Four women and Tupas

If there was any doubt at all about the outcome of the ongoing impeachment proceedings against Chief Justice Renato Corona, that doubt has already been so overwhelmed by a preponderance of testimony and evidence that a definite verdict of conviction is forthcoming.

The unraveling of an incredible and dizzying number of dollar accounts, with curious movements and transactions, are enough to tell us that the “moral fitness to govern” issue has turned against the Chief Justice. It is interesting that three admirable women have risen shining through this darkened firmament, transformed their luminosity into laser beams that sliced through the layers of legal tricks and technicalities to illuminate the truth that has since been concealed.

The three ladies are Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales, who presented a massive evidence of mind-boggling dollar accounts concealed by the impeached Magistrate; Sister Flor Basa, who has shown quiet courage and remarkable dignity amidst a gripping story of manipulation, deception and threats from the Corona couple that led to their loss of prime property; and Ana Basa, who came back to this country determined to unmask “wolves in sheep’s clothing” and finally claim for the Basa family what is rightfully theirs, amidst threat to life and honor.

There is a fourth lady, working quietly behind, supporting the lead prosecutor, Niel Tupas, who is making sure every legal ground is covered. When an opportune time presents itself, a story will be told about her.

Speaking of timing, this is now the right time to have a flashback of what transpired months ago, when a hardy team of young congressmen presented the articles of impeachment, proffered evidence, took turns arguing against a veteran of courtroom tactics, stoically faced the verbal abuse of a senator judge — and built a prima facie case against the impeached official.

Congressman Tupas, who is also chairman of the House’s justice committee, was the center of brickbats, while former SC Justice Serafin Cuevas initially won the applause of the real and virtual gallery who mistook legal trickery for brilliance. But soon enough, the cause of the defense panel wilted under the heat evidence, and the mission of the prosecution was shining forth for what it was from the start: a determined bid to expose the questionable actions of the impeached, and a righteous cause to give truth a chance.

So, at this point, we hear lead prosecutor Tupas with a defining confidence.

“It was clear from the start that the Defense merely relied on technicalities, because they knew that they did not have the evidence,” Tupas pointed out. The so-called brilliance of the Defense did not last, because the Senator Judges, the gallery and the public could no longer be impressed or deceived.

“Faced with damning evidence,” the Defense could only coast along the momentum set by the Prosecution, throwing some brickbats and enfeebled jabs along the way. Yet one senses the scent of victory for the Prosecution.

Their strategies have been backfiring. Certainly, the decision to summon the Ombudsman is a monumental blunder, to say the least, said Tupas. “They have thrown caution to the wind,” he said.

Is the sweet scent of victory wafting in the air? The Prosecution lawyers are not talking of this most desirable outcome. And yet they are humbled by the possibilities. Rep. Tupas recalls: “From the beginning, the prosecution’s job was never easy. But driven by the singular desire to do something right for our country and through sheer perseverance, our sacrifices are now starting to bear fruit.”

*      *      *

News hounds may already have read and heard about environmentalists’ opposition to SM Baguio’s expansion development project on the ground that it is destroying age-old pine trees in the world-famous tourism site. In effect, they have projected the image of a mega commercial establishment as an environment destoyer, and, in fact, have successfully convinced the local judicial court to issue a TRO stopping the continuation of an earth balling activity that’s the initial stage of constructing a parking lot for 1,000 motor vehicles in a P1.2 billion worth expansion program. So, the construction activity is on hold, and will resume upon the lifting of the court order.

SM’s corporate affairs department has remained silent about the issue, perhaps on the belief that the controversy would just naturally quiet down. The less said, the less mistakes. Last week, however, it appeared to have the good sense of agreeing to air its side through the representation at the Bulong Pulungan sa Sofitel Philippine Plaza of Annie S. Garcia and Bien C. Mateo, president and vice-president for operations, respectively, of SM Supermalls. The forum corrected the clash of environmentalists’ and supermall builder’s intentions.     

The first correction Garcia and Mateo gave was that the earthballing activity, as well as the construction of the expanded mega mall has been approved and given clearances by the city and Department of Energy and Natural Resources.

As Annie explained it, there are 1,130 trees within the SM premises. Of these, 182 will be transferred, and 86 will be replaced. Earthballing of the 182 trees began, but was stopped by the court. A video presentation showed the earthballing process to consist of digging up trees about 8-feet deep, and 6 feet around them, and wrapping them in giant biogradable plastic bags. These are to be transferred to specific carefully measured holes, with prepared organic fertilizers, and taken care of so that not a single tree will ever die. (This the environmentalists say is impossible. I dare say scientifically transferred trees do live, with proper care.) With the court order, SM technicians are taking care of the plastic-wrapped trees. Annie said there has been no cutting of trees, as environmentalists claim. Only unnecessary branches and twigs are cut, but never the trees. (Environmentalists say, tell that to the marines, but I dare say Annie is right.)

Another correction to oppositors’ claims is that only 53 per cent of the 182 affected trees are pine, and 47 percent are alnus. Since SM constructed the first existing mall in 2003, it has planted a good number of alnus trees in the area. The earthballing process is estimated to cost P7-million pesos, but that may increase, considering the delay in the construction process.

Annie said the planning and design of the expansion has been made in partnership with the US Green Building Council, for a cost-efficient and energy-saving mall planted with carbon dioxide absorbing plants and non-invasive trees in a roof garden, a rainwater collection system beneath the mall that will contain 6.9 million liters of water that would benefit not only mall concessionaires, but also to be distributed to the communities around the mall.

As of 2005, Annie said, Benguet had been planted to 6,000 pine trees. Several establishments — have been issued tree-cutting permits, such as the PEZA, UP Baguio, St. Louis University, government line agencies, subdivision developers, and private lot owners — but nary a voice of opposition was heard. How come SM Supermalls, the first in the northern region, is being vehemently attacked? Is it possible that threatened small department store owners in the city are orchestrating the opposition? You and I can only guess why, but as they say, there is no stopping of progress if by progress is meant sustainable planning and development for the common good.

* * *

My e-mail: [email protected]