Defense wants Drilon out of Corona trial
Senator Franklin Drilon
Defense lawyers of Chief Justice Renato Corona will seek the inhibition of Senator Franklin Drilon, a stalwart of President Benigno Aquino III’s Liberal Party, whom they accuse of showing bias in favor of prosecutors in last week’s impeachment trial.
“What can we do if the partiality has already been exhibited to the detriment of our client?” defense counsel Ramon Esguerra (no relation to this reporter) said on Saturday. “When will be the proper time for us to do it (seek inhibition)?”
On at least two occasions last week, Drilon, a lawyer, appeared to do what prosecutors from the House of Representatives and their private counsels should have done in the direct examination of their own witnesses.
Drilon managed to make Enriqueta Esguerra-Vidal, clerk of court of the Supreme Court, admit that she had brought with her Corona’s statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALNs).
The senator was also able to make Randy Rutaquio, Taguig City register of deeds, testify that Corona had acted as an “attorney in fact” for his daughter in the sale of a property on
Oct. 21, 2008.
Under the impeachment rules, counsels cannot object to questions by senator-judges even if the queries do not necessarily follow the Rules of Court.
No basis
“I would expect them to do that, to avail (themselves) of that remedy,” Drilon said when asked on Sunday about the defense’s plan to seek his inhibition. “But I would not heed their call for me to inhibit. I see no basis for that,” he said.
“I don’t know what they mean about me rescuing the prosecution team,” he added. “If you read the transcript, you will know exactly what happened. All I asked was whether she (Vidal) complied with the subpoena. She was the one who admitted that she had brought the SALNs with her.”
Esguerra acknowledged that asking Drilon to inhibit might be “counterproductive” and antagonize other senators sitting as judges in the impeachment court.
He said that things could get “bloody” in the coming days.
Vehement objection
Just several days into the trial of Corona, his camp has resolved to go all-out against the prosecution’s move to use evidence on his alleged unexplained wealth to help convince senators, acting as judges, to convict him in the impeachment court.
Defense lawyers led by retired Associate Justice Serafin Cuevas have drafted a legal memorandum vehemently objecting to additional and apparently more serious charges that prosecutors were trying to inject into the second of the eight articles of impeachment against Corona. Article 2 deals with Corona’s failure to disclose his SALNs to the public as required by law.
The memorandum, a draft of which was circulated among Corona’s lawyers in a meeting on Saturday afternoon, will be formally filed at the Senate impeachment court Tuesday morning. Trial resumes in the afternoon.
Do or die
“It’s do or die,” Esguerra told the Philippine Daily Inquirer in an interview.
He said the defense panel would seek sanctions on prosecutors for discussing the merits of the case outside of the impeachment court, including uploading copies of Corona’s SALNs to the Internet without court permission.
Article 2 will be the “real battleground,” Esguerra said.
The defense argued that Article 2 had been disproved after Vidal testified on Day 2 that Corona had been submitting his SALNs to her office, in compliance with an existing en banc resolution of the high court.
With the issue purportedly settled, the defense said introducing the issue of ill-gotten wealth would constitute a separate allegation and violate the rights of Corona.
Singular act
Last week, Senator Francis Escudero said an article of impeachment “must accuse the respondent of a singular, separate act.”
Before the opening of the trial, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, the presiding officer, had told reporters that the prosecution could amend the articles of impeachment (or the charges against Corona), but would have to return them to the House of Representatives for another round of voting.
But during the trial, Enrile told the defense that it would be premature to settle the matter because the prosecution had yet to formally offer evidence on Corona’s alleged graft and corruption.
“Look at what is happening. They’re feasting on it,” Esguerra said, referring to the introduction of evidence on Corona’s alleged ill-gotten wealth. “If you only alleged culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust, why include graft and corruption? It is not deemed pleaded. That is what we are saying. This is not deemed written.”
Esguerra said his camp earlier insisted that the prosecution start with Article 1 (Corona’s alleged closeness with former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo) because it was expecting a rather complicated Article 2.
“Even we realized that it would be bloody (madugo),” he said, referring to the issue of including ill-gotten wealth in the alleged nondisclosure of SALNs.
Losing in public opinion
“In the bar of public opinion, we are losing because our client is being accused in public, independent of what they are trying to prove in the trial. So this is foul as far as we are concerned,” Esguerra said.
Day 4 of the trial was spent largely on the marking of exhibits on properties in the names of Corona and his family. In a press conference after the trial, prosecutors said Corona’s SALNs were “undervalued,” citing the differences between the declared value of certain properties and the acquisition cost.
For instance, Corona declared the value of his Bellagio penthouse in Taguig at P6.8 million in his 2011 SALN. It was acquired for P14.5 million.
Corona’s camp said there was neither misdeclaration nor undervaluation, insisting that the amounts were “based on pertinent lawful values indicated in the respective real estate tax declarations and no other.”
Soon after Corona’s SALNs were submitted to the impeachment court, copies began circulating online. Esguerra said the copies could have come only from the prosecution because they contained “letter” markings. Exhibits for the defense were numbered.
“This is foul and violates the gag rule and even the gag order issued by the Senate President,” he said.
Esguerra said two members of the prosecution were seen taking pictures of the SALNs using camera phones, while the documents were being submitted in court last week. He said he objected and the Senate clerk of court took the names of the prosecutors.
“We are determined to ask for the imposition of sanctions against those concerned,” he said.
Esguerra said the prosecution, which was earlier criticized for its perceived blunders early in the trial, should keep the battle inside the courtroom “to protect the integrity of the process,” and not resort to “trial by publicity.”
