By: Tony Lopez
One, the eight articles of impeachment have frail legal legs to stand on and probably, without the politics, cannot convict Corona.
Two, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, as the presiding judge of the 24-member Senate acting as the impeachment tribunal, can make or break the case for Corona.
At 88 on February 14, Enrile is the most experienced public official of the land. He served for 14 years as defense secretary to Ferdinand Marcos whom he later ousted in a four-day People Power revolt. He has served four terms in the Senate.
Enrile was a victim of the political persecution by then President Corazon Cojuangco Aquino who ousted him as defense minister following a November 1986 coup attempt against the housewife-turned-president. He ran for senator in 1987 but was almost cheated of an election victory until his military colleagues raised alarums. Later, Cory Aquino charged him with rebellion and murder following the bloody December 1989 coup, had him arrested, and confined to a police camp in Quezon City. In June 1990, Enrile and 22 others were freed by the Supreme Court , voting 11-2.
Enrile knows only too well how it feels to be falsely accused and how it feels to be shamed before the bar of public opinion.
The trial of Chief Magistrate Corona began in earnest on Jan. 16, the first working day of the Senate, and of Congress, coming from an extended vacation marking the world’s longest Christmas celebration.
The first day was won by the prosecution headed by Iloilo Fifth District Congressman Niel Tupas, the chairman of the Houe Committee on Justice that garnered the signatures of 188 congressmen to impeach Corona.
The Senate impeachment tribunal upheld the validity of the impeachment complaint and hindered the defense panel’s attempt to delay the trial through technicalities like questioning the manner the Articles of Impeachment were endorsed by the House of Representatives.
But the second day was a big victory for the defense. Presiding Judge Enrile refused to issue subpoenas to the wife, children, and son-in-law of Chief Justice Corona on the ground of self-incrimination and the jurisprudence showing that a spouse cannot testify against her husband.
The prosecution also admitted it was not ready to present Case No. 1 or Article 1. It was ready to prosecute Case No. 2 (Article 2) but their witnesses were absent.
During the first day, Corona’s lead defense counsel, Serafin Cuevas, a former justice of the Supreme Court, pleaded not guilty on behalf of his client.
Co-defense counsel former law dean Eduardo de los Angeles refuted point by point the charges against Corona.
Delos Angeles classified the eight Articles of Impeachment into two categories: those involving Supreme Court decisions (Articles 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7); and those that pertain to the non-disclosure of the SALN of the Chief Justice, and his alleged refusal to account for the JDF. (Articles 2 and 8).
Article 1 alleges Corona’s partiality in cases involving the Arroyo administration.
Article 2 claims Corona failed to disclose statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN).
Article 3 claims Corona failed to observe stringent standards of competence, integrity, probity and independence.
Article 4 says Corona disregarded the principle of separation of powers by issuing a status quo ante order against the House of Representatives in the case concerning the impeachment of then Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez.
Article 5 alleges Corona’s arbitrariness and partiality in cases related to the creation of 16 new cities and promotion of Dinagat Island into a province.
Article 6 claims Corona arrogated unto himself the authority to investigate an erring member of the Supreme Court to exculpate him.
Article 7 alleges Corona’s partiality in granting a temporary restraining order in favor of the Arroyo couple.
Article 8 claims Corona failed and refuses to account for the Judiciary Development Fund and Special Allowance for the Judiciary collections.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar