Reprint of Ted Laguatan's Article on Corona

"Inevitably, the war against corruption is a war of good versus evil."

No Limitation

Corona trial relates to the just war against corruption

By Ted Laguatan
INQUIRER.net

8:01 pm | Tuesday, March 13th, 2012

The Constitution provides for an impeachment process to immediately remove from office  a key official who betrays the public trust.

However, in the warped Philippine socio-political setting, successfully removing an official through the impeachment process  is as likely as the Ampatuans becoming Carmelite nuns.

Removing erring Philippine officials, no matter what process is involved,  is extremely difficult. Even Justices and judges with notoriously questionable reputations and exorbitant lifestyles that reek of corruption remain unchecked and unpunished. Enough effective mechanisms are just not there to correct the whole sorry mess.

The impeachment process is inherently defective and bound to fail in accomplishing its purpose of removing key officials who ought to be removed. We have seen the systemic defects  in the Estrada impeachment trial. We are seeing it again  now.

For lack of imagination, the framers of the Philippine Constitution simply followed the American Impeachment Court model.  In the U.S.,  the 2/3 vote needed to remove a key official amounts to 67 Senators and the 1/3 vote needed to acquit amounts to 34 Senators.

In the Philippines, 16 Senators are needed to convict whereas only eight Senators are needed to acquit. It seems grossly unfair to the citizenry that their future well being can be sabotaged by just eight people – who might not be that concerned about the national welfare.

In general, the system works in the U.S. because democratic institutions are deeply embedded and more Senators are involved which means more thinking heads. The system does not work well in the Philippines.

We really ought to get away from this colonial mentality of thinking that what works well in the U.S. will also automatically work well for us. The factual cultural settings in America re political, economic and social situations are far different from those in the Philippines.  It’s best for us to do our own original thinking to solve problems unique to our situation.

This monkey see, monkey do approach – when conditions are different – often result in solvable problems becoming more complex and unsolvable. Such is the case with the impeachment process in the Philippines which is a time consuming expensive exercise in futility. It simply does not work in efficiently and effectively removing officials who betray the public trust.

The  cold undeniable reality is that the Impeachment Court is composed of politician Senator-judges. Too many of our politicians do not think in terms of primarily putting truth, justice, honor, morality and the national interest above partisan and personal considerations. Our leaders have consistently betrayed us.

Hunger, ignorance, disease, homelessness and other forms of human sufferings resulting from mass poverty is a common countrywide situation.  National and local politicians on all levels of government make inane policies and  decisions – focused not so much in solving problems but based on  partisan or personal selfish agendas. As such, neighbor countries refer to us as “Asia’s basket case”.

This impeachment trial is a classic illustration of what is wrong with the Philippines. Here, the national interest is clearly involved. The country needs an honest and efficient judicial system in order to bring justice to the people. If all the Senators were in good faith and cared more for the interest of the people than their own selfish personal and partisan interests  - they would be able to easily focus  on accomplishing the purpose for which the Impeachment  Court was instituted.  It would then not take long for them to make a decision.

They would immediately concentrate on getting any and all relevant information relating to the alleged wrongful acts of the accused and his moral character – in order to properly decide on whether to acquit or find him guilty.

If Corona were truly innocent and wanted to vindicate his honor – he also would want the entire truth about his actions and character to be revealed. He can then explain his circumstances.

Corona apparently has enormous wealth. He declares an annual fixed salary and some perks as his only income but these appear insufficient to justify his numerous real estate holdings and millions in  peso and dollar bank deposits. He also does not report his true wealth  in his SALN. To  common ordinary citizens,  these series of omissions and misrepresentations persuasively suggest that Corona appears to be engaged in dishonesty and is receiving  huge sums of money from some sources.

It is very conceivable that the discovered Corona assets is just a tip of the iceberg. People will never know and he will always be under a cloud of suspicion unless he himself acts in good faith and reveals all of his holdings – including  deposits in other banks, additional  real estate properties and corporate shares.

His lawyers have been moving heaven and earth to keep evidence related to his financials from being admitted. Some Senators  have noticeably also been involved in excluding the admission of a lot of damaging evidence against him – citing all kinds of legal  technicalities.

The main issue in an impeachment trial is the moral character of the accused who as a public servant is supposed to be an honest moral person. Any evidence that relates to his moral character should be material and relevant.

Here, the rights and interest of the people to obtain justice and have honest public servants should weigh heavily against the rights of the accused re exclusion of evidence.  Senator-judges can and should in fact consider even evidence and facts not admitted technically in court. They should fill in the blank spaces to see the truth and the big  picture about the accused – when they decide on his guilt or his innocence.

This Corona Impeachment Court has ruled repeatedly against admitting evidence touching on the wrongful acts or moral character of the accused. In fact, the very first ruling of the Court was to excuse Corona and his family from appearing in Court. The Presiding Senator reasoned that their appearances would violate their right against self incrimination. I went to law school in the United States and have been practicing law here for more than thirty years. I still have to see a court stand in the shoes of the defendant and on his or her behalf  claim this Fifth Amendment Constitutional right against self incrimination.

This right or privilege against self incrimination is personal and belongs to the accused. It is when he is being asked a question or being asked to testify during a court or related proceeding that he can assert this right. Here the Court’s  Presiding Senator Juan Ponce Enrile asserted this right for Corona and his family without them being present in court.  Technically,  Enrile has no legal standing to do this even if he might have been in good faith in zealously protecting Corona’s Constitutional rights. Enrile may have made a mistake but nevertheless, a majority of the Senator-judges affirmed his ruling. The country has to live with this mistake.

Not even President Bill Clinton was excused from appearing in his trial. The Presiding Officer did not excuse his appearance on grounds that the trial might infringe on his right against self incrimination as nothing would have prevented Clinton from asserting this right  during his  trial and related proceedings.

How can Impeachment Court Senator-Judges determine the moral character of the accused public official Corona and the extent of his wrongdoing – if evidences of his wrongdoing are kept from being admitted? How terrible is the injustice inflicted on his victims – the Filipino people – when it is some Senator-Judges themselves who are engaged in preventing  relevant evidence and facts from being presented?

Some  Senator-Judges  rationalize their actions in preventing damning evidence against Corona from being admitted by citing rules of evidence or displaying mock concerns for the civil rights of the accused or by pointing to the incompetence of the prosecution.

Rules of law, whether regarding evidence or on some other issues – are meant to serve the ends of justice. They are not meant to be abused by the accused to hide his guilt. The accused’s civil rights are not violated if he is given the opportunity to explain and to be heard.

Our people groan from the heavy burdens caused by mass poverty and widespread corruption. They cry out to the high heavens for justice. Dishonest calloused Justices and judges are deaf to their cries. They will groan and cry some more if they feel that they are again being screwed in this impeachment trial. We cannot allow ourselves to forever be victims of dishonest greedy officials placed in power to serve but instead  betray us.

