Malacañang dares defense to prove charges | Inquirer News

Malacañang dares defense to prove charges

Malacañang on Monday dared lawyers of Chief Justice Renato Corona to prove their allegation that it had offered P100 million to senator-judges in exchange for defying the Supreme Court order stopping the Senate as an impeachment court from opening the foreign currency deposit accounts of the Chief Justice.

“We have a saying in law that he who alleges must prove the same. You are the ones who made the accusations, you should prove it,” presidential spokesperson Edwin Lacierda said in a news conference, addressing the lawyers.

Lacierda said it was the “obligation” of the defense lawyers to prove their allegations that Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa had personally contacted and phoned senator-judges to defy the high court’s temporary restraining order (TRO).

Article continues after this advertisement

He said the defense panel was trying to divert attention away from the “real issue”—Corona’s culpability.

FEATURED STORIES

Lacierda said the defense panel came up with the allegation because it could no longer defend Corona.

“They are trying to condition the mind of the public that any judgment of conviction, if at all, to be rendered by the impeachment court would be tainted because of the alleged offer of P100 million, which is basically and categorically not true,” he said.

Article continues after this advertisement

Invoking lawyer-client privilege, defense lawyers refused to identify the source of the supposed information that Malacañang had been trying to convince some senators to defy the Supreme Court’s order.

Article continues after this advertisement

Tranquil Salvador III, a defense spokesperson, also reiterated that the decision of the defense to disclose to the media President Aquino’s purported attempt to influence the impeachment proceedings should not be taken as disrespect for the Senate impeachment court.

Article continues after this advertisement

“We came out in the media because we wanted the people to know the truth about what’s happening. We did not do it to show that we don’t respect the Senate. Our belief in the impartiality of the Senate remains,” Salvador said in a pretrial news conference.

“As we have said, we have a very reliable source. But at this point in time, we’re not in a position to disclose his identity,” he added.

Article continues after this advertisement

Salvador said the defense chose to conduct a media briefing on Sunday night “because we have nowhere to go.”

“We don’t have anything to hold on to. We cannot go to the (impeachment) court because we may be cited for being out of order,” he said.

“That’s why we’re putting this on notice to the public. The people should be discerning, vigilant and critical of the events unfolding.”

As Corona’s lawyers, Salvador said they were merely respecting the confidentiality of communications between lawyers and their clients as stipulated in the rules of evidence.

“Only the client, not the lawyer, may issue a consent to release (the information),” he said.

Asked if it was an admission that Corona himself had told them about Malacañang’s supposed effort to win over some senators, he replied: “The information was given to some members of the defense.”

More than Malacañang’s alleged P100-million offer to several senators, the public should understand that the defense panel’s disclosure “was in connection with the actions being taken” by the executive branch, he said.

“That’s what we want the people to know. It’s not so much about the figures involved, but the actions itself and the persuasions behind those actions,” he said.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

While a number of people would question the truthfulness of the claims of the defense, Salvador expressed confidence that “history would judge us favorably.”

TAGS:

No tags found for this post.
Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our newsletter!

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

This is an information message

We use cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more here.