Archive
The Impeachment of CJ Renato Corona – How It Started
Clearly, the fight between Pnoy and CJ Corona, is not between the Executive and Judiciary, nor between Pnoy and GMA…the real bone of contention here is Hacienda Luisita!
March 2010: First Blood
GMA appointed Justice Renato Corona as Chief Justice to replace CJ Reynato Puno.
This was concurred by nine justices in the premise that the judiciary is not covered by Article VII, Section 15 of the 1987 Constitution, which prevents an outgoing president from making appointments to government posts two months before the elections.
Presidential candidate Aquino said he would not recognize the midnight appointment of CJ Corona.
This is the reason why he did not take his oath of office with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as mandated by the 1986 constitution.
June 2010: “Watch Me”
The Unyon ng mga Manggagawa sa Agrikultura [UMA] asked CJ Corona to recall the TRO issued by the SC in June 2006. The TRO stops the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council and Department of Agrarian Reform [DAR] from revoking the stock distribution option offered by the Cojuangco-Aquino family. The TRO also stops DAR from distributing the 6,453-hectare sugar plantation to the farmers beneficiaries.
“We humbly submit to your Honorable Office our appeal asking the Supreme Court to act with dispatch and resolve the controversial agrarian case of Hacienda Luisita in favor of agrarian reform beneficiaries,” read the letter of the UMA.
CJ Corona orders the review of the Hacienda Luisita Labor Case.
July 2010: The Soup Thickens
On July 30 2010 President Aquino created the Philippine Truth Commission [PTC] under Executive Order No. 1 (EO 1). The PTC is tasked to investigate corruption scandals in the administration of former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo is headed by retired Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide Jr.
Lagman et. al. filed petition with the Supreme Court, against EO 1, citing the PTC as a duplication of the quasi-judicial powers of the Office of the Ombudsman and the Department of Justice, hence the PTC is an “exercise in futility.”
With a 10-5 vote the Supreme Court declared the PTC is “illegal” and ruled with finality on July 26, 2011 the unconstitutionality of PTC. Majority of the justices held that EO 1 violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution because it singles out the investigation of the reported graft and corruption in the PGMA administration. [4 of the dissenting justices are GMA appointees]
Thus, SC declared “unconstitutional” and nullifies with finality the creation of the Philippine Truth Commission.
The SC ruling matched the opinions of Senators Miriam Defensor Santiago and Joker Arroyo that the PTC is a veiled attempt to circumvent the rules of the land to get back at PGMA.
November 2011: Goodbye Hacienda
The Supreme Court, through its resolution G.R. No. 171101, has ordered Hacienda Luisita Inc. [HLI] to distribute the 5,000 hectares of Hacienda Luisita, to the farmer beneficiaries who have tilled the land for decades.
In addition, the Supreme Court directed HLI to pay farmers a total of P1.3 billion for the sale of three large parcels of land.
- P500 million it received from Luisita Realty Inc. for the sale of 200 hectares of land in 1996;
- P750 million for the sale of the Luisita Industrial Park; and
- P80,511,500 for the sale of the 80.51-hectare lot for the Subic-Clark-Tarlac Expressway road network.
November 15, 2011: The Last Nail In the Coffin
SC, in an 8-5 vote, issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) on the watch list order (WLO) issued against GMA and her husband Jose Miguel T. Arroyo, and others who are facing investigation on the alleged poll fraud in the 2004 and 2007 elections in Mindanao.
December 2011: Impeach Corona
December 12, 2011, it took 2 hours for 188 congressmen/women to sign the impeachment complaint against CJ Corona.
According to SC Spokesman Marquez, what congress did was against Section 2, Rule II of the Rules of Procedure in Impeachment Proceedings. The rule dictates that:
“Impeachment shall be initiated by the filing and subsequent referral to the Committee on Justice of: (a) a verified complaint for impeachment filed by any Member of the House of Representatives; or (b) a verified complaint filed by any citizen upon a resolution of endorsement by any Member thereof; or (c) a verified complaint or resolution of impeachment filed by at least one-third (1/3) of all Members of the House.”
- Corona allegedly betrayed the public trust through his track record marked by partiality and subservience in cases involving the Arroyo administration from the time of his appointment as Supreme Court justice and until his dubious appointment as a “midnight” chief justice to the present.
- Corona allegedly committed culpable violation of the constitution and/or betrayed the public trust when he failed to disclose to the public his Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth as required under Sec. 17, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution.
- Corona allegedly committed culpable violations of the Constitution and betrayed the public trust by failing to meet and observe the stringent standards under Article VIII, section 7 (3) of the Constitution that provides that “[a] member of the judiciary must be a person of proven competence, integrity, probity, and independence.”
- Corona supposedly betrayed the public trust and/or committed culpable violation of the constitution when it blatantly disregarded the principle of separation of powers by issuing a “status quo ante” order against the House of Representatives in the case concerning the impeachment of then- Ombudsman Merceditas Navarro-Gutierrez.
