'Big name lawyers want to defend Corona'

MANILA, Philippines - Big name lawyers are lining up and offering their services for free to defend Chief Justice Renato Corona in the impeachment trial at the Senate early next year.

Supreme Court (SC) Administrator Midas Marquez said that the lawyers who will form the defense team for Corona is still being finalized.

"I'm also very pleasantly surprised because there are so many big name lawyers offering their services to the Chief Justice for free," Marquez said in a television interview.

He denied reports that veteran lawyer Estelito Mendoza, who defended former President Joseph Estrada in an impeachment trial before his ouster in 2001.

In a speech before hundreds of members of the judiciary yesterday, Corona said that he will not back out from the impeachment trial and assured that he will answer the allegations against him point-for-point during the trial proper.

Meanwhile, Marquez said that Corona would likely continue to function as the SC's chief even during the impeachment trial, which will start January 16 next year.

"There is no reason for him to go on leave. He has his battery of lawyers defending him before the Senate," he said.

He, however, said that Corona may still opt to take a leave and appoint a caretaker "if the time comes that he thinks he cannot perform fully his function anymore as chief justice."

Marquez reiterated that the bases cited by congressmen-complainants in the impeachment case against Corona are "baseless" and about "past issues."

He also insisted that the impeachment case against Corona is also a form of attack on the high court and the judiciary as the grounds cited by the complainants were about decisions made by magistrates as a whole.

The impeachment complaint cited that several decisions issued by the SC on several cases involving former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo were partial.

Also yesterday, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) issued a statement expressing their opposition to Corona's impeachment.

"The impeachment has placed on trial not only the Chief Justice but the entire Supreme Court. The grounds invoked to impeach the Chief Justice refer to collegial decisions of the Supreme Court involving interpretations of law in actual disputes elevated for review," the IBP said in a statement.

It said that in all of the cases cited in the impeachment complaint, Corona merely concurred with the majority or minority opinion and was not the ponente.

"Neither did the Chief Justice flip-flop or change his position in any of these cases. The decisions were reached by the Supreme Court pursuant to its processes and subjected to reconsideration proceedings. They all involve interpretation of what the law is," the lawyers' group added.

The SC decisions cited in the complaint were:

• invalidation by the high court of President Aquino's Executive Order No. 1, which creates the Truth Commission;
• upholding of the Court of the laws enacted by Congress involving the creation of the provinces of Dinagat Island, the conversion of 16 municipalities into cities, and the creation of a new congressinal district in Camarines Sur;
• issuance of a status quo ante order in the House of Representatives' impeachment proceedings against former Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez; and
• issuance of a temporary restraining order against the watchlist order issued by the Department of Justice to prevent the travel abroad of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.

The IBP also said that the two other grounds -- Corona's failure to submit his statement of assets, liabilities and networth (SALN) and account for the Judiciary Development Fund (JDF) and Special Allowance for the Judiciary (SAJ) collections -- involve the assertion by the high court of its fiscal autonomy.

The group cited a resolution by the SC in 1992, which says the Chief Justice and Associated Justices can file their SALN directly with the Clerk of Court. It added the Chief Justice also has authority over the SAJ and JDF collections pursuant to the SC's fiscal autonomy, which the group said is not being prohibited by the government's Commission on Audit.