This impeachment case is crucial in this war against corruption.  The country needs an honest and efficient judicial system to rid the country of corrupt government officials through proper prosecutions and trials. The Chief Justice who leads the Judicial Branch, like any leader, is supposed to lead by example. The country cannot have a clean judicial system if its head and the other Justices have questionable integrities and perceived as lacking the moral authority to lead.

This impeachment trial relates to President Aquino’s all out war against corruption which the people support.

Can President Aquino and the people afford to lose this war?

This war against massive corruption in the country has to do with improving the lives of all our people. This impeachment trial is directly related to that war. The Chief Justice of the highest court in the land is undergoing trial in a confused Senatorial Impeachment Court proceeding. The people cannot rely on an unreliable impeachment system to rid the country of undesirable erring officials.

This war is between the Corona and GMA forces on the one side and the good people of the Philippines and President Aquino on the other side. Inevitably, the war against corruption is a war of good versus evil.

Like a politician, Corona holds rallies giving the impression of mass support – but attended mostly by forced to attend INC members – who certainly do not represent the sentiments of millions of Filipinos.

On the people’s side in this war against corruption are millions of common Filipinos: taxi,  jitney and tricycle drivers, farmers, factory workers, clerks, computer workers, office workers, businessmen, dentists, doctors, accountants, engineers, students, lawyers, academicians, teachers, nuns, priests  and hundreds of thousands of overseas Filipinos (toiling in distant lands because of corruption in the homeland).

Like them, I have nothing personal against Corona – but just want a better life for all Filipinos. We cannot have that unless we rid the country of institutionalized corruption. How I wish Corona and some Arroyo appointed Justices would just resign and redeem themselves by helping to clean out the judicial system and make it more efficient for the good of all. Within all of us are seeds of good and evil – and we are always free to decide one way or the other.

On the people’s side also is President Simeon Benigno Aquino who wants to rid the country of corruption.  Some well-meaning Senators are also on this same side.

The people need to now support Aquino’s  all out war against corruption. This is a rare national opportunity to bring about significant lasting reforms.

Four years from now we will have a new president.  In our history, only two presidents are known not to have engaged in corruption so the odds are against us. If the next one is corrupt, then we are back to square one. Worst because then the country would be drowned with a sense of hopelessness and the thought that we had a chance to rid the country of corruption but it did  not happen.  Many will then also conclude that it is impossible to have reforms through peaceful means.

This Impeachment Court will likely not succeed in removing Corona as Chief Justice – even if he deserves to be removed. As a removal system for erring key officials, it is dysfunctionally ineffective. Having politician Senators as judges is simply not going to work. Partisan politics and personal agendas will simply prevent the gathering of 16 votes necessary to remove him from office. It did not work in Estrada’s impeachment trial. It’s not working now nor is it likely to work in future impeachment cases.

Given that the system is defective and that the Constitution need to be amended in order to fix a broken impeachment system, should the people then just accept the partisan and personal agenda based decision of eight or more Senator-judges – that will drastically affect the future well being of millions of Filipinos? The people and Aquino should refuse to be fools and fight tooth and nail for the common good.

If eight or more  Senators  acquit Corona despite enough evidence showing that he is not morally fit to continue on as Chief Justice, they will likely justify their decision by claiming that the prosecution did not do a good job. The prosecution’s competence or lack of it will be used as a convenient excuse to justify the unjustifiable even if  the real issues are Corona’s guilt and moral character and not the prosecution’s competence.

In the Estrada impeachment trial, which was watched closely on TV, radio and printed media – the people concluded in their hearts and minds – that Estrada was guilty as hell. Correctly, they resorted to defending the people and used their numbers  to forcibly excise him from office when they concluded that many of the Senators were betraying them. The country belongs to the people and not to a crooked few.

If the system does not work, the people must protect themselves and future generations using alternative means in removing erring officials.  People power is a legitimate means of protecting the people’s interest when the mechanisms of government fail to do so.

The US Constitution was written by very wise men who learned from the lessons of history that at any time, government can fall into the wrong hands and can be used to oppress and/or steal from the people. Modern examples are the governments of Marcos, Mugabe, Khadafy, Hussein, Ceseascu, Mubarak, etc. As such, they made sure that the people had the right to bear arms and wrote this in stone in the US Constitution – in case the people needed to defend themselves against the government.

The people are looking to President Aquino to provide strong leadership in this war against corruption and by implication against the Corona forces. He was elected by millions of people based on his anti-corruption promise and continues to maintain their trust.

Aside from this mandate, he also has the support of the United States and a sympathetic global community in the fight against corruption and the quest for a better life for all Filipinos.

Capitalizing on all of this support and utilizing his legitimate powers, aside from the impeachment process, Aquino can bring down erring Justices and judges using other legal means in order to clean up the judicial system.

For example. Corona apparently has enormous wealth. The fact is that at some points of time , he continuously was earning huge sums of money from  either legitimate or illegitimate sources – in order to acquire his various real property holdings and millions of peso and dollar deposits.  He obviously did not declare these incomes in his annual income tax papers. This alone  provides enough probable cause which opens him to all kinds of possible charges including  income tax fraud, misrepresentation, conversion, etc.

Many other legal tools can be used including the mutual legal assistance treaty with the U.S. to help criminally prosecute erring officials with assets in the U.S. Aquino’s government should use all of the resources available.

Aquino should also have the Department of Justice recruit many sharp idealistic young lawyer prosecutors and honest intelligent investigators – in order to successfully prosecute as many corrupt officials as possible. He needs this special team to rid the country of mass corruption. This is an absolute necessity to accomplish the difficult task of eradicating mass corruption. All this talk  about us being his bosses, “daang matuwid”, no “wang wang” – is just empty talk, meaningless slogans and vocal cosmetics – if no significant major speedy measurable reforms result.

Corona was elected as Chief Justice by only one person who is presently detained. His patroness former President GMA, who is widely perceived as corrupt – is accused of plunder and election sabotage among other serious charges. Millions of honest citizens elected Aquino whereas only one non-credible person  elected Corona.

Politically, Aquino cannot afford to lose to Corona in this war. If with all his powers as President and the support of the people and the international community, he is still unable to influence the removal of Corona from office through this impeachment process or by using other legitimate alternatives – he will lose face and credibility. People will lose their faith in him and see him as a weak leader. Then he and we are all screwed.

Neither Aquino nor the people can afford to lose in this all out war against corruption and mass poverty. So much is at stake. We need to end mass suffering and fight for a better future for all. It’s a now or never situation. To be involved in this effort to create a better Philippines if not a better world – is a sacred obligation to God, our fellowmen and ourselves.This endemic culture of corruption which permeates government and Philippine society from the very top to to the very bottom must be vaporized – eradicated – if we are to change the lives of millions of Filipinos for the better. Who else will be involved in this all-out war in the Philippines except us Filipinos wherever we are in this world?

