRO-GUTIERREZ.

K.9. On $eptem)er 9J, ;


13/20

.9. #'e prin%iple of immuta)ility of &nal 4udgments is one of t'e primordial rules for'aving a %redi)le and e=e%tive system of administration of 4usti%e. Under t'isprin%iple2

Litigation must end and terminate sometime and some1'ere and it is essential to ane=e%tive and e8%ient administration of 4usti%e t'at, on%e a 4udgment 'as )e%ome&nal, t'e 1inning party )e not, t'roug' a mere su)terfuge, deprived of t'e fruits of t'everdi%t.-JD

.;. s explained )y t'e $upreme Court in its earliest years, su%' a prin%iple is animportant re@uirement for a %redi)le and e=e%tive system of administration of 4usti%e,t'us2

!t is true t'at it is t'e purpose and intention of t'e la1 t'at %ourts s'ould de%ide all@uestions su)mitted to t'em as trut' and 4usti%e re@uire,5 and t'at it is greatly to )edesired t'at all 4udgments s'ould )e so de%idedF )ut %ontrolling and irresisti)lereasons of pu)li% poli%y and of sound pra%ti%e in t'e %ourts demand t'at at t'e ris3 ofo%%asional error, 4udgments of %ourts determining %ontroversies su)mitted to t'ems'ould )e%ome &nal at some de&nite time &xed )y la1, or )y a rule of pra%ti%ere%ognized )y la1, so as to )e t'ereafter )eyond t'e %ontrol even of t'e %ourt 1'i%'rendered t'em for t'e purpose of %orre%ting errors of fa%t or of la1, into 1'i%', in t'eopinion of t'e %ourt it may 'ave fallen. #'e very purpose for 1'i%' t'e %ourts areorganized is to put an end to %ontroversy, to de%ide t'e @uestions su)mitted to t'elitigants, and to determine t'e respe%tive rig'ts of t'e parties. Ait' t'e full 3no1ledge

t'at %ourts are not infalli)le, t'e litigants su)mit t'eir respe%tive %laims for 4udgment,and t'ey 'ave a rig't at some time or ot'er to 'ave &nal 4udgment on 1'i%' t'ey %anrely as a &nal disposition of t'e issue su)mitted, and to 3no1 t'at t'ere is an end tot'e litigation.-KO* Cir%ular "o. K9 ironi%ally issued )y t'e >O*under rroyo5s administration. /y %onsolidating t'e petitions, t'e $upreme Court underRespondent unduly gave Miguel rroyo an un1arranted )ene&t sin%e t'e allegedurgent 'ealt' needs of President rroyo 1ould no1 )e extended to 'im.J

:.;. Aorse, t'e $upreme Court, under t'e Respondent, immediately a%ted upon t'ePetition and granted t'e #RO despite t'e fa%t t'at t'ere are %lear in%onsisten%ies informer President rroyo5s petition t'at %asts serious dou)ts on t'e sin%erity andurgen%y of 'er re@uest to leave t'e P'ilippines. s detailed in t'e dissent of *usti%e Ma.Lourdes $ereno, President rroyo presented in%onsistent, and pro)a)ly untrut'fulstatements- a)out 'er situation. *usti%e $ereno %ited do%uments su)mitted )y t'eformer president5s do%tors )elying 'er %laims of t'reat to life. side from %'anges int'e list of %ountries s'e 1anted to visit, President rroyo 1as also planning toparti%ipate in t1o %onferen%es. Hen%e, *usti%e $ereno noted2 !t seems in%ongruous for

petitioner 1'o 'as as3ed t'e >epartment of *usti%e and t'is Court to loo3 1it'

'umanitarian %on%ern on 'er pre%arious state of 'ealt', to %ommit 'erself to attendt'ese meetings and %onferen%es at t'e ris3 of 1orsening 'er p'ysi%al %ondition.-

:.J. Moreover, it appears from reports t'at t'e ponente to 1'om t'e petitions 1ereraed 1as an sso%iate *usti%e. Under t'e !nternal Rules of t'e $upreme Court, a #RO%an only )e %onsidered upon t'e re%ommendation of t'e ponente. ?vidently, in vie1 of%ertain o)4e%tions against t'e grant of t'e #RO, a 'olding of a 'earing 1it'in t'e s'ortperiod of &ve + days 1as re%ommended. >espite t'is re%ommendation, t'eRespondent engineered a ma4ority of E votes +as against &ve dissenters t'eimmediate grant and issuan%e of t'e #RO in favour of former President rroyo and 'er

'us)and in )latant violation of t'eir o1n internal rules.

:.K. !t also appears from t'e %oordinated a%ts of t'e rroyos t'at t'ey 1ere%oordinating 1it' Respondent5s Court. Bor 'o1 %an it )e explained t'at t'ey mademultiple )oo3ings on t'e same day expe%ting t'at t'ey %an leave t'e %ountry on t'every same day t'eir plea for a #RO 1as to )e de%ided !t is not di8%ult to see t'at t'e'asty issuan%e of t'e #RO 1as a )razen a%%ommodation to t'e rroyos. "ot only t'at.Respondent )ent over )a%31ards to aid and a)et t'e rroyos5 plan to leave t'e%ountry on t'e very day of t'e session on t'eir #RO plea. #'e Court5s o8%e 'ours t'atusually end at K2J< pm 1ere extended to allo1 t'e rroyos to post a measly P; million)ond later and t'e Court pro%ess server 1as drafted to serve t'e #RO upon t'e >O*and t'e O$0 after o8%e 'ours.

:.. lso, despite t'at fa%t t'at t'e Court, under Respondent, laid do1n %onditions for

t'e issuan%e of t'e #RO, Respondent allo1ed t'e issuan%e of t'e #RO not1it'standingt'e fa%t t'at it 1as esta)lis'ed t'at President rroyo and Miguel rroyo failed to%omply 1it' an essential pre7%ondition t'at 1as meant to ensure t'e vesting of %ourt

4urisdi%tion in t'e event t'e rroyos Gee prose%ution. #'e %ondition 1as, to 1it2

+ii #'e petitioners s'all appoint a legal representative %ommon to )ot' of t'em 2ho2&$$ e!e&1e 0/#oe'%, o*e, %'* othe $e)%$ #o!ee o' the& /eh%$*0&') the& %/e'!e.#'e petitioners s'all su)mit t'e name of t'e legalrepresentative, also 1it'in &ve + days from noti%e 'ereofF- +?mp'asis supplied.

:.. #'e $pe%ial Po1er of ttorney dated "ovem)er 9, ;


16/20

. #o o)tain %opies of do%uments and papersF and:. 0enerally to do all ot'er la1ful a%ts ne%essary for t'e%ondu%t of t'e said %ase.- +?mp'asis supplied.

B7 1&t0e o the Ao7o %/e!t %&$0e to !o"#$7 2&th th& #e-!o'*&t&o', theTRO ho0$* 'ot h%1e /ee' &0e*, 'o *ee"e* ee!t&1e.

:.:. >ue to t'e rroyos5 a)4e%t failure to %omply 1it' Condition ;, t'e $upremeCourt en banc in its "ovem)er 9E, ;


17/20


18/20

9. L79DJ9J, *anuary 9D, 9D;.;. .M. "o. DE77


19/20

move-, *uly ;, ;


20/20

P'ilippine >aily !n@uirer, *uly J9, ;

Documents

Full text of impeachment trial of CJ Corona