Defense raises specter of mistrial
Chief defense counsel Serafin Cuevas
Fed up with senators purportedly fishing evidence for the prosecution, the camp of Chief Justice Renato Corona on Tuesday asked the impeachment court to review the rule allowing its members, the senators, to propound questions while preventing counsels from raising objections.
The chief defense counsel, Serafin Cuevas, formally raised the specter of mistrial in open court, warning that the proceedings might be “railroaded to a verdict of guilt” against Corona.
“We are pleading for a reexamination of this rule to avoid the usual occurrence of what is known as mistrial because while it is true that the proceedings of this court as of this moment may not amount to a mistrial, it is equally discernible that it may be raised in the future in the event that the situation grows worse,” Cuevas manifested at the start of Day 21 of the impeachment trial.
“We say that this might amount to a mistrial because there is nothing left in favor of an impeached public officer,” he said. “He cannot object. He cannot make any manifestation …”
Cuevas noted that the rule preventing either prosecutors or defense counsels from objecting to a question by a senator-judge was nonexistent during the impeachment trial of then President Joseph Estrada in 2000.
No other recourse
Defense counsels have said that this prohibition had enabled some senators to gather evidence from witnesses supposedly in favor of the prosecution.
“One question may be raised, followed up by another, leading to a request for the issuance of an order requiring the production of certain documents,” Cuevas complained, noting that such documents “have not been proved to be material to the issue or relevant to the subject matter under discussion.”
He added: “Under such a situation, we have no other recourse before this honorable court and probably, the only course is to go to the Supreme Court.”
But Cuevas said that option would be “not only burdensome but a nullity as a remedy because it will take time.”
Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, the presiding officer in the impeachment trial, said Cuevas’ appeal would be tackled by the senators in a caucus.
Angara cautions vs mistrial
Senator Edgardo Angara cautioned against the idea of mistrial.
“I think we ought not to think at this stage of a mistrial and a procedure that will allow an appeal on every perceived irreversible error because it will prolong the political agony of this nation,” Angara told the court.
Enrile assured Cuevas that “as much as possible, we will try to accord the respondent a fair trial, observing not only substantive but procedural due process in order not (to) derogate anything from the application of applicable provisions of the Bill of Rights.”
Charges from thin air
Representative Rodolfo Fariñas, the deputy chief prosecutor, described the current impeachment rules as “perfect.”
“There’s a saying in English, ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,’” he said in response to Cuevas’ appeal.
Enrile, however, lectured Fariñas on the quality of the articles of impeachment brought to the Senate.
“We have a problem in the course of this trial because we are using compulsory process to gather evidence for you,” he told Fariñas flatly, pointing out that prosecutors “should have gathered (the evidence) beforehand, before you filed the articles of impeachment in this court.”
“That’s why I warned you several times that what you’re doing might be fatal to the proceedings,” Enrile said, adding that the prosecutors could not “just pluck charges out of thin air without any basis.”
