According to a key member of the President Aquinas Cabinet the government has evidence to prove that Chief Justice Ornate Corona has ill-gotten wealth that could not have been acquired with his salary in the Judiciary, and the evidence would be presented by the House prosecution team in the impeachment trial. Followed by the Presidential adviser on political affairs Ronald Llamas saying that “The House prosecution panel obtained documents that would show that Corona may have amassed ill-gotten wealth, including at least four multimillion-peso real estate properties,” .
Meanwhile Corona says “Many of those in the list are not ours. They are owned by people I don’t even know; some by parents of our children-in-law,”. Still the House prosecution anal will ask the Senate impeachment court to subpoena Corona’s statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALE) for 2010. The prosecution is saying that “They are refusing to release the SALE despite our repeated appeal.
We have no option but to ask the impeachment court to subpoena it during the trial,” . BIB reacts on the release of the SALE saying that the prosecution’s matching Corona’s income tax returns (Thirst) with his statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (Sales) has not established prima facie presumption of guilt to warrant Corona’s conviction.
Emphasizing also that 1379, or the law stipulating the handling of properties found to have been unlawfully acquired by public officers or employees. The lawyers’ group said RA 1379 states that prima facie guilt can be established “only if the public officer during his incumbency acquired an amount of property manifestly out of proportion to his salary as such public officer or employee and to his other lawful income and income from legitimately acquired property. . Addition to this the BIB adds that “The prosecution therefore needs to show not only Co’s salary, but also the fact the CA does to have any ‘other lawful income’ and ‘income from legitimately acquired property before it can claim that it has prima facie proven that CA is guilty of graft and corruption,” a lawyer named Ormolu Incidental questioned the prosecution panel’s Corona: Supreme Court of the United States By Tegucigalpa hearings the hearings.
Incidental explained that showing the discrepancy between Corona’s income and assets through the testimony of Commissioner Henries – a member of President Aquinas Cabinet – would not suffice to establish proof that several assets of the Coronas were ill-gotten. He believes the Chief Justice can afford to purchase millions worth of properties because he has been getting some UP. 4 million per year from tax-exempt allowances for his being a member of the Presidential Electoral Tribunal, Senate Electoral Tribunal and House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal.
He debunked the claim of Henries that Corona only receives an average of IPPP,OHO per year based on the alpha list of taxpayers from the Supreme Court. Prosecution panel spokesman Marking Rep. Mirror Akimbo told a news conference Prosecutors want to find out if Corona made a “proper acceleration” of the 300-square-meter penthouse unit at the Bellagio Tower in Boniface Global City in Tagging, which the Chief Justice and his wife acquired in 2009 for POP. 5 million. “We want to ask him how they purchased the property, if they had the legal means to acquire it.
We will prove that they did not have such means,” he said. But according to law said by BIB spokesman and Northern Luzon governor Dennis Habitable “Under the law on ill-gotten or unexplained wealth, it is not only the salary but also ‘other lawful income that is considered in explaining whether wealth acquired by an official is not commensurate or is unexplained,” Another is Senators acting as Judges in the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Ornate Corona should respect the Supreme Court (SC) order stopping them from scrutinizing his foreign currency deposit accounts.
As one said “There is a law of secrecy for dollar accounts. I am sure that the Senate President would not give it away,” added that “It is more academic for the Senate to respect the TROT (temporary restraining order). “. Which in virtue is in the Supreme court voting 8-5, issued a TROT on Thursday on the Senate banana on Corona’s dollar accounts with Philippine Savings Bank (Spank).
Next is which should of the two has the superior grounds that Supreme court of the Philippines or the impeachment court of the senate. According to FRR. Joaquin Barnes, a constitutionalists and opinion columnist of the Philippine Daily Inquirer, Neither the Supreme Court nor the Senate impeachment court is superior over the other; the Constitution is. “[Slaying that the Senate as impeachment court is superior to the Supreme Court [places] the two bodies on a collision course.
When irresistible forces eve someone has got to give,” adding that “The contention that the Senate as impeachment court is not equal with the other departments but even superior to them in matters involving impeachment seems to assume that the Senate as impeachment court is different from the Senate as legislative body,” The confusion strengthen a witness named Unrequited Vidal a supreme court clerk refused to release the SALE of chief Justice Ornate Corona invoking an order issued in 1989 when the Supreme Court was headed by Andrea Nirvana which rendered that the assets declarations of Supreme Court Justices among the most tightly guarded secrets in government.
The senate meanwhile which is serving as a impeachment court ordered Vidal to release and show it to the court saying that the senate ” must not be impeded by any agency of government in the performance of its duty as an impeachment court”. Vidal asked back saying that ” I am really in a dilemma. We are request that at least I get the authorization of the court first? ” which in the the sequence Seen. Drills flatly rejected her request. Then senator Joker Arroyo, a vocal ally of the previous administration, who manifested concerns over compelling Vidal to urn over the documents to the senate. In his words says ” I am disturbed by these developments. The witness had asked that she would like to ask for authorization. We do not know how the Supreme Court will react.