Juan Ponce Enrile at 88

JPE at 88
JPE, at this stage of his life and career may now be thinking about the legacy he would leave behind for posterity after having been part of the nation’s history, sometimes as hero and sometimes as villain, but, in both cases, so clearly a conspicuous shine, either brightly or darkly in the political firmament of the country. In his youth he was outstandingly intelligent, a fact which his errantly fecund father could not help but recognize and took him in his aegis  and welcomed him into the respectability of his legitimate household. His academic record is par excellence having graduated with honours in the state university despite the fact he was a working student. His academic history is capped by having completed post graduate studies in Harvard.

In the impeachment trial it is disappointing to see him vacillate in his rulings, blowing hot and cold, favouring a technicality then going back to the search for truth modality expected of an impeachment court.  Perhaps he finds himself in a quandary in the desire to payback an old lawyer friend who was instrumental in exonerating him from rebellion charges in the dark distant past. This lawyer friend is none other than, Serafin Cuevas, the lead counsel for the defense of the impeached Corona. JPE has had moments forgetting his role as presiding officer of the impeachment court. The countervailing force may be his earnest desire to be seen in a heroic light, fair and truly the venerable statesman dispensing equitable justice towards all. After achieving power and pelf one aspires for honour, perhaps as an attempt to put an icing to cover the pragmatic and less noble ways one had employed to achieve wealth and influence.

Who would have thought that JPE would be such a wimp and allow his court to be overrun by the overbearing lady senator whose intractable behaviour remained unchecked throughout the whole impeachment proceedings. This weakness was carried over by his reluctance to fight for the integrity of his impeachment court by allowing the Supreme Court to defy the subpoena orders issued by his court. He reasoned out that he was avoiding a clash between the Supreme Court and the Senate which may lead to a constitutional crisis. He opted to play “chicken” in what was a confrontation between the wills of two powerful coequal branches of government citing the doctrine of “last to act” to avoid a collision. Both are governed by the same doctrine and the Supreme Court could have played “chicken” but was more unshakeable than the presiding officer of the impeachment court. What seemed apparent was his evasion of any conflict with the stalwarts of the defense either in admonishing the boorish loudness of Miriam, checking the loquacious but sagacious Cuevas both of whom have knowledge of the law in depths rivalling his own. There were times that one might suspect that he, not to be outdone, joined in the ego tripping of Cuevas and Miriam and lectured in a condescending fashion the members of the prosecution team.

What goes on in the mind of a political Titan in the twilight of his years: intimations of mortality, the life hereafter, divine justice, past glories, leaving a fine footprint in history and having a chance at greatness in the eyes of his countrymen? The other side of the coin is the infamy of being regarded as one of the dark lords during the reign of the dictator Marcos, as a lackey of the former dictator, an architect of the rapacious martial law regime and the gang leader of a coup attempt of the newly installed Cory government. He was a man disgraced but through the magnanimity and a non-rancorous Cory leadership and a nonindignant citzenry has allowed him to bounce back unfettered by his past sins and have risen to lofty enough aspirations, not as a president of the republic but as Senate President.

Is he his own man still or is he nothing more than just a befuddled old man torn between die-hard bad habits versus his concern about leaving a positive legacy for his name or even making peace with his maker before the curtains fall?

Worldly successful old men at their end of days often reflect on the biblical question; “What does it profit a man to gain the whole world but suffer the loss of his soul?” If “...loss of his soul” means having distanced himself from the truth (...the way and the light) then it is equivalent to the perdition of losing one’s desired place  in history and being in hell. JPE is faced with the question of holding on to his hubris or renounce it by a last act of avoiding a collision with what is right. It should be an easy one for JPE to decide.

The Scream

 

Miriam’s Moments of Madness

(sources:  spot.ph and other newspaper anecdotal accounts)

When the picture of Atty Vitaliano Aguirre appeared in the dailies looking miserable with his hands cupping his ears I was reminded of the paintings of Edvard Munch, a Norwegian symbolist painter, who explored the themes of love, fear, death, melancholia, and anxiety.One of the more popular paintings of Munch was entitled The Scream which depicted a man with hands cupping his agonized face shrieking in what seemed to be an excruciating experience. My analogy may be a tad exaggerated but so was Atty. Aguirre’s pose, but, it did convey the fact that Miriam may have overstepped her bounds by inflicting aural and emotional pain to the members of the prosecution panel.

As pointed out by several observers prior to the ugly confrontation between Miriam Santiago and Atty. Vitaliano Aguirre, the chief presiding officer of the impeachment court, JP Enrile seemed to have abdicated his role as moderator of the court and have allowed senator jurors, the lead defense counsel and even himself to debase and ridicule the prosecutors in the prosecution panel. The phrase “sober as a judge” has been given new meaning in the impeachment court when decorum and sobriety were thrown out of the window. The prosecution panel became daily fare for the sadistic penchant of some of the senator jurors, more specifically Miriam Santiago. She had taken fancy on Rep. Niel Tupaz who became her favourite target for her sarcastic and demeaning tirades, gave him a grade of 3 (conditional?) in case presentation with a few expletives thrown in. The portrayal of Niel Tupaz as a bumbling buffoon may have hurt his political reputation to the delight of his political foes, namely the Defensors of Iloilo to whom Miriam is closely related to.  The prosecution, an aggrupation of congressmen and a few private prosecutors might have been guilty of poorly crafting the impeachment papers and for ineptness on litigation procedures relative to legal lion like the lead defense counsel, but surely did not deserve the bamboozling that they got. It is to their credit that they have maintained their cool but not until Atty. Vitaliano Aguirre showed a quite passive protest gesture by cupping his ears. This was not allowed to be passed up by Senator Jinggoy Estrada, who made much of the gesture as an act of disrespect to the whole Senate impeachment court. Miriam made a motion to cite Atty. Aguirre in contempt which was followed forthwith by a seconding of the motion by Senator Pia Cayetano. The senators should have been more sober and judicious to just allow something so petty just pass and not make drama out of such a trivial matter, besides this was precipitated by Miriam’s scathing verbal abuse delivered in a paroxysm of rage for effect. While Senator Peter Cayetano concurred with the citing in contempt of Atty. Aguirre he couldn’t help himself but quip “having Atty Aguirre listen to Miriam for 24 hours would have been a fitting penalty”, wittingly or unwittingly agreeing that a voice like a screaming banshee is indeed intolerable.

