Sandigan freezes Corona assets

MANILA, Philippines - The Sandiganbayan has ordered a freeze on the assets of former chief justice Renato Corona and his wife Cristina valued at approximately P130.5 million, which are the subject of a forfeiture case filed by the Office of the Ombudsman more than a month ago.

Associate Justice Teresita Diaz-Baldos, who chairs the anti-graft court’s second division, signed the two-page writ of preliminary attachment on May 5 and gave Sandiganbayan sheriff IV Alexander Valencia 30 days to enforce the order and submit a report with a full inventory of the properties.

The Sandiganbayan said the freezing of the Corona couple’s assets is in order, “considering that adequate bases exist which satisfy the requirements set forth under Rule 57 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.”

The freeze order seeks to ensure that if it is proven that the Coronas did acquire the wealth illegally, the same will be recovered by the state in full.

Also covered by the writ of preliminary injunction are any assets found held by the Coronas’ “dummies, trustees, assignees, nominees, transferees and successors-in-interest.”

The Office of the Ombudsman said the former chief justice and his wife acquired and accumulated ill-gotten wealth from 2001 to 2011.

Separate criminal charges of perjury and violation of Republic Act 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees have also been filed against Corona.

The Office of the Ombudsman said Corona failed to truthfully declare his wealth in his statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALNs) and should thus be held criminally liable.

Corona is seeking the dismissal of the criminal cases through a motion for judicial determination of probable cause.

The motion asks the Sandiganbayan to review the findings of graft investigators that according to Corona are wrong and baseless.

No surprise

Corona said the Sandiganbayan’s freeze order did not come as a surprise.

Sought for reaction, Corona said there is no need to issue a statement since it was only procedural.

“The preliminary attachment in the case (including the issuance of the freeze order) is very strict per rules of the Sandiganbayan,” he said.

Corona’s lawyer Magilyn Loja said their camp has yet to receive a copy of the Sandiganbayan order.

“But once we receive the resolution, we will have to discuss it with our client so he can take appropriate action,” she said.

The lawyer added that her client “is in the Philippines and has been facing all cases filed against him.”

Probable cause found

Meanwhile, the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) first division, which handles three of the 12 tax evasion charges filed against Corona, has found probable cause to proceed with the case against the impeached magistrate.

The CTA first division set the arraignment of Corona on June 18, noting that the issuance of an arrest warrant is moot and academic as Corona voluntarily surrendered and posted bail after the case was filed on March 4.

Based on records, the division also ruled against the request of Corona to consolidate all 12 cases – seven of which were raffled to the second division, while another two is in the third division.

The second division earlier granted the motion of Corona to suspend his arraignment in view of the petition for review that he filed before the DOJ. The arraignment for the cases in the second division is set on June 4.

The third division, on the other hand, has yet to rule on the motion for judicial determination of probable cause filed by the accused.

The case stemmed from the results of the investigation of a DOJ panel of prosecutors, which found probable cause to charge Corona with violation of sections 254 and 255 of the National Internal Revenue Code before the CTA for allegedly failing to pay taxes amounting to P120.5 million.

This is different from the ill-gotten wealth and perjury cases filed by the Office of the Ombudsman against Corona and his wife Cristina before the Sandiganbayan.

The tax cases – recommended in a 65-page resolution dated April 26, 2013 – were based on the complaint filed by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), which accused Corona of committing the crime of tax evasion and willful failure to file his income tax returns for the years 2003 to 2005, 2007, 2008 and 2010.

The BIR said the alleged criminal acts also made him civilly liable to the state in the amount of almost P120.5 million, inclusive of surcharges and interest.

It said Corona earned income from other sources aside from his compensation as a public official, which is contrary to his registration with the BIR as a “pure compensation income earner.”

In his defense, Corona claimed that the period of filing of criminal charges for the years 2002 to 2007 has prescribed, and that the evidence presented by the BIR – particularly his bank deposits – are inadmissible as the waiver he executed has expired following the conclusion of the impeachment trial.

The waiver, executed during the trial, authorized appropriate authorities to inspect his bank accounts.

Corona also said that the BIR failed to take into account his family’s wealth in computing his opening net worth, as well as the fact that the money in his bank accounts belonged to other persons.

But in its resolution, the DOJ panel ruled that Corona failed to produce evidence supporting his claim that the money in his bank deposits belong to other people. It added that the BIR could not be faulted for relying on the respondent’s SALN in computing his opening net worth.

With regard the prescription issue, the panel noted that the prescriptive period does not begin to run until the commission of the crime was discovered. It added that no law supports Corona’s claim that his waiver expired after the impeachment trial. – With Edu Punay, Janvic Mateo