Corona lawyers seek to bar documents, testimony on magistrate’s properties

MANILA, Philippines—Defense lawyers on Tuesday filed a legal memorandum asking the Senate to prevent prosecutors from offering as evidence documents and testimony  on properties under the name of Chief Justice Renato Corona at his impeachment trial.

In the memorandum, the defense maintained that the prosecution was injecting an entirely new charge into Article II of the impeachment complaint, which alleged that Corona failed to disclose his statements of assets, liabilities, and net worth (SALNs).

Corona’s lawyers said that the failure to include the new allegations in Article II showed the complainants’ “lack of any personal knowledge at the time they filed the verified complaint of the ultimate facts concerning suggestions of graft and corruption and accumulation of ill-gotten wealth.”

“Complainants did not base their charges on their personal knowledge, much less on authentic documents, at the time they filed the verified complaint,” according to the memorandum signed by lead defense counsel Serafin Cuevas and four others.

“This now explains their desperate and belated use of this Honorable Court’s subpoena power to gather evidence for the very first time to prove their case.  Unfortunately, and to CJ Corona’s extreme prejudice, these proceedings have become an illegal ‘fishing expedition.’ This should never be allowed.”

In last week’s hearings, Representative Elpidio Barzaga Jr. admitted that he and the other prosecutors who prepared the impeachment complaint had not seen Corona’s SALNs until they were formally submitted to the Senate.

Under questioning by Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano, Barzaga said the prosecution included allegations of ill-gotten wealth under Article II “based on the prevailing circumstances that we were not able to see the SALN of the chief justice.”

In the memorandum, Corona’s camp said allowing the prosecution to have its way on the matter would be “irrelevant, improper and violative of (his) constitutional rights.”

Defense lawyers asked the Senate to “expunge from the record any and all of the evidence presented” by the prosecution regarding his alleged properties. Under Article II, he is also “suspected and accused of having accumulated ill-gotten wealth, acquiring assets  of high values and keeping bank accounts with huge deposits.”

“To allow Complainants to present evidence on matters not covered by the clear language of Article II will violate (his) constitutional right to due process and to be properly informed of the charges against him,” the pleading added.

The prosecution earlier submitted for marking Corona’s SALNs from years 2002 to 2011, and land titles pertaining to condominium units and other properties under his name and those of his family.

“The use of particular words like ‘suspected,’ ‘reported’ and ‘accused,’ without more, conveys no specific allegation of every necessary circumstance and fact to constitute graft and corruption or accumulation of ill-gotten wealth,” the defense argued.

“In other words, the mere suspicion that the respondent ‘accumulated ill-gotten wealth, acquiring assets of high values and keeping bank accounts with huge deposits’ is insufficient.”

The defense cited the constitutional right of the accused “to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him.”  More specifically, it mentioned the provision saying that a complaint must be “sufficient to enable a person of common understanding to know what offense is being charged as well as its qualifying and aggravating circumstance and for the court to pronounce judgment.”

“Thus, an information is bad if it is stated that ‘there is probable cause to suspect’ that accused has committed the crime, instead that he did commit it,’” the memorandum said.

“Since the charge in an information must be made with such definiteness and certainty to enable the accused to prepare for trial, it must follow that the charge must not be stated hypothetically or argumentatively,” it added.