Corona asks 2 justices to inhibit from impeach case

Thursday, February 9, 2012

CHIEF Justice Renato Corona asked Wednesday his estranged friend Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio and an alleged Malacañang-friendly magistrate to step aside in the hearing of a petition to stop his impeachment trial at the Senate.

Through his lawyers, Corona said Carpio and Associate Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno should not join in the deliberations on Thursday afternoon since they have been critical of the Chief Justice.

Have something to report? Tell us in text, photos or videos.

"More importantly, Justices Carpio and Sereno are openly touted as the likely replacements, in the event that CJ Corona is removed from office," the motion for inhibit stated.

President Benigno Aquino III, who openly campaigned for Corona’s prosecution, admitted in an interview last December that he is now asking his legal advisers to come up with a list of possible replacements to Corona should he be found guilty of graft and corruption, among other impeachable offenses.

Carpio has been on the inside track since he is the most senior member of the 15-man tribunal. Carpio, who was Corona’s fiercest rival to the post as Chief Justice nearly two years ago, was appointed by then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo in October 2001.

Sereno, meanwhile, is Aquino’s first appointee in the High Court since assuming power in the middle of 2010.

However, Corona said Sereno’s arrival to the High Court "signaled a new period of difficulty and embarrassment" for him because the lady justice "has openly defied and challenged" his authority.

The motion failed to elaborate.

"In this case, the animosity of Justices Carpio and Sereno against CJ Corona has become public knowledge, casting doubt on their ability to render impartial justice,” the motion stated.

In a separate 39-page motion, Corona stressed that his right to due process was violated by the House of Representatives by the swift transmittal of the complaint to the Senate after it was approved by 188 congressmen in a five-hour meeting last December 12.

He also cited numerous public admissions that some signatories admitted they did not read the complaint.

Corona said the Senate should have not entertained the complaint right from the beginning due to its constitutional infirmity and lack of probable cause.

It also noted how the impeachment court committed grave abuse of discretion when it allowed the continuation of hearing and presentation of evidences despite not being able to meet legal requirements of a complaint.

"Needless to state, the statements therein do not constitute allegations in law, much less ultimate facts upon which a valid charge can be sustained. Petitioner is puzzled, however, that the impeachment court has given paragraph 2.3 different treatment and legal effect from paragraph 2.4. The result has been to deprive CJ Corona of due process and any protection from the onslaught of irrelevant and immaterial evidence,” said the petition.

"By allowing the House of Representatives to introduce evidence on matters outside the clear wording of Article II will undoubtedly violate petitioner’s right to due process. Pursuant to the due process clause of the Constitution, petitioner has the right to be fully informed of the nature of the charges against him so that he may be adequately prepare for his defense," it added.

Another case presented by the camp of Corona is the supposed grave abuse of discretion by the impeachment court in issuing the subpoena for all bank accounts requested by the prosecution, saying bank accounts must be correctly identified before they could be examined.

This was in reference to the subpoena issued by the impeachment court to Corona’s accounts at the Philippine Savings Bank (PSBank) and Bank of the Philippine Islands (BPI).

"The prohibited possession by the prosecution of the submitted documents cannot be the basis for the issuance of any subpoena. On the contrary, the mere possession of these documents is enough to invite inquiry into possible criminal wrongdoing by these conspiring congressmen. Regrettably, the impeachment court was content to elicit any explanation the prosecution had to offer. This is travesty of law and justice,” the petition read. (Virgil Lopez/AMN/Sunnex)