Corona defense asks Senate to expunge evidence on 'ill-gotten wealth'

The defense counsels of Chief Justice Renato Corona in the impeachment case filed against him have asked the Senate, as the impeachment court, to expunge or abolish evidence related to the magistrate's alleged ill-gotten wealth. In its Memorandum on Article II of the Verified Impeachment Complaint, the defense asked the Senate to:

• "immediately prevent and prohibit Complainants and the prosecution from presenting evidence on Pars. 2.3 and 2.4 of their Verified Complaint, e.g., suspected ill-gotten wealth and graft and corruption, for being irrelevant, improper and violative of CJ Corona’s constitutional rights;" and
• "expunge from the record any and all of the evidence presented by Complainants pertaining to Pars. 2.3 and 2.4."

The second article of the impeachment complaint accused Corona of culpable violation of the constitution and/or betrayed the public trust when he failed to disclose to the public his Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN). “Most importantly, Article II of the Grounds for Impeachment does not charge CJ Corona [with] ill-gotten wealth and/or graft and corruption,” the defense said on Tuesday. “Clearly, Article II of the Grounds for Impeachment does not charge CJ Corona [with] failing to disclose properties in his SALN.  It does not charge him of inaccurate disclosure of properties in his SALN.  It does not charge him of undervaluing the disclosed properties in his SALN,” the memorandum said. The memorandum was signed by defense lawyers Retired Justice Serafin Cuevas, Eduardo De Los Angeles, Jose Roy III, German Lichauco, and Dennis Manalo. Oral arguments In Day 5 of the trial Senate President and impeachment court presiding officer Juan Ponce Enrile allowed Cuevas to orally argue the main points of the defense panel’s memorandum against Article 2 of the Articles of Impeachment. Flashback  On Thursday last week, Senator-Judges Francis “Chiz” Escudero and Alan Peter Cayetano requested that both panels explain the coverage of Article II of the impeachment complaint. Senate Juan Ponce Enrile, presiding officer at the Seante impeachment court, ordered that the prosecutors and the defense team submit a memorandum regarding Article II to explain their interpretation. Suspicion not ultimate facts The defense team noted that “the mere suspicion that the respondent accumulated ill-gotten wealth, acquiring assets of high values and keeping bank accounts with huge deposits is insufficient.” The memorandum cited that the discussion of the ground o impeachment, page 13 in the impeachment complaint cited only “reports” and “suspicion” which is contrary to a court requirement that a complaint be based on “ultimate facts.” “Time and again, the Supreme Court has held that charges based on mere suspicion and speculation cannot be given credence,  and it would be absurd if mere suspicion and speculation would be treated as a valid basis to oust an incumbent Chief Justice of the Supreme Court,” the memorandum said. The defense team also criticized the prosecutors credibility in filing the impeachment complaint, saying the lawmakers did not have a personal knowledge on what was written on the complaint. “Complainants did not base their charges on their personal knowledge, much less on authentic documents, at the time they filed the Verified Complaint. This now explains their desperate and belated use of this Honorable Court’s subpoena power to gather evidence for the very first time to prove their case.  “ Witnesses “ irrelevant and immaterial” The defense panel likewise argued that the witnesses and documents from the Bureau of Internal Revenue, Registry of Deeds and City Assessors will be presented by the prosecution “to boltser its claim that CJ Corona acquired ill-gotten wealth. This is impermissible. The evidence of prosecution on this issue are completely irrelevant and immaterial.” The defense panel added that such testimonies and evidences are not connected with Corona’s alleged non-disclosure of his SALNs.  “While this evidence may supposedly prove that CJ Corona acquired properties, and that he (Corona) may not have the financial capacity to acquire them, there is no direct, logical and reasonable connection between these evidentiary facts to CJ Corona’s alleged non-disclosure of his SALN to the public.”   The Articles of Impeachment The lawmakers impeached Corona in December last year on the following grounds:

1. partiality and subservience in cases involving the Arroyo administration;
2. failure to disclose to the public his statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN);
3. issuance of flip-flopping decisions in final and executory cases;
4. issuance of the “status quo ante” order against the House of Representatives in the case concerning the impeachment of Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez;
5. decision in favor of gerrymandering in the cases involving 16 newly-created cities, and the promotion of Dinagat Island into a province;
6. improper creation of the SC ethics committee
7. granting temporary restraining order in favor of former President Arroyo; and
8. failure and refusal to account for the Judicial Development Fund (JDF) and special allowance for the judiciary collections.

- Rouchelle Dinglasan, VVP/ELR, GMA News