JP Enrile has been praised for some judicious rulings in the course of the impeachment proceedings but, by and large, had made the impeachment rules as if it was a work in progress, going as his mood and spirit moved him. This led to inconsistent rulings to the dismay of the prosecution panel. He has been timid to chastise the uncouth behaviour of senator judges and has allowed himself to be cowed to go against the manifestations of a slick and savvy lead prosecution counsel (in an interview by Karen Davila of ANC’s Headstart the lead defense counsel Serafin Cuevas intimated that he once saved the chief presiding officer, JPEnrile from the case of rebellion filed by Cory’s government, also, Cuevas was the one swore in Arturo Tolentino as president as ploy so that Marcos can reclaim it when comes back from exile; now that explains a lot of things). The impeachment proceedings transformed itself into a three ring circus with feral felines clawing and roaring without a lion tamer is the fault of the presiding officer.

If it’s any consolation, the testy lady senator from Iloilo does not discriminate on the object of her affections or affectations. She has been on a ballistic spree and has been cutting down people on camera at every opportunity ever since god knows when.  

 Here are just a few examples of bad language from Miriam that would put Tiger Woods’ demeanour and gutter utterances, when trapped in a cavernous bunker, look innocent and benign:

GAGO

Miriam told the prosecution that they are all “gago” and that all that they have been doing are “kagaguhan”. This led to one of private prosecution lawyers, Vitaliano Aguirre, to be cited in contempt for cupping his ears to avoid the shrill screams of the enraged Miriam.

--Santiago reacting to state prosecutor’s cupping his ears while she was talking - From the Feb. 29 Impeachment proceedings

The fig leaf has to go

 Told UP students who conducted a survey (500 sample) to leave UP for displaying stupidity. The “Oblation” should take off his fig leaf, perhaps in reference to transparency when she asked them to reveal their backers. In the survey the results show that 75% voted to have Renato Corona resign from his post. 

--Santiago reacting to UP students’ survey on Renato Corona Feb. 29, 2012 Impeachment proceeding

Provocative Look

"May I request the Chief Justice to discipline. Or, at the very least, admonish and reprimand this group that sees itself so high above the law."

--Santiago to Chief Justice Hilario Davide, Jr. in 2001, during the impeachment trial of then President Joseph "Erap" Estrada. Santiago was irked by a group of spectators in the Senate gallery whom she claimed looked at her "provocatively." The spectators were asked to leave the gallery.

“Mga Talakitok”

"If you can't find enough number of senators as a bloc, then bumili ka doon sa (buy some at the) House. Mas marami sila, di mas mura sila. Para silang mga talakitok (There are a lot of them, so they're cheaper. They're like fish)."

--Santiago in full-on sarcastic mode in 2007, when her anti-billboard bill just got swept under the rug.

Don’t text While I Talk

"May I just say to those two girls there... Will you please stop smiling and looking at your cellphones. If you're not listening to my speech, please step out! Now! Nakaka-insulto ang ginagawa ninyo sa Senado ng Pilipinas (What you're doing is an insult to the Philippine Senate)."

--Santiago to two women in the Senate gallery during her 2009 privilege speech, which criticized government officials who appeared in infomercials. The two women were, of course, asked to leave the gallery.

God's Power of Attorney

"Who knows what God is? Who understands the mind of God? Who has a direct line to God so that he or she can ask God what is right or what is wrong. Pag sinabi mong Diyos at mali ang ginagawa ng iba ayon sa Diyos. Ikaw ang nagsasalita para sa Diyos. (You refer to God and you say there are other people doing things wrong according to God. Then you're the one speaking for God.) I would like to see the appointment papers of the Black and White people from God, signed by God, appointing them, giving them powers of attorney."

—Santiago to Dinky Soliman, on December 14, 2011, at what would have been the confirmation hearing of the latter as Department of Social Welfare and Development Secretary. Santiago had grilled Soliman and even asked her about her membership in the Black & White Movement, an organization of concerned citizens that was formed in 2005 primarily to call for the resignation of then president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.

 Pa Epal Epal

"Therefore it behooves us to start with this principle: 'Justice delayed is justice denied.' Huwag na tayong magpa-epal dito dahil nawawalan ng gana ang nanonood. Tama na 'yun. Dumaan na tayo doon (Let's stop grandstanding because viewers are losing interest. Enough of that. We've been through that)."

-Santiago on Day 5 of Chief Justice Renato Corona's impeachment trial, on January 24, 2012, somewhat warning everyone not to waste time with rhetorics. Shortly after this, Santiago ended up berating Rep. Niel Tupas Jr. for not immediately knowing how many witnesses the prosecution team was going to present.

Incompetent and “Duwag”

"Tila hindi n'ya naintindihan and ginagawa n'ya, in which case incompetent s'ya. O alam n'ya pero pibapabayaan n'ya, in which case duwag s'ya (It seems that he doesn't understand what he's doing, in which case he's incompetent. Or maybe he knows what he's doing but he's just letting things slide, in which case he's a coward)."

--Santiago talking about Department of Interior and Local Government Secretary Ronaldo Puno in 2009. She was incensed because she thought he couldn't control the so-called warlords in Maguindanao.

Flouting the Order of the Senate

"What kind of public officials are Secretary Gary Teves and Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez that they will not act on a cause of action that brings national embarrassment to the entire Philippine government in the international community? How dare they flout the order of the Philippine Senate?

--Santiago talking about Department of Finance Secretary Margarito "Gary" Teves and Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez in 2009. She was enraged that they had snubbed a Senate hearing on the blacklisting of three Filipino contractors for alleged corruption.

The Honourable Spittoon Face

“I spit on the face of Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban and his cohorts in the Supreme Court, I am no longer interested in the position [of Chief Justice] if I was to be surrounded by idiots. I would rather be in another environment but not in the Supreme Court of idiots.”

--Santiago reacting to her being disqualified from the nomination of candidates for Chief Justice position 

I Can Scream Can’t I

"Please don’t treat me as a mere observer. I am a judge in this proceeding! In any trial court, you should not speak, you should not take any behavior at all unless with the consent of the presiding judge. Don't drown me out by screaming in this courtroom! Only I can scream here and my fellow judges!"

Santiago berating private prosecutor Arthur Lim, on January 25, 2012. Santiago was irritated that Lim once again brought up issues that had already been decided on by the court.

Miriam’s Sensitive Ears

"What the heck is so important? Is it going to change the configuration of the astrophysical universe? This is the last warning. I will cite you for contempt!"

--Santiago to people whose cellphones kept ringing during a 2010 Senate session. Prior to the start of the session, Santiago had asked everyone to turn off their cellphones.

Gunfight at OK Corral

"I challenge the shadowy faces behind this corrupt media blitz. Come on you hypocrites, stop being sneaky. Be men, come out of the bushes, and reveal yourselves. Since you have chosen to engage in character assassination, let us have a showdown at the OK Corral in full view of the public."

--Santiago to her detractors at the height of the NBN/ZTE Broadband controversy in 2007.

