COLLECTION
MANILA, JANUARY
12,
2012 (TRIBUNE) By Charlie V. Manalo and
Benjamin B. Pulta - House prosecutors may just find their charges against
Supreme Court Chief Justice collapsing, one by one.
Even before the impeachment trial formally commences, the House prosecutors
have already lost round one of the battle after the Commission on Audit (CoA)
cleared Chief Justice Renato Corona from any wrongdoing in the controversial
Judiciary Development Fund (JDF) which is one of the charges in the impeachment
complaint lodged against the CJ.
In its audit findings on the manner by which the high court spent the 2010
JDF collection, CoA belied claims by 188 complainant-congressmen that Corona had
prevented state auditors from examining the way the JDF was disbursed.
The impeachment case currently pending before the Senate charges Corona with
betrayal of public trust and graft and corruption for allegedly failing to
account for the JDF, among other accusations.
Except for the observation that the JDF collection increased by
P12,172,008.10 in 2010, audit examiners noted that the SC spent more than what
it actually collected for the year.
However, CoA auditors have apparently accepted the justification given by the
SC that the distribution of the JDF collection was "based on the balance of bank
deposits at any given date and not on the balance per books" to prevent any
delay in the payment of benefits to its personnel.
The state audit agency noted that the total JDF collection for 2010 reached
P885,887,644.88, higher by P12,172,008.10 if compared with the 2009 income of
P873,715,636.78.
However, in 2010, the available fund balance was P1,071,823,475.54 which
allowed the SC to spend P855,129,275.94 for cost of living allowance for court
personnel and P213,782,318.95 for court facilities.
CoA said that if the expenditures were to be based on the actual
collections for the year, the sharing would have been P708,710,115.90 for
COLA and P177,177,528.98 for court facilities.
Created under Presidential Decree 1949, the JDF represents a portion of
court-related fees collected by the judiciary. The law allows the SC to spend 80
percent of the fund for COLA while 20 percent is reserved for office equipment
and the improvement of judiciary facilities.
In the same report, CoA revealed that government paid a total P1,079,393.31
in commitment fees to the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development
(IBRD) as a result of the "slow/low availment/utilization" rate of the loan for
the Judicial Reform Support Project (JRSP).
The audit body said government had already shelled out over P15 million in
commitment fees from 2004 to 2010 as a result of the snail-paced implementation
by the government of the said project.
The IBRD has made available a total $21.9 million for the JRSP which should
have been completed on or before Dec. 31, 2009.
The bank extended the closing date to June 30, 2011 but the availment of the
loan remained slow.
Auditors learned that the delay has been caused by problems encountered in
the implementation of activities on civil works for the rehabilitation and
construction of Halls of Justice in Angeles City, Lapu-lapu City and Manila.
"We recommend immediate determination of the needed budget for the remaining
activities to complete the project component and return excess of the needed
budget to avoid additional incurrence of commitment fee," the CoA report stated.
In a related development, court administrator Midas Marquez says three
seasoned lawyers , two of whom are fraternity brothers of the Chief Justice have
joined the defense panel that would be representing the chief magistrate in the
Senate impeachment trial.
Speaking to newsmen, Marquez also clarified that a legal strategy and not a
change of side was the reason behind earlier reports claiming that three members
of the defense panel —including Ernesto Francisco Jr. who had signed in Corona's
reply to the charges— had decided to withdraw from the defense panel.
Earlier reports named former Court of Appeals (CA) associate justice Hector
Hofilena and private lawyer Eduardo de los Angeles.
Marquez said of the three, Hofilena who had initially offered his support to
backstop Corona's defense had not attended the meetings of the defense panel and
could not thus be considered a part of the panel.
"He offered his support but could not attend any of the meetings of the
defense panel." Marquez clarified even as he added that in the case of De los
Angeles , he "is still very much part of the legal team"
"I understand he (Francisco) filed his formal withdrawal earlier. Upon
further discussions we agreed that it would be better for the team (if Francisco
withdrew)." Marquez said about Francisco and added that in no case that it can
be viewed as a withdrawal of support by them for Corona."
Pressed for reasons ,Marquez explained that no reason was given by the lawyer
for his decision but upon inquiries by reporters, he conceded that "maybe" part
of the reason was that Francisco is a lawyer of former Sen. Jamby Madrigal who
waged a personal campaign against the presidential campaign of Sen. Manuel
Villar of the Nacionalista Party, who is considered as one of the non-aligned
fence sitting undecideds among the impeachment court senators.
Joining the defense team as spokesmen Marquez said are former student leader
and law professor Tranquil Gervacio Salvador III, lawyer Ramon Esguerra and
Karen Jimeno.
Aside from being the general counsel of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines, Esquerra who is a former undersecretary and a former acting
chairman of the Board of Pardons and Parole, Esguerra also lawyered for the camp
of former president Gloria Arroyo, and former PagCor chairman Ephraim Genuino.
Jimeno, who has recently married, has taken her masteral at the Harvard
University.
Marquez said no sanctions from the SC await any law firm or lawyers who
decide to back the House of Representatives prosecution panel.