Let us suppose the Supreme Court says ‘do not release it’ , we will now run the risk a having a showdown between the supreme court and the impeachment court”. He also added ” in our desire to have a fair trial, I hope both sides, he prosecution and the defense will agree, give her a day to ask the supreme court whether they will agree rather than using the strong arm of he court. “. Senate president Juan Pence Enroll answered back saying that ” I’m sure the supreme court is composed of wise men and they would realize the implication of any contrary action to the order of the court. Each branch must respect of government must respect the prerogative of the other branch. Lastly, the cold neutrality of Judges.
Impartial Judges that is the situation the Senate may soon find itself in unless the senator-judges are able to restrain their political enthusiasm. That is the situation the Supreme Court already finds itself in ND it must find a creative solution to the dilemma without provoking a constitutional crisis. With lawyers and public watchdogs monitoring the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Ornate Corona, the 23 senator-judges are under a high-powered microscope for the slightest signs of bias and impartiality, which they swore to uphold. Already, Seen. Franklin Drills is under heavy pressure to inhibit himself from the trial after allegedly showing bias in helping the amateurish House prosecutors get on with their job. He has flatly denied improper conduct. The Senate, now also acting as an
Impeachment Court, has denied the motion of Chief Justice Corona’s lawyers for a preliminary hearing to enable him to show (1) that the impeachment complaint filed by the House of Representatives was not properly “verified” (a constitutional requirement with a strict legal definition), and (2) that the House denied him “due process” (also a constitutional requirement with well-understood meaning, at least among lawyers) for filing the complaint without giving him prior notice and hearing, two requirements to fulfill due process. Logic / Arguments: Chief Justice Corona. It is already pronounced in the Republic Act 1379 that the middling of properties found to have been unlawfully acquired by public officers or employees.
The lawyers’ group said RA 1379 states that prima facie guilt can be established “only if the public officer during his incumbency acquired an amount of property manifestly out of proportion to his salary as such public officer or employee and to his other lawful income and income from legitimately acquired property. ” I totally agree on the claims of the defense regarding this, the prosecution look on his properties without enough evidence on there claim to show that he Chief Justice Ornate Corona doesn’t have enough source of liable income to afford such properties like the well known Bellagio penthouse which is also known to the public given to him or bought by him on a lower price which is already been answered by the Angleworm Corporation, since the penthouse has taken terrible damage during a typhoon they need to sold it a lower price.
Now regarding the said accusation of dollar accounts on his credit Chief Justice Corona for it is known that there is a law regarding the secrecy for dollar accounts, the senate should not give in to this to the prosecution because t is violation and law as well as violation of ones right. The prosecution also claims that he Chief Justice Corona owns 45 properties named after him or a member of his family, but they were able to show only 21 properties. So is that a enough evidence? With that I disagree it only shows the prosecution is not yet ready and to affirm that he owns a properties such as 45 without enough proof it goes to show a liability not only to the person they are accusing but also to the public themselves.
It’s a tarnish to them as well as the opposing counsel with such claims but no proofs and evidence o along with it. Secondly, which is superior the Supreme Court or the Impeachment court, well none of them is the Constitution is. Both the senate and supreme court should respect the constitution itself. Senate is given a power but to exercised it only on occasions. It has been pointed out that Only the Constitution is superior does the fact that the Constitution identifies the Senate as the sole Judge of all impeachment cases make it superior to the Supreme Court in everything relating to impeachment. Perhaps we can find an answer to this by the Jurisprudence on the relation of the Supreme Court to other agencies of the government.
The supreme court was violated when the impeachment court demands the release of the SALE of Chief Justice Corona, there is this Code of 1992 regarding the secrecy of the assets of member of the Supreme Court and the impeachment didn’t acknowledged that fact and proceed on the demand of the release. Now I am questioning where is the respect for each branch. Yes it is given that it’s the impeachment court asking for the release but still reason. Its there duty I know not the power which was vested in them but still you eave to obey the law of another branch of the land and that is the Supreme court, I am not being biased about this but the have already refuse motions of the defense for preliminary hearing and now this disobeying the code of such branch.
Where is the equality here they trying to point out, I Just don’t see it clearly. Both sides have there right and power but its more looking like the impeachment court have the greatest power and not supreme court or even the constitution. Lastly, senator Judges has come a long of way of scrutiny because it well known they decide on there political purpose. But honestly where is the Justice there, I personally well doesn’t see it, rejecting each motions of the defense and more looking agreeing on the prosecution. The senators should weigh on the evidence more and not look past it which well result in decisions based on there emotions and not on the substance of the evidence.
All I want to point out on this is they senator – Judges should not be impartial and look beyond it with the help of evidence and the law not purely on there own purpose with that I wanted a fair decision guilty or not guilty it should be done on proper process of law. No one should be violated of his right to due process and in this case and like the law said a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty by law. All of us Filipinos wants the best result but we should not Judge on pure emotions but on the basis of this and that as well the evidence that will produce and for the lawmakers, senator – Judges, both prosecution and defense I hope the case be done properly through the intent and meaning of the constitution.