Corona lawyers want private lawyers barred from prosecuting Corona
MANILA, Philipines—Chief Justice Renato Corona’s lawyers have asked the Senate to compel congressmen serving as prosecutors to argue their case against him—and not allow private prosecutors to do the job for them—in the ongoing impeachment trial.
Corona’s camp on Monday filed a motion to disallow the appearance of a private prosecutor, particularly lead counsel Mario Bautista and seven other lawyers called to assist prosecutors from the House of Representatives.
“It would appear unjust to allow the members of the House of Representatives to proceed after ramrodding the approval of flimsy articles of impeachment, then leave the conviction of an impeached official in the hands of a private lawyer whose interests may not coincide with the best interests of the State,” Corona’s lawyer Jose Roy III said in the motion.
“It is respectfully prayed that the honorable impeachment court disallow the appearance of Messrs. Mario Bautista, et. al. as private prosecutors, there being no compelling justification for the same,” he added.
Roy warned against allowing the appearance of private lawyers “despite the absence of any clear, compelling reason.”
“It will only be a matter of time before the House of Representatives appropriates public funds to finance the impeachment of targeted officials later on,” he said in the motion. “Surely, the evils of allowing such a practice are apparent even now.”
Article continues after this advertisementRep. Niel Tupas Jr., the lead House prosecutor, on Monday attempted to have Bautista, a veteran litigator, to argue with retired Supreme Court Associate Justice Serafin Cuevas on Corona’s motion for a preliminary hearing and eventually to junk the impeachment trial.
Article continues after this advertisementBut Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, presiding officer, rebuffed Tupas, saying “the argument must be presented by members of the House of Representatives acting as prosecutors.”
In the motion filed Monday night, Roy said that the House has “not shown any good reason why its own rules of procedure permits the employment of a private prosecutor.”
“The appearance of a private prosecutor is not a matter of right, but premised on the grant of authority to appear, subject to the existence of specified conditions,” Corona’s lawyer argued.
“The mandatory language of the House rules does not permit any such authority for a private prosecutor.”
Roy said the presence of private prosecutors in the impeachment trial of former President Joseph Estrada could not be used to justify the presence of Bautista and company in the present trial.
In the Estrada case, Roy noted, Bautista served as a private prosecutor representing witness Clarissa Ocampo.
“To be sure, every person has the right to counsel, but a private prosecutor’s proper function is to represent and recover relief in behalf of an injured party,” Roy said.
“In this case, there is no private party demanding relief against CJ Corona; it is the House of Representatives that is the sole complainant.”
