Will high-drama unfold in the resumption of the impeachment trial Tuesday with the scheduled testimony of Internal Revenue Commissioner Kim Jacinto-Henares?
Not so fast, according to lawyers of Chief Justice Renato Corona, who will ask the impeachment court to junk all documents and testimonies in connection with allegations of ill-gotten wealth.
The defense team will submit this morning a memorandum that would also ask the court to remove from the records evidence submitted and marked in last week’s trial.
Ramon Esguerra, one of the defense counsels, on Monday said his camp would ask the court to immediately resolve their “standing motion” against the introduction of a supposedly new set of allegations against Corona into Article 2.
If the matter is not resolved soon, he said the defense would ask that the prosecution move to the seven other articles of impeachment, particularly Article 1 (Corona’s alleged “partiality” and “subservience” in cases involving the Arroyo administration).
“If senators take a little time resolving (our motion), we may ask for the suspension of the presentation of evidence on Article 2—not the proceedings—and hope we can go to other articles in the meantime,” Esguerra told the Philippine Daily Inquirer.
“Besides, the prosecution said Article 1 is their strongest case so let them prove that in court.”
If the defense succeeds in a suspension, Esguerra said Henares should not be made to testify yet. Henares was earlier subpoenaed by the court to produce Corona’s income tax returns (ITRs).
Prosecutors were apparently trying to show that Corona could not have afforded to acquire at least two condominium units and other properties based on his salary in government.
Corona’s camp earlier denied that he has ill-gotten wealth, saying he has only five properties, some of which had been purchased through loans or the sale of previous properties.
Palace move awaited
Lawyer Romulo Macalintal, who has been closely monitoring the proceedings, said Monday Henares’ presence in Tuesday’s trial might provide some “drama.” He said it would be so in case she brought the Corona’s ITRs without the approval of Malacañang.
“Will senators compel Henares to submit the tax records of Corona to the Senate without (the President’s) approval)? And will (Senate President Juan Ponce) Enrile approve such a release knowing fully well it is not allowed by law?” he asked.
Presidential spokesperson Edwin Lacierda said Monday it was likely Mr. Aquino would authorize the release of the ITRs but that he had yet to discuss this with the President.
“We need the ITRs to connect the dots,” Lacierda said.
Mr. Aquino has been accused of masterminding Corona’s impeachment, initiated by the President’s Liberal Party allies to remove obstacles to the President’s campaign promise to prosecute former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo for corruption.
Esguerra said the memorandum to be submitted today would focus, among other issues, on the right of Corona “to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him, on the vagueness, if not ambivalence, of the allegations.”
One allegation per article
Article 2 alleges that Corona failed to disclose his statements of assets, liabilities and net worth. But it also contains the allegation in a subparagraph that “respondent is likewise suspected and accused of having accumulated ill-gotten wealth, acquiring assets of high value and keeping bank accounts with huge deposits.”
Senator Francis Escudero had said that Article 2 accused Corona of “three separate acts.” He said an article or charge should contain “a singular, separate” allegation.
Representative Elpidio Barzaga, a member of the prosecution, earlier admitted that his team had not seen Corona’s SALNs until they were presented to the impeachment court last week.
The admission prompted Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano to ask him: “Are you accusing the Chief Justice of accumulating ill-gotten wealth and acquiring assets of high value and huge deposits or not?”
Barzaga replied: “We are charging him and our suspicion is based on the prevailing circumstances that we were not able to see the SALN of the Chief Justice.”
Critical decision
The prosecution yesterday raised the possibility it might opt not to make a full presentation of the eight articles of impeachment in the Senate trial, especially if it feels that it has enough evidence to nail down Corona on Article 2.
“We will only do this to ensure that we will have a speedy trial which the defense obviously does not want because its strategy is to delay it as long as they can hoping the public will lose interest,” said Marikina City Representative Miro Quimbo in a press conference.
But Quimbo said that the Senate’s decision on Article 2—whether to allow or disallow the prosecution from presenting evidence of Corona’s ill-gotten wealth aside from his statement—would be a crucial decision because it would set the tone for the rest of the trial.
“It’s not only fatal for Article 2 but fatal to the pursuit of truth and accountability. The impeachment is not a criminal but a political process. If we grant the motion of the defense, we would have completely embraced the strictness of interpreting the impeachment process. This is not what the impeachment process was created for,” said Quimbo. With reports from Marlon Ramos, Christine O. Avendaño and Gil C. Cabacungan