Defense opposes subpoena on banks

TRANQUIL SALVADOR III

Is winning a raffle draw an impeachable offense?

Lawyers of Chief Justice Renato Corona on Wednesday raised this question as it opposed the request of prosecutors from the House of Representatives for the Senate impeachment court to subpoena two banks to bring documents pertaining to accounts that Corona and his wife purportedly owned.

The prosecution claimed that Corona’s account won P1 million in Philippine Savings Bank’s “Monthly Millions” raffle draw and that the Chief Justice had time deposits, money market placements and dollar accounts in the bank.

“Why should the Chief Justice be faulted if he really won the raffle? If he’s just lucky, is it a sin? I don’t think there’s a problem with that or if any law was violated,” said Tranquil Salvador III, the defense panel’s spokesperson.

“Anyway, if he did win, I don’t think he cheated. It was just given to him. And before you could claim the winnings, I’m sure you should pay all the taxes,” Salvador said.

In two separate pleadings, Corona’s lawyers dismissed as a “fishing expedition” and “improper” the prosecution’s attempt to present documents pertaining to bank accounts that the Coronas were allegedly maintaining in Bank of the Philippine Islands (BPI) and PSBank in Makati City.

Fishing expedition

The defense claimed that the move was aimed at pursuing the prosecution’s allegation that Corona accumulated ill-gotten wealth as stated in Paragraph 2.4 of the second of the eight articles of impeachment.

“However, (the Senate) already ruled that Paragraph 2.4 does not contain statements of ultimate fact(s) and must be deemed excluded from the impeachment trial,” the defense said in a motion for opposition.

“Considering that Paragraph 2.4 is deemed unwritten, any evidence relating thereto is inadmissible and irrelevant,” it added.

Corona’s lawyers said the prosecution was trying to “resort to the compulsory process of subpoena to introduce … documents and related testimony” in its effort to “possibly uncover more definite leads to evidence.”

“(This) is a fishing expedition for evidence that is obviously irrelevant and immaterial,” the defense said. “No doubt, this is not a sound basis upon which a valid request for subpoena [to testify and to submit documents] can be made.”

Corona’s lawyers also assailed House prosecutors for asking the Senate to order

PSBank officials to submit documents concerning bank accounts which they did not even identify in the motion they filed on Tuesday.

“At the outset, it bears stressing that the requested documents … were not premarked and have not been mentioned in the proceedings thus far,” the defense said. “Indeed, the request is akin to acting on suspicion, rumor or reports and other such similar hunches or guesswork.”

SALN

Dennis Manalo, one of the defense lawyers, said Corona’s alleged winnings had nothing to do with the second of the eight articles of impeachment.

He said Article 2 only alleged that the Chief Justice should be held liable for culpable violation of the Constitution for his alleged failure to submit his annual statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN) and not for amassing unexplained wealth.

“This seems to be an unusual theory,” Manalo said. “First, they claimed that receiving a huge discount for buying a property was enough reason for (Corona) to be removed from office. Now, they’re saying another reason.”

The lawyer noted that the Senate impeachment court earlier ruled that it would not issue a subpoena for documents which were not specifically identified.

“I think if the impeachment court chooses to be consistent, I don’t expect it will act on (the prosecution’s request),” Manalo said.

In its motion, the defense said, “At any rate, even assuming that Corona did win a raffle prize, the same does not constitute ill-gotten wealth and/or graft and corruption.”

“From the foregoing, it is clear that the request is nothing but a brazen attempt to introduce irrelevant and immaterial evidence in these proceedings, in violation of (Corona’s) right to due process,” it added.

As to the prosecution’s request to summon BPI officials, the defense said the account number, which the prosecution stated in its motion, “does not correspond or have any relation at all” to what the House prosecutors earlier marked as Exhibits VVV and VVV-1.

The defense, meanwhile, called on the Senate to use its contempt powers to bar the prosecution team from further “crucifying” Corona before the public by discussing the merits of his impeachment trial in the media.

TV network

In a statement, Ramon Esguerra, one of Corona’s lawyers, claimed that a “network and its assets” were helping the prosecutors in destroying Corona’s credibility by allowing them to discuss evidence which were not formally presented in the Senate impeachment court.

“What the prosecution is doing in the media is  gross disrespect,” Esguerra said in Filipino.

“We have an impeachment court precisely because we want to try the case here and not resort to what the prosecution had been doing since the start. The Chief Justice has rights like any other Juan dela Cruz,” he continued.

Esguerra also raised concern over a news article posted on ABS-CBN’s news website which quoted unnamed House prosecutors who claimed that Corona was maintaining a secret dollar account.

Esguerra assailed Iloilo Representative Niel Tupas Jr., the House lead prosecutor, for talking about the merits of the case when he guested in the ANC “Headstart” program. ANC is the cable news channel of the Lopez-owned ABS-CBN.

“If that is how the prosecution and their media associates handle the impeachment, we are alarmed that the act of the Senate is already being undermined,” Esguerra said. “Imagine having two trials: (in) the Senate and (before) the public, aided by some (media) networks.”

The lawyer said “we might as well … stop this charade or stop the live (media) coverage of the hearings so we stop the pandering, innuendos and spins” if Corona “will be pilloried publicly on so-called evidence never presented or entered into the trial.”