Corona on Trial

Discover Yahoo! With Your Friends

 

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

    Philippine chief judge mistrial strategy bared

    Manila (Philippine Daily Inquirer/ANN) - By accusing certain senators of being biased against him, Philippine Chief Justice Renato Corona is setting the stage for his eventual declaration of a "mistrial ", Senator Sergio Osme?a III said Tuesday.

    "I know their strategy. Their strategy is to declare there is a mistrial. There¿s a pending TRO [temporary restraining order] that the Supreme Court has yet to decide on. That¿s part of the game. We can handle that, " Osme?a told reporters after the ongoing impeachment trial of Corona.

    On Monday, Corona filed a supplementary petition with the high court to stop the trial, claiming that certain senators have lost the cold neutrality of an impartial judge and acted as partisan prosecutors by causing the production of documents and eliciting testimonial evidence favoring the prosecution.

    Corona accused Senators Franklin Drilon, Osme?a, Francis Pangilinan, Teofisto Guingona III and Alan Peter Cayetano of violating his right to due process.

    Corona last week asked the Supreme Court to stop the impeachment proceedings, saying that the articles of impeachment against him were defective for lack of probable cause.

    Old hat

    Drilon, a member of President Benigno Aquino III's Liberal Party, said Corona¿s charges were old hat.

    "That¿s an old issue. They raised the same issue in the motion to inhibit. Obviously they realized that it had no basis. Now they incorporate it as part of their petition to stop this court from proceeding with the impeachment. Absolutely no basis. The senator-judges are allowed questions and by our rules, the standard is that we observe political neutrality, " he said.

    Drilon said the Senate impeachment court was a class of its own. "We are governed by the rules of the impeachment and insofar as neutrality is concerned. Our rules provide that the standard is political impartiality and this impeachment court is superior in adopting its own rules, which cannot be inquired or interfered with by the Supreme Court, " he said.

    Pangilinan said there "seems to be a concerted effort on the part of the defense to cast aspersions on the integrity and fairness of the impeachment court. "

    Answering charges

    Pangilinan noted that the defense panel earlier accused the Palace of offering senator-judges P100 million in exchange for voting against the high court¿s TRO on the opening of Corona¿s dollar accounts.

    "(Corona) should just focus on answering the charges rather than publicly attacking the impeachment proceedings, " he said. "Contrary to his allegations about the trial being a fraud, the vote of 13 to 10 is proof that the impeachment court is mindful of the concerns raised by the defense. "

    The Senate voted on Monday to respect the Supreme Court TRO on the opening of Corona¿s dollar accounts. The TRO was requested by

    Philippine Savings Bank where the Chief Justice also maintained peso bank accounts.

    Pangilinan said the senator-judges "will decide on the basis of evidence and what we believe is best for the country and not on the basis of political alliances or biases. "

    Search for truth

    Guingona, also a member of Aquino¿s Liberal Party, described Corona¿s accusation as "unfortunate. "

    "We¿re here in search of truth, accountability and transparency, " he told reporters. "We¿re just in search of the truth. "

    Emboldened

    Osme?a said he had to grill bank officials on Corona¿s accounts to bring out the truth. "I see some gaps and I felt that in the interest of truth, which is the whole purpose of this trial, we have to bring out whatever documents pertaining to the accounts identified already. "

    The senator said the Senate vote to respect the TRO may have emboldened the Chief Justice.

    "Of course ... The Senate has decided that it will submit itself to interlocutory orders from the Supreme Court, particularly when it pertains to the

    Bill of Rights. That¿s fine by me. Rules are rules and we will abide by them, " Osme?a said.

    A legal staff of Senator Alan Peter Cayetano said he had nothing to respond to because the senator was mentioned only in passing in Corona¿s petition.

    Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile said the impeachment court¿s vote in favor of the TRO was not necessarily a prelude to how it would decide on the fate of Corona.

