JUSTICES DEFEND CJ ON RULING RECALL (PAL EMPLOYEES UNION)
MANILA, MARCH 22, 2012 (BULLETIN) By ELLALYN B. DE VERA, HANNAH L.
TORREGOZA, and ROLLY T. CARANDANG - Survey Has No Bearing –
Senators
MANILA, Philippines — Forty-seven percent of Filipinos believe that Chief
Justice Renato C. Corona is guilty of the charges against him, while 43 percent
cannot categorically say whether the chief magistrate is guilty or not, a Pulse
Asia survey result released Tuesday revealed.
The survey drew mixed reactions. The Senate, sitting as an impeachment court,
says it has no bearing when they will decide on the impeachment case.
But the prosecution panel from the House of Representatives welcomed it,
saying it was proof that it submitted substantial evidence against Corona, while
Supreme Court Spokesman and Court Administrator Jose Midas P. Marquez branded it
as premature.
The survey, conducted February 26 to March 9 with 1,200 respondents
nationwide, also showed that 5 percent say the Chief Justice is innocent, while
5 percent of the respondents have no response.
In that particular survey, the respondents were asked: "Sa mga ipinaparatang
na pagkakasala kay Chief Justice Renato C. Corona, masasabi ba ninyo na siya ay
(Of the charges Chief Justice Renato Corona is accused of, would you say that he
is)... innocent (definitely innocent or probably innocent); or guilty (probably
guilty or definitely guilty)?"
Of those who believed the SC Chief Justice is guilty, 15 percent said they
are certain about his guilt, while the rest said he is probably guilty.
Of the 5 percent who believe Corona is innocent, 4 percent said he is
probably innocent and 1 percent said he is definitely innocent.
Pulse Asia noted that practically same percentages across geographic areas
(Metro Manila, rest of Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao) and socio-economic classes
(upper to middle class ABC, masa or class D, and the poorest class E) either
think the Chief Justice is guilty (from 37 to 52 percent).
[Photo - The country's newest lawyers take their oath before justices
of the Supreme Court in a ceremony at the Philippine International Convention
Center in Pasay City yesterday. Impeached Chief Justice Renato Corona, the guest
speaker, renewed his call on lawyers to help fight 'tyranny' and defend
democracy. The 1,913 law graduates who hurdled last year's Bar examinations
officially became lawyers yesterday after taking their oath before justices of
the Supreme Court. The new lawyers were told to live by their vow to protect the
Constitution and uphold the rule of law at all times. Justice Arturo Brion
delivered a strongly worded speech and called on the new members of the Bar to
fight tyranny as he cited the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona,
who also attended the event. Jonjon
Vicencio]
Almost all areas and classes also expressed indecision on the matter (43 to
48 percent).
However, the survey found that 54 percent of respondents in Mindanao said
Corona is guilty, while significantly fewer residents (31 percent) were
undecided on the matter.
Concerning how senator-judges will hand down their verdict, respondents were
asked: "There are some people who believe and those who doubt that the senators
who will judge the impeachment case of Chief Justice Corona will be fair. Of the
following, which one is the closest to your own view? Will be fair and will not
favor any one or will not be fair and will favor someone, or you don't know."
In this category, 69 percent believe that the senators will be fair and will
not favor anyone when they finally decide on the impeachment case against
Corona. Pulse Asia said this is the majority sentiment in all geographic areas
(63 to 74 percent) and socio-economic groupings (66 to 71 percent).
Twenty-two percent said the senator-judges will not be fair, a view that is
more pronounced in Mindanao (30 percent) than in Metro Manila and the rest of
Luzon (18 to 19 percent). Nine percent were undecided.
Filipinos Convinced
The prosecution spokespersons said the survey results only showed that most
Filipinos are convinced that prosecutors had presented overwhelming evidence to
warrant the removal from office of the country's top magistrate.
"It only shows that the people monitoring the impeachment proceedings are
convinced by the evidence presented by the prosecution," Deputy Speaker Erin
Tañada said. "This shows that the evidence that we've presented is substantial
to sway the minds of the people that the Chief Justice is guilty," he added.
Rep. Romero Quimbo, another prosecution spokesman, said the survey was a
reflection of the sentiment of the public.
"The Chief Justice is accused of betrayal of public trust and the operative
word there is the public, and it is important how we see the public in a snap
shot," Quimbo pointed out.
Marquez noted that the survey was done ahead of the presentation of the
defense panel.
"It's premature because the impeachment case is still pending. We don't know
the basis of the respondents in saying that he's guilty or innocent. The defense
isn't through yet," Marquez said.
"I hope it is not taken and released to influence the senator-judges from
deciding one way or the other," he said.
