Senate allows evidence vs Corona properties, not ill-gotten wealth
MANILA, Philippines – The Senate, acting as an impeachment court, did not allow the prosecution to present evidence pertaining to the alleged ill-gotten wealth of Chief Justice Renato Corona but may present those against his reported properties that were not declared in his statements of assets and liabilities and networth (SALNs).
Senate President Juan Ponce-Enrile said the decision was reached in a caucus at 12 noon, two hours before the resumption of the trial Wednesday.
“And this impeachment court has arrived at a decision in that caucus . . . that this court will allow the introduction of evidence on impeachment Article Number 2 paragraphs 2.2 and 2.3 but not the introduction of evidence on 2.4. And so all parties must be guided,” said Enrile.
Paragraph 2.2 in Article 2 of the Articles of Impeachment refers to Corona’s alleged failure to disclose his statement of assets, liabilities and net worth while 2.3 reads that “It is also reported that some properties of respondent are not included in his declaration of his assets, liabilities and net worth, in violation of the anti-graft and corrupt practices act.”
Paragraph 2.4 reads: “Respondent is likewise suspected and accused of having accumulated ill-gotten wealth, acquiring assets of high values and keeping bank accounts with huge deposits.”
On the defense team’s motion to quash the subpoena issued to Internal Revenue Commissioner Kim Henares and the submission of income tax returns of Corona and his family, the Senate ruled that the prosecution would have to first lay the basis or connection of these tax documents to the ongoing impeachment trial of the Chief Justice.
Article continues after this advertisementSenator Franklin Drilon explained further that “the court ruling would allow evidence in 2.2 and 2.3 over a property that was not included in the SALN. However, under 2.4, which asserts that such properties could be ill-gotten, the court did not rule on that and will rely on the presumptions of law particularly the Anti-Graft Law”.