"Definitely no (sanctions).They are free to support and decide to be lawyers
of the prosecution if they want." he said.
The prosecutors quickly pounced on Marquez. They said he should resign from
his post unless he wants to continue to be the personal spokesman of the Chief
Justice.
Akbayan Rep. Walden Bello said that Marquez should learn from that biblical
passage as he is increasingly seen in public not as the High Court's
Administrator and Spokesman but as "point guard" in the defense of chief
magistrate in the impeachment process.
In order to sort out this confusion, and for the good of the Supreme Court,
Bello has one advice for Marquez, "Resign."
"Already, we have a Chief Justice who, in his lack of integrity, has pledged
himself to the service of Gloria Arroyo under the guise of public service. And
here emerges Marquez in the very likeness of his superiors," Bello concluded.
"Marquez' reputation and credibility are stained, and it will get worse because
it is not likely that he will shut up. He should very well follow his heart's
desire to serve Corona. And in order to do that, he must resign.
Bayan Muna Rep. Teddy Casiño, for his part, urged Corona to immediately
dispose of Marquez from his defense team and hire private spokesmen.
Casiño reminded Marquez that only Corona, not the High Court, is on trial at
the Senate.
"Since he is not Corona's personal aide and defender, he should refrain from
playing the role and give the job to someone else who is not paid by taxpayers
money. Marquez should play no part in Corona's legal or communications team,"
Casiño stressed.
Marquez's reply to calls for resignation was that he is not the spokesman for
Corona's impeachment trual, saying: "I don't know why they are singling me out.
I know where I stand and I think I know what I'm supposed to do. I'm just
performing my function to the best of my ability.," adding that he is both the
spokesman for Corona, as chief justice and the Supreme Court.
Sources said that Marquez is probably an effective spokesman, which is why
his resignation is being called for. With Gerry Baldo
CJ wants Senate court to slap disciplinary action on Tupas,
panel By Angie M. Rosales and Gerry Baldo 01/11/2012
[PHOTO - Tupas, Niel Jr. C. Representative Iloilo, 5th District Term: 2
House of Representatives]
Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona has asked the Senate impeachment
court to slap disciplinary action on the lead prosecutor, Iloilo Rep. Neil
Tupas, and other panel members for publicly disclosing claimed evidence on his
alleged illegal acquisition of 303.5-square meter condominium unit at The
Bellagio in The Fort, Taguig City.
The SC Chief Justice made known to the impeachment court his objection to the
"unbriddled dissemination of the House prosecution team of information or
documents which may not not even be admissible in evidence or relevant to the
case."
In his seven-page manifestation, Corona noted at least three provisions of
the Senate rules of procedure on impeachment trials to take consideration of his
manifestation, to include the power to enforce obedience and punish parties to
the case, if need be.
Tupas and some members of the House prosecution panel held a press
conference late last week where they presented some pieces of supposed
evidence on the said questioned real estate property purported to be owned by
Corona.
They claimed that the CJ violated the law when he failed to mention the real
property in his Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Network (SALn) which Corona
vehemently denied.
The Tupas assertion of a possible illegal acquisition of said property runs
roughshod over the peremptory language of Rule 18 of the Rules of Procedure on
impeachment trials promulgated by the Senate, said Corona's counsels Ramon
Esguerra and Tranquil Salvador III.
The said rules state that the "presiding officer and the members of the
Senate shall refrain from making any comments and disclosures in public
pertaining to the merits of a pending impeachment trial. The same shall likewise
apply to the prosecutors, to the person impeached and to their respective
counsel and witnesses.
"Mr. Tupas' attempt to justify his indecorum is even more unfortunate," they
said, citing news reports where the congressman was quoted to have even said
that he did not commit any violation of the impeachment rules since the trial
rules on public disclosures take effect when the proceedings begins on Jan. 16.
"The fundamental error of Mr. Tupas' view betrays his lack of candor. The
rule of procedure in impeachment proceedings of the House of Representatives is
clear...section 15 (on impeachment prosecutor) – the House of Representatives
shall act as the sole prosecutor at the trial in the Senate through a committee
of 11 members thereof to be elected by a majority vote.
"Undoubtedly, the House of Representatives has publicized the list of its
prosecutors, naming no less than Mr. Tupas as the chief prosecutor. These
prosecutors have even named spokesmen who have repeatedly held press briefings
and conferences, participating in various public forums. Mr. Tupas has openly
made known his participation in the impeachment trial and even identified
himself as a principal author of the complaint," they said.
It's evident, they added, that Tupas has every intention to publicize
information or documents against Corona despite knowledge of the rules which
seek to prevent undue speculation from the general public regarding the merits
of the case and insulate the senator-judges from influence or pressure outside
the proceedings.
"Against these purposes, the prosecution's recent tack, no less than that of
its chief prosecutor, is a clever ruse to destroy the image of Chief Justice
Corona before the bar of public information and generate a negative public
perception of his guilt ahead of the impeachment trial. No question about the
malice and insidious motives can be heard, considering that the acquisition of
the condiminium unit was candidly admitted and explained in par. 12 of Article
II of the Answer filed by Chief Justice Corona," they said.