No Bearing
Although the survey showed that the Corona issue has divided the nation,
senators said public opinion would have no bearing on how the impeachment court
will decide whether to acquit or convict the Chief Justice.
Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, presiding officer of the court, said no
amount of public surveys can influence how the impeachment body will decide on
Corona's case.
"I will decide it according to the evidence and nothing more," Enrile said.
"If we are to rely on surveys to convict or not convict a person charged in
our courts, then we do not need the courts. All we have to do is conduct surveys
whenever somebody is charged," the Senate leader added.
To prove his point, Enrile cited the death of Jesus Christ as the "classic
case of surveys" wherein public opinion was the basis for his judgment.
"I'm not concerned about surveys when it concerns the administration of
justice. We are administering justice here and the classic case of surveys that
was wrong is the man on the cross who was the product of a survey," Enrile said.
He was judged by a survey and until now people are worshipping him," Enrile
said.
"The culpability of the chief justice will not be determined by surveys or by
public opinion. It will be decided by the senator-judges individually and
collectively," said Sen. Gregorio Honasan II.
Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III also agreed that senator-judges are
the ones that would evaluate the merits of the case and thus should not be
pressured by public opinion.
Meanwhile, the prosecution strongly opposed the request of the defense panel
to subpoena the statements of assets, liabilities, and net worth of President
Benigno S. Aquino III, Senate President Enrile, House chief prosecutor Rep. Niel
Tupas Jr., Vice President Jejomar Binay, Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales,
Senators. Edgardo Angara, Manny Villar, Miriam Defensor Santiago, Joker Arroyo,
Budget Secretary Florencio Abad, Health Secretary Enrique Ona, Agrarian Reform
Secretary Virgilio De los Reyes, Foreign Affairs Secretary Albert del Rosario,
Energy Secretary Jose Rene Almendras, Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin, Trade
and Industry Secretary Gregory Domingo, Finance Secretary Cesar Purisima, Public
Works and Highways Secretary Rogelio Singson, Tourisim Secretary Ramon Jimenez,
Transportation Secretary Manuel Roxas, and his predecessor Jose de Jesus,
Presidential Legal Counsel Eduardo de Mesa, National Anti-Poverty Commission
Chairman Jose "Joel" Rocamora, Metropolitan Manila Development Authority
Chairman Francis Tolentino, Civil Service Commission Francisco Duque, Commission
on Elections Chairman Sixto Brillantes, and former Commission on Audit Chairman
Reynaldo Villar. (With a report from Rey G.
Panaligan)
FROM PHILSTAR
7 JUSTICES DEFEND CJ ON PAL RULING RECALL By Edu
Punay (The Philippine Star) Updated March 22, 2012 12:00 AM
[PHOTO - Chief Justice Renato Corona speaks before law graduates
during their oath-taking ceremonies at the Philippine International Convention
Center yesterday. With him are associate justices. Jonjon
Vicencio]
MANILA, Philippines - They are supposed to be barred from testifying, but
seven justices of the Supreme Court (SC) issued a resolution yesterday defending
Chief Justice Renato Corona's actions in the case involving the employees' union
of Philippine Airlines (PAL) in 1998.
In a 30-page resolution, the seven justices held that Corona's participation
was only ministerial in the recall of the Sept. 7, 2011 ruling. Citing a
procedural lapse, the ruling had declared – supposedly with finality – as
illegal the retrenchment of over 1,400 members of the Flight Attendants and
Stewards Association of the Philippines (FASAP).
The justices cleared Corona of misdeed, as alleged in the Articles of
Impeachment, for the ruling on the retrenchment of PAL flight attendants.
They junked the allegation in the dissent of Associate Justice Ma. Lourdes
Sereno, President Aquino's first appointee to the high court, that Corona had a
hand in the recall order.
"As can be seen from the above narration, the Chief Justice acted only on the
recommendation of the ruling division, since he had inhibited himself from
participation in the case long before," read the final point in the ruling
penned by Justice Arturo Brion.
The majority ruling described the allegation as mere "confusion brought about
by the Chief Justice's role as the presiding officer of the Court (particularly
in its meeting of Oct. 4, 2011), and the fact that the four most senior justices
(Corona, Justices Antonio Carpio, Presbitero Velasco Jr. and Teresita
Leonardo-de Castro) inhibited from participating in the case."
Corona had inhibited on the FASAP case since it was filed in 2008. He only
referred to fellow magistrates an official letter from PAL lawyer Estelito
Mendoza, which is allowed under SC rules.
"In the absence of any clear personal malicious participation, it is neither
correct nor proper to hold the Chief Justice personally accountable for the
collegial ruling of the Court," the resolution said.