- Corona allegedly committed culpable violations of the Constitution through wanton arbitrariness and partiality in consistently disregarding the principle of res judicata and in deciding in favor of gerry-mandering in the cases involving the 16 newly-created cities, and the promotion of Dinagat Island into a province.
- Corona supposedly betrayed the public trust by arrogating unto himself, and to a committee he created, the authority and jurisdiction to improperly investigate a justice of the Supreme Court for the purpose of exculpating him. Such authority and jurisdiction is properly reposed by the constitution in the House of Representatives via impeachment.
- Corona supposedly betrayed the public trust through his partiality in granting a temporary restraining order in favor of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and her husband Jose Miguel Arroyo in order to give them an opportunity to escape prosecution and to frustrate the ends of justice, and in distorting the supreme court decision on the effectivity of the TRO in view of a clear failure to comply with the conditions of the Supreme Court’s own TRO.
- Corona allegedly betrayed the public trust and/or committed graft and corruption when he failed and refused to account for the judiciary development fund (JDF) and special allowance for the judiciary (SAJ) collections.
elinonapigkit
I Will Make It Happen 
The Absence of Justice In An Impeachment Court Composed of Senator-Judges: One of the Defects of the 1987 Constitution
The ongoing impeachment trial of CJ Corona borders on being a television legal mini-series and could be considered as a prime time entertainment show, purely for the enjoyment of the viewing public where every players, defense, prosecutors, and senator-judges shows their knowledge and/or versatility in court proceedings and interpretation of the law.
But will the rule of law prevails in this proceeding?
For instance, it’s so nice to see the grandstand performance of the senator-judges in their role as inquisitors, hiding their style of fishing expedition in the guise of finding the “truth” and in the name of “justice.” And whenever they embarked on a fishing expedition, they show that as senator-judges, they lord it over the issue at hand regardless of what the law says, the message they sent is something to be afraid of.
Notably, the battle cry of this impeachment trial by both the congressman-prosecutors and senator-judges is let the “truth” comes out so “justice” will prevail.
But then, is there “justice” in using illegally acquired evidence? Is there “justice” when nobody can object to what the senator-judges is saying and/or doing except his/her co-senator-judges?
More so, will the defendant get justice even if the “truth” of his innocence comes out in this impeachment proceeding that is being simultaneously tried by media in the court of public opinion?
Along this line of thought, we have to ask, who are the judges in this trial?
They are the senators who get their mandate from the electorate. How many among the senators, now sitting as judges, will run again in the coming 2013 election? And even if they will not run in the 2013 election, they still have to face the electorate, one way or the other. Simply put, these senator-judges owe their position from the people!
With this given fact facing the senator-judges and with their constant pronouncements that they represent the people, what will guide them when they cast their votes at the end of the impeachment trial? Will they base their judgment on the rule of law, that is, based on evidences? Or will they be biased in favor of the public opinion that has been created by the media trial?
And with their mindset focused on the premise that they are the voice of the people and personally, as politicians who have vested interest in the power given them by the electorate, it is very difficult to believe that they will uphold the rule of law come judgment day at the end of the impeachment trial.
Clearly, senator-judges cannot be impartial in their judgment of the case. They cannot ignore the public perception and/or opinion. Their being a senator depends on the electorate.
This is the dilemma of CJ Corona, or for that matter any official facing impeachment under the 1987 Constitution, at the end of the day impeachment will be based on the public opinion regardless of what the evidences show
In this case, CJ Corona must sway the public opinion in his favor. But can he match the demolition job of the administration fed in the media for the trial by publicity?
Let us not be too naive, to ignore the truth that this impeachment is a test case between CJ Corona and President Aquino. And this is the reason why this impeachment has the full backing of the present administration.
The propaganda machinery and financial resources of the present administration are being used in this impeachment trial. It cannot be ignored that the propaganda machine of the administration is being used to the hilt for the demolition job against CJ Corona to condition the minds of the people that he is not fit to be the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
To this end, the allies of the administration, the 188 congressmen were given the marching order to nail down CJ Corona. And like obedient soldiers, loyal to their superior, these 188 congressmen blindly signed a defectively drafted Articles of Impeachment, which the administration’s senator-judges are fervently trying to prove.
Nevertheless, if by a certain stroke of miracle, CJ Corona is acquitted contrary to the public opinion as fed by the present administration through the media it is a certainty that mob rule will show its ugly head.
At the end of the day, when this impeachment trial is over, we shall come to realize that an impeachment under the 1987 Constitution will:
Finally, the crucial question we have to ask ourselves is, up until when are we going to use the 1987 Constitution, in spite of its glaring defects in giving us grandstanding politicians who only care for their personal vested interest, a constitution institutionalizing mob rule instead of the rule of law, a constitution sowing disunity instead of uniting the people, and drowning us in the quagmire of economic stagnation and political immaturity, making the Philippines the sick man of Asia?