    "That is not an indication of anything yet, " he told reporters, noting that the matter of the TRO was "just an issue. "

    "So when we go on the merits, there¿s a distinction between judgment on the merits and decision on interlocutory matters, " he said.

    Enrile, who turned 88 Tuesday, joined 12 other senators in voting to respect the TRO.

    How do you feel about this article?

     

    72 comments

    • nick  •  Manila, National Capital Region  •  3 months ago
      WHAT I SEE HERE IS A TAINTED JURY.. THE IMPEACHMENT BODY VOTED 13 TO 10 IN FAVOR OF RESPECTING THE TRO.. A FARSH BY ANY MEANS.. THIS VOTE CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE SENATOR JUDGES ARE TAINTED IN MY HUMBLE OPINION.. WHY DO U NEED A VOTE TO FOLLOW THE LAW OF THE LAND??? THE TRO TO ME SHOULD HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED AS SACH, AND IF THEY DID NOT AGREE...THE SENATORS SHOULD HAVE APPEALED.. NOW THERE IS DOUBT OF A FAIR IMPEACHMENT TRIAL IN MY MIND.. PLS NOTE.. IF A CONVICTION HAPPENS...DO IT LEGALY!!! NOT POLITICALLY OR TRIAL BY MEDIA... OR FOLLOW THE DESIRES OF THE PARTY LINE...DISGRACE IS FOR THE PROSECUTION TEAM
      • Orville 3 months ago
        nick, you should scrutinized yourself. binuto mo ba si corona para maluklok sa supreme court para mangulimbat ng pera ng bayan. naintindihan mo ba na ang impeachment court can be organized if there is a caused to impeach people like corona na corrupt at partial sa pag dispensed ng fair judgment. dapat iyan ang ipasok sa utak mo na kulang sa information. hindi mo ba narinig sa radio at sa tv na nagpakalat ng information katulad ng pagsuhol sa mga senador ang mga maka-corona kaya hindi mo dapat sabihin na trial by publicity which you heard from brenda santiago . alam ng karamihan na mga Filipino na people can do anything to remove mga mangulimbat sa kaban ng bayan at yung abusado sa katungkulan. hindi mo ba alam na dahil sa pera eh pinabawi ni corona ang decision ng supreme court sa kaso ng mga pal employees dahil sa pera. keep your mind open and your eyes wide open.
      • jon 2 months ago
        Nick, your mind is confused on the TRO vote. You need to study.
    • Sean  •  Quezon City, National Capital Region  •  3 months ago
      so ngayon may idea na ang mga magnanakaw sa bansa na magopen na lang sila ng dollar account para hindi masilip ang mga assets nila. hay... no wonder ang ibang neighboring countries natin mauunlad samantalang before ang bansa natin ang maunlad. meron nga tayo democracy pero amf, ang mga officials natin mga recycled and old farts. we need something new. a new government and new government officials. eh kung ung mga million million na kinurakot nyo dinonate nyo n lng sa mga charities or medical missions sa mga remote areas eh di nakatulong pa kayo sa bansa mga balimbing..... mga nurses natin 9-12k lng sinasahod per month tapos kayo million million nakukurakot per year.... mahiya naman kayo sa mga average working pinoys....
    • joel  •  3 months ago
      Boys and Girls of the World.. Go ahead lets impeach CJ Corona... but ito ang akin if i may, after a year if Hacienda Luisita is given back to its owners (aquino's and conjuancos) then hope you realize that what i have been telling you is right...The whole clan is pressuring the President so that they can reverse the ruling of the Supreme Court in giving the Hacienda to the farmers... YAN ANG MATUWID NA DAAN!!!
      • Joseph Depompa 2 months ago
        I believe that the surpreme court will do whats right when they feel the time is right. The land distrabution will take place in the end. the surpreme court I feel now holds up on voting to deny any request to change the approved settlement only to make the president look bad during thier close friends impeachment trail that is all it is. In the end the SC knows better then to go back against their ruling giving the lands to the farmers.
      • Tet 2 months ago