Justices Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin, Roberto Abad, Jose Perez, Jose
Mendoza and Bienvenido Reyes concurred with the ruling.
The majority of SC magistrates also branded as "disturbing" another claim in
Sereno's dissent on "alleged silence of, or lack of objection from, the members
of the ruling division during the Oct. 4, 2011 deliberations."
"The lack of a very active role in the arguments can only be attributable to
the members of the ruling division's unanimous agreement to recall their ruling
immediately.
"To be sure, it was not due to any conspiracy to reverse their ruling to
affirm the previous court rulings already made in favor of FASAP; the (SC)
division's response was simply dictated by the legal uncertainties that existed
and the deep division among them on the proper reaction to Atty. Mendoza's
letters," the high tribunal explained.
With this ruling, the SC has affirmed its recall order and denied FASAP's
motion for reconsideration filed on Oct. 17 last year.
"The recall of the Sept. 7, 2011 Resolution of the ruling division was a
proper and legal move to make under applicable laws and rules, and the
indisputably unusual developments and circumstances of the case," the court
held.
The SC stressed the recall order "was made by the Court on its own before the
ruling's finality pursuant to the Court's power of control over its orders and
resolutions."
"Thus, no due process issue ever arose," the SC added.
Justice Sereno maintained her dissent and was joined by Justice Estela
Perlas-Bernabe.
In her 52-page dissenting opinion, Sereno believes the recall order has set a
dangerous precedent as it "opened a Pandora's box full of future troubles for
Philippine judicial decision-making."
In its original ruling, the high court ordered the reinstatement with full
back wages of 1,400 flight attendants who claimed to have been illegally
retrenched by PAL at the height of labor strikes in 1998 – an amount that could
reportedly reach P3 billion.
The latest ruling also confirmed that the SC sitting as full-court would
again rule on the merits involving the 13-year-old labor case.
The SC said the case should now be raffled off either to Justice Bersamin or
Justice Peralta, the only remaining members of the Special Third Division that
originally ruled on the merits of the case.
The FASAP case is among the grounds raised by the House prosecution in
impeachment charges against Corona.
Prosecutors even presented in trial FASAP president Roberto Anduiza as
witness last month. He testified on their long running labor row and accused
Corona of meddling in the case and facilitating the recall of the supposedly
final ruling that favored their cause.
The SC had already justified the recall order, saying it was caused by a
procedural flaw.
SC spokesman Midas Marquez had revealed that the case was first assigned to
the 3rd division of the high tribunal with retired Justice Consuelo
Ynares-Santiago as member-in-charge.
When Santiago retired in 2009, the case was transferred to a special division
composed of her replacement and original members.
Membership of divisions in the high court has since also changed due to
reshuffle following retirement of justices.
"Many members of that third division had retired and the justices have also
been reshuffled, so this case found its way to the 2nd division.
"What could have happened – I'm not saying this is what really happened since
the court will still look into it – was that a regular member of the 2nd
division who was designated to sit as special member of the special 3rd division
that was handling the case thought they were ruling on it as a regular
division," Marquez suggested.
Marquez said the SC in full decided to take up the case "to avoid further
confusion," adding that the justices are expected to "decide on all issues
including possible action on the cause of confusion."
He said the case was also raffled to a new member-in-charge yesterday
afternoon. The full court is expected to rule on the second motion for
reconsideration of PAL.
The SC first ruled on the case in July 2008.
The case stemmed from PAL's decision to dismiss on June 15, 1998 some 5,000
of its employees in order to cut costs and mitigate further losses. This was
during the Asian financial crisis.
During that period, PAL claimed to have incurred P90 billion in liabilities,
almost the same level as its assets of only P85 billion.
PAL adopted "Plan 14" where it reduced its fleet of aircraft to 14 from 54
that resulted in the dismissal more than 1,400 flight attendants and stewards
and other cabin crew personnel.
A worker was supposedly retrenched based on his or her performance for the
year 1997 alone.
It was later amended to "Plan 22," which forced the firm to rehire some 140
of the workers previously retrenched.
To appease other employees, PAL chairman and chief executive officer Lucio
Tan offered to transfer shares of stock to employees and three seats in the
Board of Directors. This was on the condition that the collective bargaining
agreement with employees would be suspended.
The employees, however, rejected the idea.
Mass actions forced PAL to close shop despite the approval of its
rehabilitation blueprint from the corporate regulator.
Through the intervention of then President Joseph Estrada, the workers issued
a counter-offer. The proposal, which included the hiring of retrenched workers,
was ratified on Oct. 7, 1998.
PAL resumed operations immediately after, but the labor case continued.
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/
