Our billionaire CJ

BY DUCKY PAREDES

MALAYA

‘(E)veryone can see how dumb the bum is and how, if he was a little smarter, he could have got away with (if not murder) billions!’

SO they found that our Chief Justice has P24 million in a bank and who knows how much more in other banks where he also has deposits. Why am I not surprised?

How much more has to be revealed before the Impeachment trial winds down? How much more must still be discovered before a judgment can be made?

In existing legislation, if a civil servant is found with more money to his name than he could have legitimately earned and cannot explain how this could have happened, the excess is forfeited to the government. This being only an impeachment trial, why not rule on the crook, kick him out and let’s all get on with our lives? What is an impeachment all about, anyway? Isn’t it only to decide whether the bum should continue serving the public? What else do we want to know about this awful person?

Spending any more funds for several more months of impeachment time is impractical and pointless.

Frankly, going on with it will only uncover more dirt and may only serve to inspire crookedness in many of our young. After all, everyone can see how dumb the bum is and how, if he was a little smarter, he could have gotten away with (if not murder) billions!

***

He was cheated in 2007; so, Senator Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III wants a better election when he runs in 2013. Now, he is the Chairman of the Committee on Electoral Reforms and People’s Participation in the Senate and is talking about what he calls “i-PCOS” an acronym for “Improved Precinct Count Optical Scan” machines.

“i-PCOS is a call to the Comelec as well as a challenge for it to do a better job of guarding and ensuring the integrity of the will of the Filipino electorate,” said Pimentel.

“Respect the automated election law by observing all the minimum system requirements and allow freely source code review.”

“It is a call to eliminate fraud altogether,” Pimentel stressed.

According to Koko, raising the quality of safeguards and lessening opportunities for human intervention in the counting of votes, the Comelec would strengthen the democratic process through automation aided by the latest technology.

I believe it also helps a lot that Gloria is no longer president. Koko finished 13th (Migs Zubiri was 12th and a “winner”) primarily because of Gloria, Of course, Koko got his revenge when he helped develop a case of electoral fraud that has now landed Gloria in the suite of the Veterans Memorial Hospital while awaiting her date with the courts.

Comelec Commissioner Lucenito Tagle sees the poll body as either leasing brand new machines or purchasing the machines that the poll body leased from Smartmatic International Corp. in the 2010 polls.

***

Bantay Gloria Network (BGN) sees the petition before the Supreme Court asking for a temporary restraining order to stop the officers or representatives of the Bank of the Philippine Islands and PSBank from testifying on his bank documents as Corcona’s “throwing in the towel” on the impeachment trial.

“Like a boxer who is out-boxed and about to be knocked down, Corona, black-and-blue because of the avalanche of evidence presented by the prosecutors before the impeachment court, is calling it quits. Not even the legal wizardry of Atty. Cuevas can prevent his client from hitting the canvas”, Bantay Gloria co-convenor Risa Hontiveros said.

“Without doubt, the midnight chief justice is giving up even before the people knock him out with an outright conviction. This is what Corona’s petition for a TRO is all about, plain and simple,” Hontiveros added.

“Nandadaya na ang punong mahistrado. Knowing that the impeachment trial is slowly but surely unearthing the truth, Corona is seeking exoneration not by proving his innocence before the impeachment court but by asking the office which he heads, the Supreme Court, to support him through a TRO,” Hontiveros said.

This is from a press release of the BGN. The part I like is this one: “Hontiveros added that Corona appears bent on transforming the Supreme Court into a sanctuary for crooks.”

“Should the high court decide to tackle the petition, it won’t be to uphold the rule of law or to maintain constitutional order. It is mainly to protect honor among thieves. The court will be transformed from a court of last resort to the plunderers’ last line of defense,” Hontiveros said.

For her part, Leah Navarro, leader of the Black and White Movement, said Corona should stop stonewalling: “Corona should man up. Cut and cut clean. If he believes he can no longer defend himself before a legal and constitutional process, then he should not hide behind the high court. We urge him to resign and do the country some good.”

***

We have a letter on my ran on Quezon City and how it mistreats its businessmen: “I read your column almost everyday. I used to live in PH for 35 years and came here to the US in the 80’s. I just want to make a comment on how business permits are handled here in the city of Nashville, Tennessee where I live.

“Opening a business is easy, you can apply online, call the city/county office for a copy of the form or print a copy your self from online. Payment can be done online or by mailing the form and check payment. Acknowledgment and/or receipts can be printed online or are mailed by the city.

“New business permits are emailed or mailed by the city in less than a week from payment date. The first business permit remains valid as long as the business owner wants.