        it's odd and rather unfortunate that the Palace has opted to keep silent on the Hacienda Luisita angle of P-Noy's fanatical zeal to remove the Chief Justice and virtually bully the other SC magistrates...
      • Martin 2 months ago
        The Cojuangcos will disown Aquino if they loose the Hacienda while he is president.
    • tenderwhisper  •  Manila, National Capital Region  •  3 months ago
      mistrial? to senators drillon, osmena, pangilinan, alan cayetano, ..check yourselves- ur indeed acting the way you are ---senators conducting a public inquiry...tama di kayo dapat tawaging judge because you don't deserve to be called one...anyway, sitting as judge in an impeachment proceeding is different from a senator conducting public inquiry...sa senado, most of you are abusado...you are over reacting to everything you do - in this impeachment court, you cannot act and behave the way you like because there is a risk of trampling on the rights of the accused guaranteed under the constitution... the BILL OF RIGHTS is the WEAPON of the ACCUSED AGAINST THE ABUSES that the GOVERNMENT may/shall commit in the course of performance of its duties or assertion of alleged right. come on mga senador especially drillon, we are supposed to be living in a civilized society..and we expect you all to behave the way you should be as required under the law and ethical standards, NOT as a committed member of your party...
      as people, we have placed in the constitution the duty to the supreme court to CHECK these abuses that ANYONE OF YOU IN THE GOVERNMENT may commit... this is under the SC expanded power of judicial review - to take cognizance of justiciable issues which precisely relate to 'ABUSE OF DISCRETION AMOUNTING TO LACK OR EXCESS OF JURISDICTION" ....justiciable questions are issues involving a “real and substantial controversy” that can be resolved by a conclusive decision of a court of law. in short, these are questions “appropriate for judicial determination”. NOT because the senate is sitting as an impeachment court having the sole power and jurisdiction to try impeachment cases, it can absolutely do whatever it wants to do...that it can disregard the exclusionary rules - the rules on evidence which is well accord to the the bill of rights? the rules on evidence are premised on the bill of rights..and whenever there is trampling of the rights of the accused, the SC may always be called to protect the ordinary juan dela cruz's right/s.
      sana the press should also observe the ethical standards of their profession...kasi may mga commentator na puro misleading ang sinasabi lalo na ang channel 2...(most of us and my friends stopped watching channel 2!!)....
      so our advise to the biased senators, you don't want mistrial, then you better observe impartiality...obvious naman si drillon at ibapa..hindi naman kami mga tanga...si drillon nga you can always see in his face the partiality..panisi ngisi pa..tama ba yan?....we cannot tolerate that behavior...
      • Ted 3 months ago
        Well said Tenderwhisper. Huwag kang magalala hindi na ako boboto ulit for drilon, osmena, pangilinan and cayetano. They lack impartiality - that is why ganito itong mga batas natin....hindi patas.
      • Brenz 2 months ago
        Ha! Talk about an abuse of power? Look closely, what is the CJ doing?! Explain how he got his wealth when he filed his saln under oath stating he has no other sources of income except his salary?! What "bill of right" did you want him to exercise - the right to theft, abuse, and lie to the people of the Philippines?! If thieves in another country get their hands cut off and feet amputated, then, it feels just about right to impeach Corona!
      • roberto 2 months ago
        You said it very well Tenderwhisper. That is PNOY politics. Dami dito sa PNAS ganyan, TRAPO baga?
    • Jo  •  3 months ago
      Our constitution has been created to protect the rights of our people.