"As complainant and chief prosecutor, Mr. Tupas should be the first to honor
the authority of the Honorable impeachment court which has long since commenced
the exercise of its powers, to safeguard the integrity of the impeachment
proceedings and to strictly comply with the Senate rules. Mr. Tupas is neither
beyond nor beneath these rules. Whether he likes it or not, he is bound by
them," they added.
Corona's counsels pointed out that included in the Senate rules of procedure
on impeachment trials is it's authority to issue or promulgate any interim or
disciplinary measures to enforce and carry into effect its legal mandate.
As this developed, the motion filed by a member of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines (IBP) against Tupas and the rest of the House prosecution panel to
cite them in contempt of court is seen to be denied.
In the transmittal form submitted by lawyer Emma Lirio-Reyes, clerk of court
of the Senate impeachment court, she noted that the urgent motion filed by
lawyer Fernando Perito be denied "on the ground of absence of legal standing."
The House prosecution panel yesterday sought to bar Corona's motion to hold a
preliminary hearing saying the Senate impeachment court should deny his request
and proceed with the trial proper.
It's just a dilatory tactic and should not be entertained by the Senate
impeachment court, said Iloilo Rep. Niel Tupas Jr., lead prosecutor and private
prosecutor Mario Bautista in their filed comment.
The preliminary hearing which in reality is a motion to dismiss and the
Senate rules on impeachment do not provide for such motion to dismiss.
In their 15-page comment on Corona's motion for preliminary hearing, the
House prosecutors noted that such pleading seems to be a mere afterthought,
having been filed three days after his answer to the Articles of Impeachment was
transmitted to the Senate.
"The motion appears to be intended to secure a preliminary ruling from the
Senate so that he can later on bring it up to the SC for review and injunctive
relief. If this happens, then it would be clear that Corona has no respect for
this Honorable impeachment court and is trifling with the impeachment
proceedings," they said.
Tupas and Bautista pointed out that Corona's objection has already been
waived following the filing of the complaint and the Chief Justice himself
publicly pronounced that he is ready and willing to face trial in the Senate.
"Moreover, Corona has invoked and submitted himself to the jurisdiction of
this Honorable Coiurt – he has filed an Answer on 26 Dec. 2011 asking for the
affirmative reliev of a 'judgment of acquittal for all the Articles of
Impeachment' and 'for all other reliefs just and equitable under the premises.'
He is now estopped from denying the jurisdiction of this Honorable impeachment
court over the subject matter of the case. It should be stressed that Corona did
not qualify his submission to the jurisdiction of this Honorable impeachment
court as his answer was not made on an ad cautelam basis," they said.
As to the matter of the verification of the "verified complaint" for
impeachment is fatally defective, they debunked Corona's claims on this saying
that the House of Representatives journal of the Dec. 12, 2011 plenary
proceedings would bear them out on this matter.
In the said proceedings, it showed that the Articles of Impeachment has been
declared in the plenary as a verified complaint.
Provisions of the rules of court, particularly on such a technical matter as
to what constitutes proper verification, are not strictly applicable to an
impeachment proceeding as it is not a judicial proceeding but rather a political
process, as admitted by Corona himself, they said.
"Thus even assuming (without admitting) that the verification of the
impeachment complaint falls short of the requirements of the rules of court, it
would not render the verification fatally defective for purposes of the
impeachment proceedings.
"But even assuming (without admitting) that some representatives failed to
read the impeachment complaint, it would not render the verification of the
complaint defective. Article XI, section 3 (4) of the Constitution does not
require verification by all of the complainants. The said provision merely
speaks of the 'filing' by at least one-third of the members and not verification
by all of the said members," they said.
At the weekly Ugnayan sa Batasan Media Forum, Marikina Rep. Miro Quimbo,
Aurora Rep. Sonny Angara and Quezon Rep. Erin Tañada, prosecution panel
spokesmen said there is a clear move on the part of the chief justice to derail
the impeachment process.
"It's an attempt to side-track the issues and this is purely an act of delay.
It is a delaying tactic on the part of the Chief Justice to derail the
proceedings," Quimbo told House reporters yesterday.
Quimbo noted that Corona's recent moves were not in consonance with his
earlier statements that he is ready to face his accusers.
Angara, for his part, said that "the Chief Justice should face the issue fair
and square by allowing the full-blown trial to proceed without prolonging the
proceedings."
Chief News Editor: Sol Jose Vanzi
© Copyright, 2012 by PHILIPPINE HEADLINE NEWS ONLINE
All
rights reserved
PHILIPPINE
HEADLINE NEWS ONLINE [PHNO] WEBSITE
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------
Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/phnotweet
This is the PHILIPPINE HEADLINE NEWS ONLINE (PHNO) Mailing List.
To stop receiving our news items, please send a blank e-mail addressed to: phno-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Please visit our homepage at: http://www.newsflash.org/
(c) Copyright 2009. All rights reserved.
-------------------------------------------------------------Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/phno/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/phno/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
phno-digest@yahoogroups.com
phno-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
phno-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