“Every year, returns are required to be submitted and business fees paid based on the return and all of these can be done online or by mail. The good thing is that the city has a different due date schedules for businesses such as: retailers, wholesalers, restaurants, etc. which means that the due dates are staggered or spread throughout the year. Would it be nice if cities in PH would have different due dates for businesses to avoid long lines.” – Jim Bernardez, Madison, TN

***

Hopefully, some mayors, councilors and other officers of LGUs will read this letter and see how simple what they see as complicated things can become if they really want to serve their people better.

***

Readers who missed a column can access www.duckyparedes.com/blogs. This is updated daily. Your reactions are welcome at duckyparedes@yahoo.com

‘I am not guilty, I don’t want trial’

BY AMADO P. MACASAET

MALAYA

‘In this sense, it is Gloria Arroyo who is under trial. If Chief Justice Corona is not convicted, Mrs. Arroyo’s majority of eight jurists will save her from the gallows.’

FIRST, the Chief Justice declared upon impeachment that he did no wrong and was prepared to face trial.

Second, he declared that anybody who can find the 45 or so pieces of properties in five cities of Metro Manila in his name and that of his wife will get them. Upon his written permission, of course.

Third, the prosecution was furnished machine copies of his “initial deposit” of $700,000 in a savings bank in Quezon City. Now he objects to the production of the records for examination by the senators sitting as judges in the impeachment trial.

Now comes Chief Justice Renato Corona filing a petition with the Supreme Court seeking to stop the impeachment trial.

The petition, denied or granted, does not prove his claim of having done no wrong. He does not want to defend himself as he said he was ready to, in fact in full battle gear to face his accusers, namely President Aquino, who he said wants the Supreme Court destroyed so he can have one under his control.

In the same fashion probably that Gloria Arroyo made sure that she keeps control of the Court even after she retires. She still has the tenuous majority of eight magistrates known to be loyal to her to the end, that is, until they retire or are impeached.

Not to be forgotten by everyone is how the Arroyo court “violated” the Constitution by allowing then President Gloria Arroyo to appoint Renato Corona to head the court to ensure her protection from what, as early as then, she knew would be charges of plunder that she would definitely face under the Aquino administration.

In this sense, it is Gloria Arroyo who is under trial. If Chief Justice Corona is not convicted, Mrs. Arroyo’s majority of eight jurists will save her from the gallows.

I am reasonably certain that the Senate will defy the TRO in case one is issued. That means the impeachment trial will continue. That means a constitutional crisis could ensue.

The impeachment trial is muddled by issues that can only result in delays. For example, Congressman Danilo Suarez wants a probe on the leak of the records of the “initial deposit” of $700,000 in a savings bank in the name of the Chief Justice.

Suppose I say somebody from the bank gave me machine copies of the deposit records, will I be held liable for some crime? Maybe my friend Danny Suarez will tell the world if not the impeachment court that there is the law creating the Foreign Currency Deposit Unit which prevents the disclosure, examination of dollar deposits by any and all agencies of government without the written permission of the depositor.

In the case of the deposit of the Chief Justice, I dare say that he used the inviolability of the record of deposits as a convenient shield to keep unexplained wealth from being examined.

In fact, he violated Supreme Court jurisprudence by making the deposit.

Now comes another friend, Congressman Ferdinand Martin Romualdez demanding that the sanctity of the Constitution be respected in the impeachment trial. Some demand!

Who, to begin with, caused the impeachment of the Chief Justice? Wasn’t it indirectly Gloria Arroyo by pressuring the court to allow her to appoint Renato Corona as Chief Justice during a period prohibited by the Constitution?

Wasn’t it Renato Corona who brought his fate upon himself by accepting an appointment made legal by his peers by misinterpreting the Constitution?

Now comes Midas Marquez, administrator and spokesman of the Supreme Court, appealing once again to the people to respect the Supreme Court and its decisions.

How long are we going to respect the “violations” by the Supreme Court of the fundamental law? How long are we going to allow the magistrates to shield themselves from wrongdoing by invoking the doctrine that the Supreme Court is right even when it is wrong after it has spoken with finality?

Until the present court allows Gloria Arroyo to walk from the charges of plunder, courtesy of Chief Justice Corona and his peers chosen for loyalty to Gloria Arroyo, not exactly to the Constitution and the laws?

Stated simply, this country is on the road to a government of men and not of laws if the impeachment trial is stopped by the Supreme Court at the behest of the Chief Justice. We must all remember that Mr. Corona’s rating is below zero – minus 15 percent to be exact.

This perception, in fact, judgment, was made by the people. Under the doctrine of “vox populi vox Dei” shall we allow the Chief Justice to walk so that Gloria Arroyo herself may walk from charges of high crimes?