I don’t think we will ever see Miriam donning repentant rags in atonement for her profanities and uncharitable behaviours against other people during the season of Lent. She said she is not changing her personality for the countless and nameless faces who disapprove the way she talks and fires up, especially against people who challenge her. ''I cannot please all other people all of the time. I'm only addressing my own constituents, the university students and urban professionals,'' she said, in characteristic “taray”, excluding the rest of the marginalized Filipinos who wallow in ignorance and poverty from the rest of what she considers as her kind of people; how elitist! what arrogance!

She said of her detractors, “This is a personality attack. They want me to change my personality. Hindi na possible 'yan because I was born this way,'' It’s just like saying that she was “pinanganak at pinaglihi sa sama ng loob”. This as an  excuse for antisocial boorishness, penchant for unbridled ad hominems and low regard of others including her peers is not acceptable and has no place in decent society. She should be exiled in an unpopulated desert island where cursing her existence and everybody else’s would be justified or encourage her to join an obscure cult whose abode would be the fastnesses of the mountain ranges of Afghanistan were communications would be limited to the occasional sounding of a highland horn blown by a Taliban terrorist.

The Corona Impeachment - 8th Week

The Prosecution Rests Its Case

 The impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato C Corona has been running for several weeks now and several revelations have come out as a result of the presentation of the evidences against the numerous allegations against the Chief Justice. Despite the wealth of information and the interesting developments that have evolved from the trial and the numerous fora in media I found myself reluctant to put down on paper my thoughts on the matter at this stage of the case. Prior to the impeachment hearing by the Senate and even at the early part of the impeachment proceedings I have poured out my thoughts, responded to other writers’ opinions through my blog, wrote letters to editors, commented on columns  and to those who were inclined to discuss it in e-mails, reactions to my blog and on discussions in person.

Perhaps it is the fact that so much has been aired in conventional media as well as in viral media that almost everything that can be said about the case has been thoroughly aired out from the chronicle of the events, rumours, opinions from every direction and the humorous sidelights that inevitably crop up in cause celebres.

 As an avid anti-Corona advocate I have shared the thoughts of the opinion leaders who personally indict and attack the Chief Justice at the instance of each new revelation of actuations that support the allegations of his betrayal of public trust and the culpable violation of the Constitution. I believe that at this point in time there is enough rope to hang the accused and that we should already stop the needless expense of time and money that the senators incur in the proceedings. It only takes one of the allegations to be proven to impeach the Chief Justice; as Ted Laguatan says the main question to be proven in all these is the fitness; the lack of it, of Renato C Corona to continue in office as chief magistrate, the answer to which is so patently obvious. From another perspective, there are those who say that we should stop the needless use of the citizens money spent in a “moro-moro” which they say will end up on an acquittal of the Chief Justice from any wrong doing evidence to the contrary notwithstanding. I have mentioned before that I have doubts that the Chief Justice will be acquitted by the senate jurors considering that the votes needed for his exoneration is just 8 out of the 23 senators who will vote. From the outset there were already 6 who are avowedly pro-Corona while the rest is a motley group who on the surface are pro Pnoy but with quite a number of them can be easily enticed mostly out of self interest. Would any kind of proof of the chief justice’s culpability no matter how true (short of smoking gun) convince enough senator jurors to vote against him? In the course of a few weeks of proceedings there are closet pro-Corona senators now coming out of the woodwork who signal their leanings by the way they question the prosecution and sometimes join in the bullying frenzy brought about by the haughtiness of some “know it all” senate jurors and the grandstanding of the chief counsel of the defense who is quick to display his knowledge of court procedures in the presentation of witnesses, the proper unfolding of evidence in an admissible and correct form, the appropriate legalese and other court room conventions. Former Justice Cuevas truly displays good knowledge of the law but he uses this knowledge to obstruct the emergence of the truth by preventing the prosecution to develop their case through continuous objection to anything, filibustering even, that the prosecutors have to say to break the train of thought of the exposition of their case. In most cases the defense lead counsel is technically correct and his objections are upheld by the presiding officer. The presiding officer, JP Enrile, on occasion joins the defense counsel in admonishing the prosecution panel for their ineptness. With the lead defense counsel using sarcasm to demean the less experienced prosecution panel members; Senator Miriam Santiago complements him with her histrionics, threats to cite in contempt the prosecutors and ad hominems clothed in colourful but sometimes quaint verbiage. After her arrogant and uncouth behaviour she hies off leaving the rostrum with a plea of temporary intensity causing a hypertensive condition.  This bashing of the prosecution panel should not have happened at all if the presiding officer was consistent on asserting that the impeachment court is “sui generis”, of its own class, and is substantially not governed by conventional litigation rules but by the procedures that they have formulated particular to the impeachment which are deemed supreme against the other branches of government insofar as the impeachment issues are concerned. The defense panel’s composition are made up of high powered lawyers and headed by a known expert lawyer and was a former justice of the Supreme Court whose knowledge of the law and its undertakings sometimes hold in awe even the presiding officer who more often than not sustains the numerous objections that he protests forgetting at most moments that the court he presides in allows common sense over the technicalities of litigation practiced in regular courts hearing criminal, corporate and cases other than impeachment. The presiding officer blew hot and cold with his rulings in the impeachment court. He is too much of a lawyer to disregard the caution to exercise common sense, prudence, conventional notions of right and wrong of the unique court and on occasion lapses into allowing the technicalities applied in litigation as the lead defense takes advantage of.

Just this afternoon we were made to witness important events within the impeachment court from outside.

The lead defense counsel, Justice Cuevas was doing the cross examination of the witnesses from media (ABS CBN) to authenticate the evidences (cd’s of events surrounding the TRO case).  It was a plain and simple process of identifying and authenticating the evidences presented but the lead defense counsel was looking for ways to discredit the witnesses to make it appear that their testimonies are hearsay and not from their own firsthand experience to render their evidences inadmissible. The ludicrousness of the cross examination reached its height when he grilled the cameraman about the workings of a TRO with his characteristic leer waiting to pounce on the hapless cameraman as soon as he makes an erroneous response. Clearly it’s a case of a slick lawyer trying a legal legerdemain which seemed to be the hallmark of the lead defense counsel’s litigation style.

There was a break on the proceedings and the coverage segued into a press briefing with Atty Midas Marquez making announcements at the Supreme Court. The first announcement had to do with the results of the recent bar exams. He was pleased to announce that the recent bar exams had a high rate success, achieving more than 31%. Personally, I feel that the last thing this country needs is another lawyer to join the burgeoning legal profession and the political field. Even before the impeachment case of Renato Corona I have always held most of them suspect of using the law to disadvantage other people and to protect the rights of robber barons, unscrupulous businessmen and institutions, warlords, and drug syndicates. The impeachment case has made this unfortunate feeling even more entrenched in my consciousness. What has crept out from the dark pits into the light of day are crimes brazenly committed because they have the protection of the very arbiters of justice in our land.

