Corona prosecutors rest case, saying there is sufficient evidence to convict

(Updated 7:20 p.m.) After 25 days of trial, the House prosecution team decided on Tuesday to rest its impeachment case against Chief Justice Renato Corona.   Lead prosecutor Niel Tupas Jr. announced the panel will no longer present evidence on the five other articles of impeachment against the chief justice “We have already presented a strong case. The evidence we laid down suffices to convict Corona for betrayal of public trust,” he said during the day's trial. He, however, said that the prosecution is reserving its right to present evidence on Corona’s dollar account, which was barred by the Supreme Court through a temporary restraining order last month.   For over a month now, the prosecution has been presenting evidence against the chief magistrate on the following articles of impeachment:

• Article II (non-disclosure of properties in Corona’s statements of assets, liabilities and net worth or SALN),
• Article III (lack of probity, integrity and independence), and
• Article VI (irregularities in the issuance of a temporary restraining order for former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo last November).

  Tupas said the prosecution has thus far presented 25 witnesses and marked 395 documents as evidence in support of these three impeachment articles. He added that the panel will have to decide in the coming days which of these will be formally offered as evidence to the impeachment court. Hands tied   At a press briefing, Tupas said members of the prosecution panel have been thinking of resting their case for two weeks now. He said they only decided to pursue the case “to complete the story” and “to present the complete picture.”   Tupas added that the “decision point” came when SC spokesperson Midas Marquez announced on Tuesday afternoon that the high court will not let its personnel to testify in the trial, citing judicial privilege.   “Kung hindi papayagan, paano naming papatunayan ang kaso namin? Talagang tali na ang aming mga kamay,” Tupas said.   The lead public prosecutor added that the decision was “unanimous” and had the blessing of the House leadership.   Marikina Rep. Romero Quimbo, prosecution spokesman, said that the SC’s February 14 ruling—which prohibits the release of confidential documents to the prosecution team for the trial—also “bolstered” the panel’s decision.   “Pinagbabawalan ang employees at ang pag-release ng mga dokumento. We felt it will be very difficult for us to prove our other articles. Practically all our evidence will come from the Supreme Court,” he said.   Quimbo added the prosecution panel did not consult President Benigno Aquino III, who has repeatedly criticized Corona in public, before arriving at its decision. Despite this, Malacañang expressed support for the prosecution's move.   “We look forward to how the defense will answer questions on the discrepancies found between Chief Justice Corona’s SALN and his unreported assets,” deputy presidential spokesperson Abigail Valte said in a text message to reporters. Notice to the Senate   Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, who presides over the trial, instructed the prosecution to file a formal notice informing the impeachment court of the dropping of the five impeachment articles:

• Article I (partiality to Mrs. Arroyo in SC decisions),
• Article IV (irregularities in the issuance of the status quo ante order on the impeachment proceedings of former Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez),
• Article V (gerrymandering in the creation of 16 new cities and the declaration of Dinagat Island as a province),
• Article VI (allegedly improper investigation of Associate Justice Mariano del Castillo’s plagiarism case), and
• Article VIII (failure and refusal to account for the Judiciary Development Fund and Special Allowance for the Judiciary).

  Enrile initially wanted the prosecution to file a motion on the dropping of the articles, but Senator Joker Arroyo said a notice would suffice.   “It is the privilege of [the] prosecution. I suggest they file a formal notice. It is unfair for them if we pass judgment on what they will do,” Arroyo said during the trial.   Lead defense counsel Serafin Cuevas said Corona’s camp submits to the prosecution’s decision to drop the five other impeachment articles. Defense's side In an interview, other members of the defense team said the prosecution’s move was a welcome development in the case.   "Mula simula pa lamang binigyan na sila ng lahat ng pagkakataon para kumalap ng ebidensya... Ngayon, it's time they realize na hanggang dito na lang," said defense spokesperson Tranquil Salvador III.   Salvador refused to assess the over-all "strength" of the evidence that the prosecution has presented.   "Hindi namin hinuhusgahan ang ginawa nila. Hindi din namin sinasabi na mahina o malakas ang kanilang ebidensya," he said, adding the Senate is in the best position to evaluate the evidence.   Our turn   Now that the prosecution has rested its case, the defense panel said it can finally tell its side of the story to the impeachment court and to the public.   "Bigyan niyo kami ng pagkakataon para iprisenta ang aming ebidensya. Kung nagkaroon kayo ng pasensya na pakinggan sila [prosekusyon], bigyan ninyo rin kami ng pagkakataon at pasensya na magpaliwanag," Salvador said.   Asked if the defense can debunk all the charges leveled by the prosecution against the chief magistrate, another defense lawyer, Rico Paolo Quicho, responded: "Kayang-kaya." Possible effects   Enrile, in an interview after the day’s trial, refused to comment on the possible effects of the withdrawal of the five remaining articles, except that it will definitely shorten the proceedings.   "I don't know the repercussion.  We just made a clarification of what is going to happen. I asked them whether they will want to state as a matter of admission whether they will stand or fall on those three [articles] and nothing more and nothing less and they said yes," he said.   Asked if he sees the trial to be over before Holy Week, Enrile said: “Siguro, maaari.”   He said the prosecution may still present evidence on Article II of the impeachment complaint pending the ruling of the Supreme Court on the legality of examining foreign currency deposits.   He said he does not know yet the plans of the defense panel, which now has to present evidence only on three articles also — II, III and VII.   Enrile also said now they don’t have to discuss in caucus whether or not they will comply with the Supreme Court order prohibiting the employees of the high tribunal from testifying in the trial.   He said the only matter they will have to resolve is the motion of the defense to suppress evidence from the Philippine Savings Bank, which they said was illegally obtained. He was referring to the bank records of Corona that were presented by the prosecution. – Kim Tan, Mark D. Merueñas and Amita O. Legaspi/KBK/HS, GMA News