P5M missing in Corona SALN, says prosecution

MANILA, Philippines—Chief Justice Renato Corona’s failure to declare the actual acquisition cost of his properties in his statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN) was highlighted on Day 30 of the impeachment trial.

In Corona’s 2010 SALN alone, Senator Panfilo Lacson noted that no acquisition costs were listed for the five properties he declared, including the two condominium units in Taguig City.

A total amount of P18,438,980, however, was listed under the column “acquisition cost” when it was supposed to be the sum of the five properties based on the current fair market value.

But the prosecution, responding to Lacson, said the acquisition cost of the properties should be based on the deed of sale or the contract price, and not on the assessed or fair market values being prepared by the city’s assessors’ office.

And based on the contract price of the two properties in Taguig, the Bonfiacio Ridge condominium unit was bought at P9, 959,940 while the Bellagio condo unit was P14,510,225 or a total of about P23 million.

Lacson noted the discrepancy of P5 million between the P18, 438,980 listed in the SALN and the P23 million acquisition costs for the two properties alone.

Asked then what was meant by this discrepancy, private prosecutor Jose Panganiban said, “Hindi po truthful. Hindi po accurate iyong pagkaka-declare ng SALN.”

Lacson then directed his question to Corona’s lead counsel, former Supreme Court Justice Serafin Cuevas.

“We will definitely deal with it when our time comes in the presentation of presentation of our evidence,” Cuevas said.

Just the same, Cuevas pointed out that the SALN was not prepared by the Chief Justice himself.

But Lacson pointed out that even if Corona did not personally prepare the SALN, the Chief Justice sworn to the accuracy of his SALN.

Before this, Cuevas indicated that Corona might have simply committed errors in the filing of his SALN and that this can be corrected.

“If in the preparation and submission of SALN, a public official making the same has relied on the valuation made by an official of government, then he must be in good faith,” he said.

“No presumption of malice could enter and therefor, if there’s no malice, then the SALN if there are errors, irregularities, infirmities may be ordered corrected, your honor,” he said.

Cueva s said nothing should prevent a public official from correcting the errors in his SALN if it can be proven the mistakes were in good faith and that there was no intention “to defraud in order to create criminal liability.”

But Senate president and presiding officer Juan Ponce-Enrile said Cuevas’ argument was only correct in ordinary cases but should not apply in impeachment cases.