Atty Midas Marquez also announced that the Supreme Court, en banc, ruled that TRO to subpoena personnel of the high court is upheld and the administrative employees earlier subpoenaed and heeded the summons on an earlier date were instructed by the Supreme Court not to obey the summons.

Talk about creating a chilling effect which was oft used in defending the Supreme Court in earlier arguments; there could not be a more chilling effect than this to us the citizens where you have a Supreme Court who can just curl up like an armadillo whenever questioned for its actuations and decisions. How can an erring member of the Supreme Court be removed from office if they have the right to stonewall against ferreting evidence from any of their members in an impeachment court? The presiding officer said that their hands are tied because they have to respect the internal rules of the Judiciary the last one of which seemed to be a patched up job to ensure the further impregnability of the dark castle of justice. Despite the explanation made by the presiding officer it leaves the message that the impeachment court seems helpless to secure evidence from them even if subpoenaed. The presiding officer said that they cannot go against the internal rules of any of the branches of government but has the power to decide on the ultimate judgment of the fate Renato C Corona through the votes of two thirds majority of the senate assemblage.

The most surprising event of the afternoon is the pronouncement made by the prosecution to rest their case just on the bases of evidences presented from less than half of the items of listed in the original impeachment complaint. They feel that, thus far, they have presented enough evidence to convict the chief justice. It seems to be a pity that the other items of impeachment were abandoned even if they seem to be reasonable albeit badly crafted. One gets the feeling that the ploy of the other side to humiliate and demean their characters and professional stature through daily diatribes by the lady senator from Iloilo, the lead defense counsel, proCorona senator jurors and at times by the presiding officer himself.

Perhaps it is also the discernment of the prosecution that all the efforts, the money spent and the hours devoted pleading their case may not amount to anything but failure.

I have expressed even before that the impeachment case will not be judged by the merits of the case, political affiliations or love for the Filipino but on the consciences of the senate jurors. If this is so, the Filipino ends up being more wretched than before. Votes will be governed by selfish interests and the senators being what they are; rich, influential, powerful and enjoying the fruits of the current system need to preserve the status quo. The status quo is the goose that lays the golden eggs and very few senators of the land, from my knowledge, past and present, will be willing to bring down the axe on the neck of proverbial goose.

Corona's Speech at the Inauguration of Justicia Room

On the occasion of the blessing of the Justicia Room at the Ateneo Law School, Rockwell Center, Makati City, Chief Justice Renato C. Corona was given the privilege to deliver a speech in front of his contemporaries, former professors and the members of his defense panel in the impeachment case; quite a few, including the head of the defense panel, former justice Cuevas, were alumni of the Ateneo Law school. His speech touched on his academic experience in law school, early career and his topping of the bar examinations. He thanked his mentors for inspiring him to excel in his studies and for the school for moulding and inspiring him to rise to greater heights.

The Chief Justice is now the subject of an impeachment case which if found guilty of the accusations of graft and corruption; betrayal of trust and abuse of authority would have him removed from office, barred from assuming any governmental position as well as from private practice of the legal profession. As he said, “I have nothing to gain and everything to lose”.

The case, to say the least, is a celebrated one and is marred with controversy because of the issues that arose outside of the items in the impeachment case. What started out as a legal tussle involving former president, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and the head of the Department of Justice, Leila de Lima on the issuance of the Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) by the Supreme Court putting in abeyance the hold order barring the former president’s bid to travel for medical treatment outside the country is now a constitutional issue from whence, as suggested by the Corona advocates, a constitutional crisis can ensue.

What the Corona advocates are protesting about, among other things, is that the case has got to do with the question of supremacy among equal branches of government. Their contention is that the Executive branch with the help of the Legislature is imposing on the Supreme Court their authority, inclusive of the interpretation of the law which they insist is the sole responsibility of the Supreme Court. On the other hand the Senate avers that an Impeachment Court has the right to put to practice the rules of such a court as they see fit to allow the ferreting out of the truth unimpeded by the technicalities of regular court proceedings. The Senate Impeachment court is a lawful assemblage which is guaranteed by the constitution as an instrument to oust erring high officials of government. Fr. Joaquin Bernas, a respected constitutionalist and legal expert says that not one of the branches of government has supremacy over the other, only the constitution is supreme over them.

The general public seems to be opposed to the Corona cause which the Corona advocates dismiss as a result of propaganda that the Aquino government has successfully launched. The Corona group argue on the basis of legal tenets which seem to be appreciated only by the legal community—but even then, there are law practitioners who are as intensely opposed. Within the Ateneo alumni there are those who strongly oppose Corona; seeing the ousting of the Chief Justice as linchpin to the government’s effort to eradicate graft and corruption in government as it is intertwined with the wrong doings of the former administration; and there are those, legally inclined, who see it as a threat to the rule of law, unconstitutional and anarchy bound. For many officials and politicians, past and present, see it a threat to the status quo. The success of the eradication of graft and corruption is synonymous to the end of the cornucopia of plenty which they have enjoyed. 

The invitation to speak on the inauguration of the Justicia Room in the Ateneo Law School, needless to say, is a gesture reserved for those, who without a doubt, are honourable and with unimpeachable moral qualities all of which are still to be proved in the case of Corona. If by chance Corona gets impeached it would be a smear to the reputation of the Justicia Room whose inauguration was graced by his presence and oration. It would, also, be an embarrassment to the school to have granted such an honour to someone who might be proven to be an antithesis of what we uphold as the law.

Funny that Corona cites Dean Pompeyo Diaz who was spot on when he made the astute observation that among the many evil people in this world the most dangerous is the one who knows the law but has no conscience. It is a conclusion one can make upon seeing the proliferation of mercenary lawyers who make a living (a lucrative one) taking on hopeless cases which seem indefensible from the very start. What makes it deplorable is that these lawyers are among the most brilliant ones, bar topnotchers from the best of schools who know the law in depth; know them enough to twist it in favour of their clients through skilful manipulation of the technical aspects of the law. We’ve been through this discussion before, with the pro Corona advocates insisting on the literal application of the law without regard to the moral precepts that they are based on; without regard to recognizing what is patently evil and conventionally wrong—judging on the letter of the law and using procedures that ensure “due process” to free the obviously guilty Big Man of wealth and power but seldom protects Juan of humble circumstances and simple perspectives

.

The tact that the defense panel has taken is the suppression of evidences and testimonies through the knowledge of the intricacies of forensics, evidence presentation, admissibility of testimonies, correctness of form, legalese and just about anything that they can cite to bedevil the prosecutors who are generally inexperienced and ill trained in this art.  

   

Corona protests that he is being demonized by being depicted as abominable and unworthy. He said it didn’t matter because he alone knows the truth--but sharing the truth of his dollar accounts would have cleared him of the suspicions and the accusations; he has chosen to keep the truth to himself, thereby, strengthening the perception that he really has something to hide.

