Supreme Court (SC) Chief Justice Renato Corona is not buying the call of the prosecution team for him to take a leave of absence while his impeachment trial in the Senate is pending.
He is staying put at the helm of the high court and the entire judiciary.
Speaking to newsmen, Court Administrator Midas Marquez said the SC chief has opted to continue performing his duties since “there is nothing in the Constitution or any law that requires him (Chief Justice) to leave his office while facing impeachment proceedings.”
“So he will continue to perform his functions,” he said.
Marquez also dismissed the claim of panel Marikina Rep. Miro Quimbo that the Chief Justice should relinquish his post even temporarily so as not to “drag, misuse and abuse” the entire judiciary as an institution in facing impeachment that should be on “individual capacity.”
The lawmaker said that Marquez, for instance, is being used to defend the Chief Justice when he should only speak for the entire institution, but Marquez stressed that defending the Chief Justice is well within his duty as spokesman for the high tribunal.
“Let me repeat. It’s my function to protect and defend the institution and the justices, including the Chief Justice. For as long as he (Corona) is the Chief Justice I will speak for him the same way I can speak for the other justices,” he pointed out.
Marquez has reiterated that Corona is set to assign a team of spokesmen solely for the impeachment issue.
The SC official likewise played down the insinuation of the prosecution panel that Corona’s answer to the
impeachment charges was “weak and defective” as it purportedly lacks proper verification, or signature.
“There’s no requirement for the answer to be verified. It’s not in the Constitution, rules of court or rules of impeachment. What is only required is for the initial pleading — in this case the complaint — to be verified,” he explained.
“If they say it’s weak, that’s their allegation. Let the Senate rule on that,” he stressed, as he cited an impeachment rule prohibiting parties from discussing merits of the case in the media.
Midas Marquez also yesterday scored the president and his spokesman for announcing that President Aquino has ordered his legal team to provide him with a shortlist for the replacement of Corona.
“Let’s not be too presumptuous. Let’s not be too arrogant. We should exercise a degree of humility,” Marquez said.
Marquez noted that Corona’s impeachment trial has yet to start. “Nothing is lost when we are humble,” he said.
Aquino announced this order during a TV interview, and the same was followed up by his spokesman Lacierda.
Marquez reminded Malacañang that the Chief Justice’s position is not yet vacant.
“The impeachment process is about to start only next month,” Marquez stressed, adding that Malacañang had no authority to screen possible applicants to the judiciary.
Marquez said that while the President has the power under the Constitution to appoint members of the judiciary, it is the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) that has the authority to screen applicants to the judiciary and the Ombudsman post.
Aquino jumped the gun too eagerly in starting the process for starting the replacement for the chief justicem a former Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) president said yesterday.
Former IBP president Jose Aguila Grapilon cautioned Malacañang against talking about Corona’s replacement and instead advised Aquino to wait for the outcome of the impeachment trial which begins on Jan. 16.
“His announcement (to find a replacement of the CJ) is too premature since the Senate has to first start the impeachment trial and of course to prove whether or not he is guilty of the charges against him,” he told reporters in a chance interview.
“Let the Senate determine his (Corona’s) guilt or innocence first” Grapilon said.
Five former IBP presidents are taking exception to the earlier stand of the current officials of the 40,000-strong organization who expressed grave alarm over what they described as “breakneck and high-handed impeachment” of the chief justice by the House of Representatives.
Grapilon and Solicitor General Anselmo Cadiz, who served as IBP president from 2003 to 2006, presented a manifesto expressing their support for Corona’s impeachment.
Aside from Grapilon and Cadiz, other ex-presidents who signed the manifesto were Raoul Angangco (1995-1997), Arthur Lim (1999-2001) and Teofilo Pilando (2001-2003).
Cadiz is Aquino’s solicitor-general. Lim is said to be in Aquino’s government while Angangco is identified with the Firm and Justice Antonio Carpio, who is said to be pushing the impeachment of Corona, for him to be appointed chief justice.
The five former presidents said: “Everyone in government, including high officials removable only by impeachment, is ultimately answerable to the sovereign people from whom all governmental authority emanates.”