      Some senators-judges have been abusive to their line of questioning and recommending sub-poenas to people as witnesses in this impeachment trial. Up to what extent does the impeachment trial will uphold in securing the truth but at the same time respecting the rights of accused and the witnesses w/o eroding the very core of our constitution?

      The witnesses are treated as collateral damage. One way or the other, they will be sued for this because of violation of certain law which senators "don't seem to care about"..

      It turns out that once the sub-poenas have been granted, witnesses are being presented, documents have bee submitted, NO sufficient evidences have been found to collaborate the prosecution team's allegation. Why does the impeachment court allowing this?

      Our government is wasting millions for nothing. What a shame!!

      How can we say that we are protecting the rights of our people if some of our senators do not respect our constitution??
      • PDPH '69 3 months ago
        Can't you see what Corona doing to his ill-gotten wealth. He is transferring all the pesos into the dollars account by converting it. All peso account become Zero.
      • Rio 2 months ago
        @PDPH'69 masyado kang ignorante. Komo narinig mo na hindi basta-basta maoopen ang dollar account naisip mo ang ganyang extremely weak strategy. Nakita na dapat yan sa updates ng peso accounts nya kung ginawa niya yan at magiging extreme issue of doubt yun laban sa kanya. Hindi siya kasintanga mo para gawin niya ang ganyang move.
    • joel  •  3 months ago
      hindi ako lawyer but this is my humble opinion. If one should file charges against someone, it should be written and filed with very specific items you are accusing him of. If i say, Pres.A is corrupt, and i have the ability to provide pork barrels to the 188 lowlife congressmen, can i already file an impeachment case against him? Concreteness of the allegations will provide establishment of facts that will help you determine whether the accused is guilty or not. Hindi tulad nito na - Betrayal of Public Trust daw then buksan ang bank accounts nya dahil may makikita tayo dyan. People - this is one unfair Trial. How can us Filipinos allow this? Please do not let yourselves be dictated upon by those who want control over you. Let your values help us discern the way which is right and wrong. The fact remains that all these politicians are after their own interests. S.Korea did it in 10 years... why cant us Filipinos do it also... As a citizen, lets start doing our share to give examples to our lawmakers... kung jeepney driver ka.. start stopping in jeepney stops and drop passengers on the side of the road, kung bus driver ka.. start maintaining your speed to safety and observe traffic rules. Kung pasahero ka, start lining up and wait in designated stops.. kung politician ka.. use your budget wisely to help your constituents.. PROGRESS WILL BE REALIZED IF ALL THESE SMALL THINGS HAPPEN ALL AT THE SAME TIME.
    • albert127  •  3 months ago
      all technical strategies be applied to show that chief justice is telling the truth when he states that he will defend himself till his last breath.
    • EdF  •  3 months ago
      if cj is telling the truth he must not be a pinoy.
    • Cesar  •  Manila, National Capital Region  •  3 months ago
      Ano nanaman yan kuya?
    • Cesar  •  Manila, National Capital Region  •  3 months ago
      What will they think of next?
    • A Yahoo! User  •  Manila, National Capital Region  •  3 months ago
      enator Enrile, take note of this US Supreme Court Decision, as it should apply here since the Philippine Constitution is largely based after the US Constitution:

