Impeachment court reprimands defense lawyer

Jose Roy III

The Senate impeachment court has reprimanded defense lawyer Jose Roy III for alleging that Malacañang offered senator-judges P100 million each “in soft projects” to reject a Supreme Court order on Chief Justice Renato Corona’s dollar deposits.

Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile said Roy’s reprimand was heavier than the admonition given private prosecutor Vitaliano Aguirre II after he was cited for contempt for covering his ears as Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago was berating the prosecution for its alleged incompetence.

Enrile announced the penalty at the close of the hearing Tuesday night, declaring that there were “sufficient and justifiable reasons” to cite Roy for indirect contempt. He said that the lawyer was “not being candid and (took) lightly his commitment to the court for failing or refusing” to reveal the source of his information.

“This court must assert its dignity and honor in these proceedings.  In effect, the defense panel suggests this court could be paid into making a decision and I do not think it is proper to even think about this impeachment court (this way),” he explained.

“It is my privilege to serve the penalty in behalf of the defense counsel,” Roy replied. “We all stand reprimanded and we shall be guided accordingly.”

Senator Panfilo Lacson noted Roy’s action was “not triggered by anything except probably his desire to preempt the senator-judges” and force them to uphold the Supreme Court’s temporary restraining order (TRO) barring the impeachment court from scrutinizing Corona’s dollar accounts.

Senators agreed to cite Roy for indirect contempt for alleging in a hastily called press conference that Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa was offering senator-judges P100 million in soft projects in exchange for a vote upholding the TRO.

Heavier penalty

Lacson said senator-judges agreed during Monday’s caucus that the penalty against Roy should be heavier than the one meted on Aguirre.

“Aguirre’s action was directed at one particular senator and was precipitated by what we may call verbal abuse,” he explained.

“In the case of Roy, there was none. The point was to put us on the spot. (Defense lawyers) had an emergency press con to divulge their information that an amount of P100 million was involved. (Roy) was attacking the integrity of the court, of the senator-judges,” he added.

He noted that a reprimand was akin to a scolding while an admonition was a reminder. “A priest admonishes. A reprimand is stronger … like a pinch,” Lacson said.

Lacson said Roy, who was with other members of the defense panel during the press conference in which the alleged bribe was announced, should not blame the Senate tribunal for singling him out.

“He was the one who announced the P100-million offer. If someone else assigned him to do that, that’s his misfortune. He may have apologized but the damage has been done,” Lacson noted.

Originally posted: 7:15 pm | Tuesday, March 13th, 2012