While the primacy of the law and the separation of powers should be respected, the former IBP leaders said: “we must realize and accept that the rule of law and the doctrine of separation of powers do not mean, nor require, that the Chief Justice shall be immune from criticism, or impeachment.”
Grapilon, in his opinion, said that Corona should not misinterpret his impeachment as an attack to judiciary and instead consider it as positive thing in promoting a healthy democracy since it is “an indication that the power of checks and balances is at work.”
“The Chief Justice is not the Supreme Court and clearly, we should put that in our minds,” he added. Cadiz likewise echoed the statement of Grapilon as he insisted that the executive is not lording over the judiciary.
The Solicitor General called on Corona to take a leave of absence as an act of delicadeza while the Impeachment proceeding against the SC chief takes place.
In a related development, the House prosecution panel is confident it will get a conviction in the Corona impeachment court.
House Deputy Speaker Erin Tañada said they can get the needed 16 votes to convict the Chief Justice who has been impeached on eight charges involving culpable violation of the Constitution, betrayal of public trust, and graft and corruption.
“We are confident that we will get the 16 votes based on the evidence we will present in the Senate,” Tañada said. He is one of the 11-member House prosecution panel.
Tañada also noted that Corona’s reply on the impeachment charges shows that the chief justice does not want to face the Senate impeachment court.
“The answer of CJ Corona shows that he is engaging in”double talk.” His answer reveals that he is not committed to his “campaign speech” which he delivered in front of the court employees. He is running away from the charges by asking for dismissal of the impeachment complaint instead of facing the charges as he said he will,” Tañada said.
Tañada also pointed out that Corona’s refusal to sign his reply could be construed as a sign that he does not want to be held accountable for his reply.
“The fact that he did not verify his answer shows that he does not want to be held accountable for what is written in his answer,” Tañada said.
But Bayan Muna Rep. Neri Colmenares, who is also a member of the prosecution team, said that the Senate is not bound by the technical rules as the impeachment trial is not a judicial proceeding.
Colmenares also stressed that there is a need to resolve the impeachment case on the merits and not on technicalities.
“It really depends on the senate, but in my personal opinion, considering that impeachment is not a judicial proceedings, the senate is not bound by technical rules so I guess they’ll give him chance to correct if they feel verification is a must. I’d also rather that the issue be resolved on the merits and not technicalities,” Colmenares said.
Malacañang is expecting a “fair-minded” Senate for the trial and would unseat the chief magistrate only on the basis of their evidence.
At a press briefing, Lacierda admitted that the impeachment case of Corona is now entirely in the hands of the Senate and whatever would be its decision is already beyond Malacañang.
Lacierda’s claim however belies reports that at this early, Malacañang is already preparing possible contigency actions in the event that Aquino’s personal war with Corona will not result in an impeachment including the use of “people power” to force the resignation of the chief justice if and when he is cleared by the Senate.
Apart from using “mob rule,” Aquino’s political strategists headed by his chieg Political Adviser Ronaldo Llamas have already set-up a network of people’s organizations to launch “shame campaigns” against Senator-judges who are deemed to be pro-Corona.
According to Lacierda, Malacañang is counting on the Senate to look at Corona’s impeachment case on the basis of the evidence that will be presented against him.
What Lacierda has apparently forgotten however is that the Senator-judges would also have to look at the evidence of Corona as well and not just the evidence of the prosecution.
“ I think it’s beyond us right now. Most of us will know the backgrounds of the individual senators. We are… we do expect, however, notwithstanding our what we know of the senators, we do expect them to rule on the impeachment trial based on what we will present and what the witnesseswe will be presenting as well. So we expect them to be fair-minded. We expect them to recognize the strength of our evidence,” Lacierda claimed.
Lacierda maintained that while he believes that the senator-judges “ would personally know the sentiments of the people” he still would not want to make any “political judgment on them” apparently referring to senators who are seen as “friendly” to Corona and the SC.
“ If I make any comment on that I would be accused of making a political judgment on them. So I would leave it with the senators. They would personally know the sentiments of the people and how…what they should do,” Lacierda said. Virgilio J. Bugaoisan and Gerry Baldo
Comments
Post a Comment