Think about it. There are enough laws that sit with this situation.

http://www.malaya.com.ph/02102012/edmacasaet.html

What is Corona hiding?

PerryScope

By Perry Diaz

A storm is brewing at the Senate impeachment trial of Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona.  In a move to prove charges of culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust against Corona, the House of Representatives’ prosecution team subpoenaed his bank records, which makes sense if conviction is to be secured.  It did not then come as a surprise that Corona’s defense team opposed every attempt to delve into Corona’s bank records, particularly his secret dollar account, which many believe is the repository of his alleged ill-gotten wealth.

The prosecution claimed that Corona and his wife Cristina’s account won P1 million in Philippine Savings Bank’s “Monthly Millions” raffle draw and that the couple “had time deposits, money market placements, and dollar accounts in the bank.”  But the defense team’s spokesman, Tranquil Salvador III, said,“Why should the Chief Justice be faulted if he really won the raffle? If he’s just lucky, is it a sin? I don’t think there’s a problem with that or if any law was violated.”

I agree that Salvador was right in that sense.  But would he agree that for the Coronas to qualify for the P1-million monthly raffle, they should have had a huge deposit in that bank?

So, how much moolah do the Coronas have stashed in the banks?

Secret dollar account

What prompted the prosecution team to request the impeachment court to subpoena Corona’s bank records was when one of the prosecutors received documents provided by an “anonymous source” that showed Corona had opened a bank account in 2008 for more than $700,000 (approximately P34 million).  

Last February 6, Day 12 of the impeachment trial, the senator-judges decided by majority vote to allow the impeachment court to subpoena Corona’s bank records and bank officials over the opposition of Corona’s defense panel.

Indeed, opening Corona’s bank records would be like opening Pandora’s box; it could be damaging to Corona’s defense.  It is for this reason that the defense panel vehemently opposed the testimony of bank officials and the admission of Corona’s bank records as evidence.  If his bank records – particularly his secret dollar account — reveal a huge amount of cash deposits that he did not declare in his Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALNs), he would have difficulty vindicating himself.

Corona seeks TRO

Last February 8, in a desperate attempt to suppress damaging evidence against him, Corona filed before the Supreme Court an urgent petition for certiorari and prohibition with prayer for immediate issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) and writ of preliminary injunction.  Also, Corona’s defense team filed a letter before the Senate impeachment court, which asked to defer or delay the enforcement of the subpoena until after the Supreme Court has acted on Corona’s petition.  Corona’s defense team also requested the impeachment court “to defer the enforcement of the subpoenas it issued to the Philippine Savings Bank and the Bank of the Philippine Islands.”  The impeachment court immediately denied the defense’s two motions; thus, allowing Pascual Garcia III, President of Philippine Savings Bank, to be put on the witness stand.

Garcia, who was subpoenaed to bring 10 specific bank records of Corona, presented only five accounts, which showed that as of December 31, 2010 he had a total deposit of P19,728,555.39.  He did not bring the other five accounts, which were dollar accounts, claiming that he was prohibited to disclose them under Republic Act 6426 (Foreign Currency Deposit Act).  However, even without the dollar accounts, his disclosed bank deposits appear to far exceed the net worth he stated in his SALN for the year 2010.  This is the “smoking gun” that proves that he lied in his SALNs, the gist of Article 2 of the impeachment complaint.

Discrepancies in net worth

Two days prior to the testimony of Garcia, Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) Commissioner Kim Henares was cross-examined by Corona’s lead defense lawyer, Serafin Cuevas, who asked her if she found any discrepancies in Corona’s SALNs.  She answered in the affirmative and indicated that as a result of the discrepancies the BIR is now investigating the Coronas for tax liability.

This prompted the prosecution to re-direct Henares.  Over the objection of Cuevas, Henares said that nine properties and several others were not included in Corona’s SALNs.  She testified that in 2003, Corona stated his net worth at P7 million instead of P14 million; P7 million in 2004 instead of P21 million; P8.3 million in 2006 instead of P31.224 million; P11 million in 2007 instead of P24 million; P12 million in 2008 instead of P25 million; and P14.5 million in 2009 instead of P52 million.  In 2010, his net worth went down when the Coronas sold their La Vista property to their daughter for P18 million.

Betrayal of public trust

With the testimony of Henares, the prosecution team breached Corona’s first line of defense.  While Corona is far from defeated, his defense is weakened.   However, to convince the senator-judges that Corona’s actions constitute betrayal of public trust, the prosecution team must prove without a shadow of a doubt that Corona indeed committed these impeachable acts.