      Nixon v. United States, 506 U.S. 224 (1993),[1] was a United States Supreme Court decision that determined that the question of whether the Senate had properly "tried" an impeachment was a political question, and could not be resolved in the Courts.
      Facts
      In this case, a United States federal judge named Walter Nixon was convicted of committing perjury before a grand jury, but refused to resign from office even after he had been incarcerated. Nixon was subsequently impeached by the United States House of Representatives, and the matter was referred to the United States Senate for a vote on Nixon's removal. The Senate appointed a committee to hear the evidence against Nixon, and then report to the body as a whole. The Senate then heard the report of the committee and voted to remove Nixon from office. Nixon contended that this did not meet the constitutional requirement of Article I that the case be "tried by the Senate."
      Holding
      The majority opinion (the court's decision was unanimous, although four separate opinions were published) held that the courts may not review the impeachment and trial of a federal officer because the Constitution reserves that function to a coordinate political branch. Article I. Sec. 3 of the Constitution gave the Senate the "sole" power to "try" impeachments. Because of the word "sole" it is clear that the judicial branch was not to be included. Furthermore, because the word "try" was originally understood to include fact-finding committees, there was a textually demonstrable commitment to give broad discretion to the Senate in impeachments.
      Furthermore the Framers believed that representatives of the people should try impeachments and the Court was too small to justly try impeachments. Also, the judicial branch is "checked" by impeachments, so that judicial involvement in impeachments might violate the doctrine of separation of powers.
      The Court further ruled that involving the judiciary would prevent finality without clear remedy, and bias post-impeachment criminal or civil prosecutions which the Constitution explicitly allows.
      Justices White, Blackmun and Souter concurred, but voiced concern that the Court was foreclosing this area for review. While they found that the Senate did all that was constitutionally required, they were concerned that the Court should have the power to review cases where the Senate removed an impeached officer summarily without a hearing, or through some arbitrary process, such as "a coin toss".
    • Edwin  •  3 months ago
      Tandaan nyo ang mga balimbing...Franklin Drilon, Sergio Osmena, Francis Pangilinan, Teofisto Guingona III and Alan Peter Cayetano..iboto nyo ulit para wala ng pag-unlad ang bansa.
    • Reggie  •  Manila, National Capital Region  •  3 months ago
      lalong gulgulo pag nag attempt lang man ang defense magpamistrial
    • Lyzzete  •  3 months ago
      Mr. President sabi mo hindi ka nakikialam sa caso ni CJ Corona eh bakit ka nagsasalita sa harap ng mga studyante ngayong umaga? what are you trying to imply? na mag agree sa yo ang studyante? kumukuha ka ng simpatya? hellooooooo!!!
    • Jo  •  3 months ago
      People are going to remember the names of Senators Franklin Drilon, Osme?a, Francis Pangilinan, Teofisto Guingona III and Alan Peter Cayetano who have been biased in this impeachment court. People are not stupid enough to continue believing all the lies of the prosecution team.

      45 properties, narrowed into 21

      Authetic Bank Documents of Corona but what do we get? PSB said it was fake because they couldn't disclose it publicly due to bank secrecy law. How can the prosecution team tell if the bank documents they have are authentic or not if they haven't seen Corona's bank accounts? I bet all of those documents are true copy produced in Morayta.

      Senators, stop being being so partisan, stop protecting your agenda, stop thinking about your pork barrels. People know
    • Lyzzete  •  3 months ago
      My God Pinoy is talking again in public! about the CJ Corona!! Pinoy maghunos dili ka naman!!! wag mo sirain si CJ Cororna sa mag speaking engagement mo!!baka sa yo bumaliktad , sa totoo lang binoto kita pero hindi ko alam na masyado kang bingatibo!!! naawa kami sa yo!! anong klase kang President gumising ka naman dapat ang mga sinabi mo ay tungkol sa mga ginawa mo sa mga apektado ng lindol at baha sa visayas at mindanao.. pabayan nmo na ang Corona's case to the Impeachment court!!!
    • alicia  •  Manila, National Capital Region  •  3 months ago
      pahiralin ang concience huwag yong dikta ng isang taong gustong maghiganti lamang. Tama ang unang nagcomment matalino na ang mga tao ngayon dinamin iboboto yong hindi naging patas ang judgement nila sa kasong ito.Ang prosecutors ang sunod ninyo kung gusto ninyo talagang maging matuwid ang daan,pero walang liko palaging tuwid pag sa kakampi..Palaging pinaktatakpan pagkakampi na ang nasasabit.at gumagawa ng mali tulad ni Llamas anong nangyari pinagtanggol pa siya ng ....
    • Martin  •  Dhahran, Saudi Arabia  •  2 months ago
      Dirty Politics as usual....Just once I would like to see a Drilion or Osmena.act fairly and honestly in life. Both are just so corrupt...why do we vote these guys into office all the time? I think we always vote for the family name and not the persons character, ethics and hard work.
    • Reggie  •  Manila, National Capital Region  •  3 months ago
      wag naman po sana!
    • W  •  3 months ago
      di mo na malaman tuloy kung sino ang nagsasabi ng totoo kasi kanya kanya ng patutsada.
    POLL
    Loading...
    Poll Choice Options