The impeachment court is sui generis, a unique assemblage of senator jurors who have been tasked to ferret out the truth without being hampered by the technicalities of a regular court—a proceeding that could easily be understood by most of the constituents; relying on what is commonly accepted as fair and judicious assessments of the facts presented; a people’s court, for the lack of a better term.. The judgment would rely on what are perceived as conventionally correct and truthful minus the legal gobbledegook. A court where Juan would have a chance of getting redress.

Corona wanted to make heroic his act by saying that he was willing to lose everything for something he believes in. He should realize that this is his comeuppance; he had it coming to him. The prospect of losing everything stares him in the face but it is not because of defending what he believes in but due to dishonesty, abuse of position and total loss of integrity as Chief Justice.

P.S.

An e-mail from DJ de Jesus (grupo58) explained that Corona was not the keynote speaker but volunteered to speak when guests were invited to do so.

from DJ de Jesus:

"The event at which he spoke was the rededication of the Justicia Room, which is adorned by portraits of the Justices of the Supreme Court who are also alumni of the law school, from Teehankee to Corona.  Other justices present were invited to speak, but no one (except Corona) came forward to take the floor.  Perhaps, the organizers should have anticipated that Corona would use the event to bolster his side on the impeachment case.  His presence alone should have raised the alarm.  Wnen Fr. Bernie criticized Corona in his PDI column for accepting the "midnight appointment,"Corona reportedly declared that he would never step into the Ateneo again, while Fr. Bernie remained there.

 

In any event, the impression created in the media that the Ateneo invited Corona to deliver the keynote address at the event, in order to give him a platform to argue his case, I have it on good authority, is mistaken."

Reprint of The issue is Corona’s guilt, not the prosecutors’ competence By Ted Laguatan

No Limitation

The issue is Corona’s guilt, not the prosecutors’ competence

By Ted Laguatan

INQUIRER.net

11:31 pm | Saturday, February 4th, 2012

  share  

Like many who follow the Corona impeachment trial, I am often frustrated by the obvious lack of competence shown by the prosecution team. Repeatedly, they fail to do what needs to be done. They are often unprepared, show sophomoric exposure to rules of evidence, lack tactical skills and fail to anticipate that their own witness might turn hostile against them.

But from something bad, something good can sometimes happens.

Let’s take the last point. They brought in the Megaworld witnesses to support their argument that Corona did not declare the correct value in his SALN and to obliquely attack him by showing that he was given an extraordinary 40% discount — subliminally suggesting that this was a bribe.

They should have anticipated that the Megaworld witnesses could easily turn hostile. Certainly, Megaworld would look bad and could be subjected to criminal penalties if they gave the impression that the 40% discount was a bribe.

Predictably the witnesses justified the discount: They claimed the unit was water damaged due to a typhoon and that the economy was bad that year forcing them to sell at a whopping 40% reduction.

But as fate would have it, the error of the prosecution may result in some pay dirt. Senator Sergio Osmena intuitively has requested for detailed records of the purported typhoon damage and possible insurance compensation to Megaworld if any.

The financial records of Megaworld also indicate huge profits for the year 2008, the year the unit was sold.  Moreover, the other comparable units were sold for the market price of around P10 million or more. The Megaworld witnesses also indicated that this was the last unit    available unwittingly indicating the brisk sale of units.

If Megaworld is not able to persuade the public that the reasons they expressed for the price reduction are true – that would make this transaction very suspicious.

On another point, the issue of unjust enrichment or unexplained wealth  would have been a logical and very relevant issue against Corona. That alone, if proven, would mean that he is morally unfit to continue being Chief Justice.

Why the prosecution gave up so easily in allowing the defense’s request to exclude this allegation and supportive evidence indicates poor thinking and technical incompetence. They could have scored heavily if they were allowed to delve into the issue of Corona’s alleged ill gotten wealth.

Nevertheless, evidence consisting of ownership of various properties in Corona’s name and his children’s names which could not be justified by his reported income nor by his     relatives’ incomes — are quite damaging.

These real property ownerships and income reports were presented as evidence by the   prosecution to show that Corona devaluated his assets or omitted important information  in his annual SALN (Statement of liability and Net Worth).

Even if presented not for the purpose of proving ill gotten wealth — inevitably, by implication, like it or not, these series of evidence do suggest that Corona was purchasing various properties in his name and in his children’s name utilizing unexplained money sources. Of course, his lawyers will be given a chance to explain these irregularities.

These eye opening revelations should open the gates for serious consideration by the Ombudsman’s office and the Department of Justice to determine if enough probable cause exists to file various separate criminal charges against Corona and other Justices and  judges with similar indications of probable corruption. Again, they will be afforded due process rights to prove their innocence.

If President Aquino and all of us really and seriously want to clean up corruption for the good of all — we must support all legitimate and legal means to carry out this sacred goal. Clean government will lead to a better life for all.

The prosecution is not exactly a dream team but I have no doubt that they sincerely want to do their best – warts and all. Unlike the defense lawyers whose daily bread comes from doing trials, the prosecutors are limited in trial experience.

A common error which amateur lawyers make: They do not carefully double check the accuracy of their data.

To show the public that they have a strong case, prior to the trial, based on incomplete data — in their enthusiasm — the prosecutors negligently rushed to announce on TV and other media that Corona had some 45 properties.  It turned out later that only some 24 properties were involved.

While those numbers by themselves should be more than enough to place Corona in a bad light, still to be fair, the prosecutors deserve to be rebuked for this negligent presentation.

The majority of the viewing public who want the truth to come out cheer when Senators take up the slack to elicit vital information from witnesses that the prosecutors fail to do.

Unavoidably, the Senator-Judges reveal their positions when they speak. The defense accuses Senator Frank Drilon of being biased on the side of the prosecution and wants him to recuse himself from the trial. On the other hand, the prosecution could say the same thing about Senator Joker Arroyo. Senator-Judges on one side or another have to reveal their cards sooner or later. This is the nature of this impeachment beast.

Another Senator, Gringo Honasan, wants to keep the public from trying the case by muzzling each side’s spokespersons — a clear violation of Constitutional free speech rights. Let the people get as much truth as possible even if mixed with some bovine dung now and then. Adults should be able to decide for themselves who’s telling the truth.

The issue in this impeachment trial is not the competence or incompetence of the prosecution or the defense. The real issue is whether or not Corona should be impeached for repeatedly protecting the interests of the Arroyos above that of the people.

The main focus of this impeachment trial should be on the interest of the people. Specifically, this means having a judicial system with honest fair judges  who provide true justice to the people.

The personal interests of President Aquino, Corona, the Senator-Judges, the Congressperson-prosecutors, the defense lawyers and whoever else – are only relevant here  in so far as they help to promote the people’s interest.