Although Enrile had manifested from the get-go that the impeachment complaint was neither a criminal nor civil case wherein conviction beyond “reasonable doubt” is required in criminal cases and “preponderance of evidence” in civil cases, “clear and convincing” evidence is all that is needed to convict the respondent in an impeachment trial.  However, it is not going to be an easy task.

In a few days, the Supreme Court would rule on Corona’s petition for certiorari and prohibition with prayer for immediate issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) and writ of preliminary injunction.  If the high court rules in his favor, it could trigger a constitutional crisis.  Would the Senate impeachment court subordinate itself to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and not to the sovereignty of the people for which it was created?

The people are watching the development with anticipation.

(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)

 # # #

 “The world suffers a lot. Not because of the violence of bad people, but because of the silence of good people!” – Napoleon    

Criminal intent, not number of properties, is key in Corona trial—Sen. Santiago

By TJ Burgonio 

Philippine Daily Inquirer

Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago. 
INQUIRER FILE PHOTO

MANILA, Philippines – While probably terrified of her, prosecutors at the House of Representatives may have found an ally in Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago, who thinks there’s been too much ado over the prosecution’s “flip-flop” on the number of Chief Justice Renato Corona’s properties.

“There is a Latin phrase we often use, ‘falsus in unum falsus in omnibus’ [false in one thing, false in everything ]. If a witness is caught lying in one detail, he has been lying in other details,” Santiago said in a telephone interview.

However, regardless of the number of properties, Santiago said, the more important issue was whether there has been  “criminal intention” on the part of the respondent not to declare his assets, which she said would constitute “proof of a high crime.”

“If it appears indicative of a criminal intent, there’s no need to go to the other properties. One or two examples would suffice,” she said, quickly adding, “Unless he has an explanation acceptable to a  reasonable man.”

So far, in their presentations on Article 2, Corona’s alleged failure to disclose his statements of assets, liabilities and net worth, the prosecution “attempted to show certain irregularities.” The defense, however, has been able to explain the alleged irregularities, Santiago observed.

When she appeared in the second week of Corona’s impeachment trial, the fiery senator lambasted the prosecution for their purported lack of preparation and antics in court, even chiding private prosecutor Arthur Lim for his “long colloquies.”

The prosecution came under fire on Day 11 of the impeachment trial after lead prosecutor Iloillo Representatives Niel Tupas Jr. admitted they presented evidence only for at least 21 of Corona’s properties, not 45 properties they had earlier declared in a press conference.

They parried the round of criticisms by asserting that the crux of the matter was whether Corona declared the assets in his SALNs.

Senator Gregorio Honasan III agreed: “Whether 21 or 45 doesn’t make a difference. That’s not the point. The point is whether he declared this in the SALN. If he did not declare these, that’s the problem. We should not be talking arithmetic and splitting hairs here.”

After the fuss over the matter, Honasan said he would propose in their Monday caucus that Tupas and his defense counterpart, Serafin Cuevas, brief the senators and the public about the kind of testimony or evidence they would present for the week [...]

Read the full story >> Criminal intent, not number of properties, is key in Corona trial—Sen. Santiago

GMA News TV to air documentaries on Marcos, Aquino on EDSA anniversary

Source: GMA News

GMA News TV commemorates the Edsa Anniversary this year by airing two powerful documentaries on former Philippine Presidents: “Marcos: The Fall of a Dictator” and “Cory Aquino: The Housewife Who Led a Revolution”.  Commissioned by and first aired on History Channel Asia, the documentaries include valuable archival video of the Marcos era and Martial Law years as well as of the Edsa Revolution and Aquino’s first years in office — footage few of today’s youth have ever seen.

The documentaries feature interviews with those close to the former Presidents including former senators Joker Arroyo and Jovito Salonga, former President Fidel V. Ramos, human rights lawyer Rene Saguisag, and sons of Ferdinand and Cory: Senator Bongbong Marcos, and President Noynoy Aquino, to name just a few.

“The Marcos years were the darkest in our country’s post-war history,”  says Executive Producer Kara Magsanoc-Alikpala. “Many paid the ultimate price to restore decency, dignity and democracy in the Philippines. We pay tribute to those heroes, many of them unknown, who chose to fight the culture of fear, silence, corruption and intimidation.”

“Marcos: The Fall of A Dictator” airs Saturday night, February 25 while “Cory Aquino: The Housewife Who Led a Revolution” airs Sunday night, February 26, both at 8:40 pm only on GMA News TV Channel 11.

http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/246574/newstv/newstvspecials/gma-news-tv-to-air-documentaries-on-marcos-aquino-on-edsa-anniversary