Defense lines up 29 witnesses

MANILA, Philippines - Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. and lead prosecutor Iloilo Rep. Niel Tupas Jr. are to be included in a list of 29 witnesses the defense panel wants to testify during the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona.

The defense panel also included in the list Supreme Court administrator and spokesman Jose Midas Marquez. He is expected to testify on Article 6 of the Articles of Impeachment regarding the proceedings about an ethics case and allegations of plagiarism in writing the SC’s decision on the Vinuya case.

Justice Presbitero Velasco, Marquez, Fr. Joaquin Bernas, Justice Roberto Abad and/or Justice Arturo Brion would be included by the defense panel to testify under Article 7 of the impeachment complaint.

Apart from the justices, the defense also wants COA supervision auditor of the SC; lawyer Corazon Ferrer-Flores, deputy clerk of court and chief of the SC Fiscal Management and Budget Office to testify on the issue of the use of judicial funds under Article 8.

In a 29-page compliance order, the defense panel camp led by retired SC justice Serafin Cuevas reiterated their preliminary objection to the validity of the impeachment complaint filed by the House of Representatives against the Chief Justice.

Defense lawyer Jose Roy III explained the panel is planning to revive the issue on the verification of the impeachment complaint, which the Senate body had not ruled upon when it junked on the first day of trial the defense’s move for a preliminary hearing.

As far as he is concerned, Roy said he wanted all 188 signatories to the verified complaint called to the witness stand only to prove their earlier stand that the impeachment lacked the constitutional requirements of verification.

“It is a legitimate purpose of the defense to attack the complaint and the complainants,” Roy said.

“Personally, I believe, we should not be told what we can and cannot do in the first place. We would have not had this problem if not (for) the obviously politically motivated complaint against the chief justice,” he said.

“The Senate ruled that they could not inquire about the issue of transmittal. That’s what they ruled upon. They didn’t know if the verification, they said that the House certified that this is correct so we are not going to inquire past the fact,” Roy explained. “That is materially false.”

Roy noted not one of the congressmen who signed the complaint came out to testify.

“You have spokesmen, talking and talking there, and why won’t they go and testify,” he said.

Defense lawyer Tranquil Salvador III added the panel will not be limited to the body’s decision on the preliminary hearing, and that they can raise the issue on verification anytime during the trial.

They wanted Belmonte and Tupas to testify in relation to their statements regarding the circumstances and events that transpired on Dec. 12, 2011, which led to the impeachment of Corona.

Apart from Belmonte and Tupas, the defense wanted House Secretary Marilyn Barua-Yap, Cavite Rep. Jesus Crispin Remulla, Batangas Rep. Hermilando Mandanas and Navotas Rep. Tobias Tiangco “to testify on their personal knowledge” and the statements on the circumstances that led to the filing of the verified complaint against Corona.

The defense wants to classify as documentary evidence the congressional records on Dec. 12, 13, and 14, 2011 and “all relevant acts and records of Congress, stated or mentioned in the preliminary objection are admitted and adopted by way of judicial notice, without need for further proof.”

Aversion

Under Article 1, the defense wants Tupas to prove that he is averse to Corona and that due to this aversion, “he intentionally omitted in the verified complaint relevant portions in the assailed Supreme Court decisions including the relevant acts of Congress, that exculpate CJ Corona from the charge of betrayal of public trust.”

The defense also wanted a representative from the Office of the Court Administrator to identify a copy of a study of “The Role of Supreme Court in Unstable Democracies: The Case of the Philippine Supreme Court, an empirical analysis 1986.”

The study authored by Laarni Escresa and Nuno Garoupa discusses the issue of “partiality” or “voting patterns” of justices of the Philippine Supreme Court.

The defense also wants to reserve the right of  Corona to “pursue his continuing objection” to the presentation of evidence under paragraphs 2.3 and 2.4 of the complaint.

They wanted to call in a representative from the Philippine Center of Investigative Journalism to testify on the contents of their presentation, “Who Should Cast the First Stone,” on the website of ABS-CBN on Jan. 11.