Defense slams prosecution for not doing cross examination on Corona

MANILA, Philippines — Lawyer Dennis Manalo, a defense counsel for Chief Justice Renato Corona and the second speaker for the final arguments in the impeachment trial, slammed the House prosecution team for not conducting cross examination.

During his statement before the Senate impeachment court on Monday, Manalo asked why the prosecution decided to not conduct cross examination after Corona offered to sign an unconditional waiver on his bank accounts.

“Our rules are clear, when you waive the cross, the testimony is unimpeached,” said the defense lawyer, maintaining that Corona was “entitled to an acquittal.”

He also lambasted the attention given to Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales’ testimony which bared the chief magistrate’s bank accounts, saying that the AMLC investigation was invalid.

He said that the Ombudsman could not have made the Anti-Money Laundering Council explain its report on Corona’s accounts because the said agency “refused to testify because there was no court order allowing that inspection.”

AMLC was given “authority to inquire into bank deposits… (and) may inquire into or examine any deposits with any banking institution upon order of a competent court.”

He hit at Morales, saying that she did not investigate whether AMLC had a court order to warrant the examination of Corona’s bank accounts. “Did the Ombudsman ask AMLC where is your court order? She did not. She said that she never investigated AMLC.”

Manalo further defended the chief magistrate’s interpretation of the foreign currency deposit law, saying no one came forward when Corona made a challenge for unconditional waivers on bank accounts. “Chief Justice showed that his interpretation of law was followed by the most hardworking people in judiciary.”

He also asked the Senate whether it would move to declare the said law as unconstitutional when “the Constitution is clear, cases involving constitutionality of laws shall be heard by the Supreme Court en banc.”

“Even assuming that there is a tinge of unconstitutionality, decisions like this have prospective application.”

The defense lawyer also slammed Ilocos Norte Representative Rodolfo Farinas’ statement that Corona “peddled his position for material gains” as an “absolute lie.” He maintained that members of the Supreme Court acted not as individuals but as a collegial body when it makes a decision.