We are a nation in continuous mourning. One third of our people go to bed hungry at night. Mothers and fathers quietly sob watching their sick children waste and eventually die because they cannot afford to buy medicines. Many innocent people are in jail because they cannot afford lawyers. Young people become victims of human traffickers. So many leave their loved ones to work in far hot and cold countries with strange cultures – braving terrible loneliness and all kinds of dangers and risks.

It does not have to be like this. If we have a clean honest efficient government, we can change the Philippines.

Note: Atty. Ted Laguatan is based in the San Francisco area. He is honored by the California State Bar as one of only 29 lawyers officially certified as Expert-Specialists continuously for more than twenty years. He also does human rights and complex litigation cases involving accident injuries and wrongful death. Email laguatanlaw@gmail.com Tel             650 991-1154     

The Corona Impeachment Thus Far

There are just too many technically “innocent” evil men in our society all because of the ability of seasoned lawyers to find loopholes in our legal system and apply them to exonerate persons who obviously are guilty but by some legal sleight of hand are allowed to get away scot-free. As if this is not enough the influence of well placed politicians and high government officials are used to overturn honestly arrived at decisions of the lower courts.

The impeachment court trying the Chief Justice Corona is made up of senator jurors who want to let the truth come out. At the least this is how the impeachment court is defined and at this stage the presiding officer, JP Enrile, seems to be conducting a fairly liberal procedures of the impeachment court. How this will be applied as we get into the crunch point of the proceedings remains to be seen.

Legal luminaries like former justice Cuevas, Dindo de los Angeles and a battery of lawyers who are deemed experts at litigations are pitted against a prosecution panel of congressmen made up of lawyers and non lawyers who hardly have had court experience. Even the outside help from practicing lawyers are not the best that money can buy compared to the powerhouse team of the defense panel. Former Chief Justice Cuevas knows this full well and is having a grand time bamboozling the lightweight opposition to submission. In his frequent objections he makes fun of the lawyers of the other side most of whom were his former students. He facetiously chastises them for being absent in class or for not being attentive during his lectures and the objection almost always turns into a lecture or a remedial review of legal academic subjects. The impeachment court recognizes this and has set up their own rules which may not be constrained by legal protocols, narrow and stretched jurisprudence and other legal technicalities. In some cases the truth is caged by the restrictions of the procedures that are supposed to guard against the curtailment of the rights of the individual often at the expense of abusing of the rights of the larger public or the rest of society. What is inherently evil and what is patently incorrect are sometimes protected by the very laws that are supposed to ensure the reign of civility and morality in our society. How often do we find lawyers and opinion leaders leaning towards the literal applications of the law without regard to the moral precepts which served as bases for such laws?  

Coronarroyo advocates from the senate juror ranks who were shy at the onset are slowly coming out of the woodwork to show their leanings and have joined the bamboozling frenzy of the relatively ill equipped lawyers of the prosecution. Thus far I have already counted seven senator jurors who would be on the side of the Chief Justice needing only one more to swing it in favour of the defense. The feisty now turned testy Miriam Santiago has joined the fray and with her usual bully tactics has irritated, sometimes intimidated the prosecution panel and most of the audiences with her mindless and bombastic tirades. 

I hate to say it but the Senate is not exactly the institution where one finds the most upright of persons. A swing vote is all that is needed and I fear that the price for that will be a tantalizing one when dangled.  All the more Justice Cuevas will be emboldened by this show of support and we can be assured of continuous pedantic filibustering from the head of the defense panel. 

Of late, Cuevas has leaked the information (now denied) that he has been offered a deal by Malacanan which involved his resignation as head of the defense panel in exchange for the dropping of the extortion case against NBI Director Gatdula who happen to be a co-Iglesia member. As Ted Laguatan said, this is nothing but ego tripping for Cuevas and using dirty tricks that puts Malacanan in a bad light. Cuevas has been irresponsible in this recent ploy of his and the INC higher ups are concerned that they have been dragged in an inadvertent light into the controversy.

In the latest impeachment proceedings, Megaworld head of Marketing Noli Hernandez testifies that the 40% reduction/discount is a justified one because of the expediencies surrounding it. It should not have surprised anyone that the prosecution witness would turn “hostile” because anything that they say which proves that they have given special treatment to the Coronas in the purchase of their property will be inimical to them. Being a seasoned Marketing executive he was quite glib and adroit in his testimony, a fact which did not escape the attention of Senator Osmena. His story of how the 40 % (P10 million) reduction/discount was arrived at seemed stretched and contrived at certain points. The cost reduction from the list price of P24 million of the Bellagio top penthouse to P19 million, a P5million reduction, was due to the fact that it was a water damaged unit (typhoon inflicted). The second, which was purported as a  discount of 15% (a little less than P3 million) was for cash discount. The rest has been explained away as pressure coming from the softness of the market after the global financial crisis which sent the financial giants like Lehman Bros., Merryl Lynch, JP Morgan, et al in dire straits. The testimony of Noli Hernandez gave rise to several questions such as the insuring of the unit at construction stage and the insurance claims, the selling of a damaged unit involving liabilities, the cost of rehabilitating the water damaged unit, the strength of the typhoon (as insinuated by Jinggoy Estrada), the existence of an engineering department’s report. Senator Manny Villar, an expert in the real estate and condominium industry cited that 40% discounts are not exactly unheard of because SMDC (Henry Sy) granted a 40% discount to anyone interested in buying SMDC condos. It of course does not bolster the case of the 40% reduction/discount given to Corona because Megaworld had the offer only to a specific individual and not to all. SMDC must have overestimated what the market can bear with their initial price offers and corrected it by granting the substantial discounts to everyone. Hernandez also offered the reason of market softness due to the financial debacle, however, the annual financial statement belies his claim because the company experienced a very profitable year and there was really no need to bring down prices for their units on sale and the specific penthouse unit sold to Corona. The executives of Megaworld Messrs. Ng and Hernandez were understandably cagey and a bit evasive in their statements. Their allegation that they were separately not aware of information with regard to pricing and financial deals is pure fiction. Anyone who has worked with organizations the size of Megaworld would know that executive committee or management committee members would share an awareness of vital information. If you were to ask Mr. Ng about the prices of their units he would easily rattle them off from the top of his head and Mr Hernandez would surely consult the head of finance for deals involving these amounts, just to cite examples of sharing of information at the top.

I have always said that it is almost a certainty that a man of humble resources and simple perspectives will not be served justice while somebody who has a strong support base of money to afford the best lawyers and media mercenaries; and extensive influence is expected to have the odds in his favour for exoneration.

So where lies the truth? So where’s justice?

De Quiros said in an article that the common Juan finds it difficult to find justice because the system favours the elite and that they are left with no other recourse but to seek justice elsewhere by taking the law into their own hands, later as a fugitive of justice vengefully wreaking havoc to society or as an insurgent joining the NPAs.