Jan 30 Senate Impeachment Court Record

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012
Republic of the Philippines
Senate
Pasay City
Record of the Senate

Sitting As An Impeachment Court
Monday, January 30, 2012
AT 2:01 P.M., THE PRESIDING OFFICER, SENATE PRESIDENT JUAN PONCE ENRILE, CALLED THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL OF SUPREME COURT CHIEF JUSTICE RENATO C. CORONA TO ORDER. The Presiding Officer. The Impeachment Trial of Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato C. Corona is hereby called to order. The Presiding Officer will lead this Court in prayer. In the presence of God, we gather today to fulfill our duty under the Constitution. We humbly ask that You, Lord, bestow our nation the grace to overcome the challenges that the Impeachment Trial may bring. Soften the divisive impulses that may arise from bringing out the truth. Temper the judgments so that no one may jump into premature conclusions. Let not our personal biases cloud our perceptions. As elected representatives of the people, we embrace this opportunity to bestow us the wisdom to apply the law equally to all. Afford us the political maturity to withstand this exercise; strengthen our institutions; and guide us, as citizens of a democratic nation, that we shall be governed by a system of laws that emanate from our Constitution. All of this we ask of You always forever and ever. Amen. The Secretary may now please call the roll of Senators.
2
The Secretary, reading:
Senator Edgardo J. Angara ............................................................... Present* Senator Joker P. Arroyo ................................................................... Present Senator Alan Peter Compaero S. Cayetano ................................. Present Senator Pia S. Cayetano ................................................................... Present Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago .................................................... ** Senator Franklin M. Drilon ................................................................ Present Senator Jinggoy Ejercito Estrada ....................................................... Present Senator Francis G. Escudero ............................................................. Present Senator Teofisto L. Guingona III ....................................................... Present Senator Gregorio Honasan II ............................................................. Present Senator Panfilo M. Lacson ................................................................ Present Senator Manuel Lito M. Lapid ....................................................... Present Senator Loren B. Legarda ................................................................. Present Senator Ferdinand Bongbong R. Marcos Jr. .................................. Present Senator Sergio R. Osmea III ........................................................... Senator Francis N. Pangilinan ............................................................ Present Senator Aquilino L. Pimentel III ........................................................ Present Senator Ralph G. Recto .................................................................... Present Senator Ramon Bong Revilla Jr. ..................................................... Present Senator Vicente C. Sotto III ............................................................. Present Senator Antonio Sonny F. Trillanes IV ........................................... Present Senator Manny Villar ......................................................................... Present* The Senate President ......................................................................... Present The Presiding Officer. With nineteen (19) Senator-Judges present, the Presiding Officer declares the presence of a quorum. The Floor Leader. Senator Sotto. Thank you, Mr. President. May I ask the Sergeant-at-Arms to make the proclamation. The Presiding Officer. The Sergeant-at-Arms may do so. The Sergeant-at-Arms. All persons are commanded to keep silent under pain of penalty while the Senate is sitting in trial on the Articles of Impeachment against Chief Justice Renato C. Corona. The Presiding Officer. The Floor Leader. Senator Sotto. Mr. President, I move that we dispense with the reading of the January 26, 2012 Journal of the Senate sitting as an Impeachment Court, and consider the same as approved. The Presiding Officer. Is there any objection? [Silence] There being none, the January 26, 2012 Journal of this Court is approved. The Secretary will please call the case before the Senate sitting as an Impeachment Court.
___________________
*Arrived after the roll call **On sick leave
The Secretary. Case No. 002-2011 in the Matter of Impeachment Trial of Hon. Chief Justice Renato C. Corona. The Presiding Officer. The Floor Leader. Senator Sotto. Mr. President, may we ask the parties and their respective counsel to enter their appearances. Representative Tupas. Mr. President, good afternoon and to the Honorable Members of the Senate. For the House of Representatives Prosecution panel, same appearances, Your Honors. The Presiding Officer. Noted for the Prosecution. The Defense panel. Mr. Cuevas. Mr. President and the Honorable Members of this Impeachment Court, for the Defense, the same appearance, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Noted for the Defense. The Floor Leader. Senator Sotto. Mr. President, on January 25, 2012, the Impeachment Court, through the Presiding Officer, issued its ruling on Article II of the Verified Complaint for Impeachment. Counsel for Chief Justice Renato C. Corona, however, moved in open court for a written Resolution which was granted by the Presiding Officer. The Impeachment Court shall now promulgate its Resolution on Article II of the Verified Complaint for Impeachment. The Presiding Officer. Before we proceed, may I know the pleasure of the gentleman, Senator Trillanes. Senator Trillanes. Thank you, Mr. President. I am here to state for the record my positions regarding several issues raised in this Impeachment Court the past few weeks. The Presiding Officer. May I suggest, Your Honor, that being the case, the Chair will recognize His Honor later and we dispense with the preliminary matters first, with your indulgence. Senator Trillanes. Yes, Mr. President. But I think thismy position will just be stated for the record, Mr. President. It would only take a couple of minutes. The Presiding Officer. Proceed. Senator Trillanes. Thank you, Mr. President. First, as regards the nature of impeachment. With all due respect to all those who have stated their different opinions, I have also researched extensively on the subject and I am convinced that it is a political process with a judicial character. It is where the public participates, through their representatives, in the formulation of public policy to resolve a policy issue of whether the conviction or acquittal of Chief Justice Renato Corona is in the best interest of our country. I agree that it is in a class of its own. But in my own personal experience, it is akin to one of the most sacred traditions of the Philippine Military Academy which is the Honor Committee Trial. It is where a cadet who is accused of violating
the tenets of the Honor Code is tried by a jury of the eight members of the Honor Committee. And only a unanimous vote of guilty can convict an accused. The only difference that I can see with this Impeachment Trial is we do not have brilliant lawyers like the ones performing before us. And it is also the reason why we do not have technicalities in our attempt to ferret out the truth. Again, that is in a laboratory setting. Secondly, as to the standard of proof, as a former soldier, Navy officer, I will not even venture into defining and distinguishing between what is proof beyond reasonable doubt and substantial evidence because that is well within the expertise of my more seasoned colleagues. But what I do know and what I will apply in this Impeachment Trial is the basic sense of justice that God has given every human being born in this planet. Lastly, as regards the issue raised by Senator Chiz Escudero as to whether the acts committed by the Chief Justice prior to his appointment to the Supreme Court should be covered by this trial, my position is yes, we should cover them all because I believe that part of what we are trying to find out in this trial is the moral fitness of the Chief Justice to remain in office. Being a justice of the Supreme Court is different from elected officials in the sense that elected officials are subjected to periodic elections to renew their mandate, so you can have the worst possible moral record. But once you get elected into public office, it is presumed that the public has already accepted your past and probably they have voted you for your other qualities or lack thereof. But the Justices of the Supreme Court whose principal mandate is to administer justice to every citizen of this Republic, they should possess the highest possible moral standards for public officials. That is all, Mr. President. Thank you. The Presiding Officer. Thank you. Senator Sotto. Mr. President, may we continue with the Resolution of the Impeachment Court. The Presiding Officer. The Clerk of Court is directed to read the Resolution of the Impeachment Court with respect to the issue of Article II, first. And later on, with respect to the subpoena issued to the parties that were subpoenaed. The Secretary. Resolution. This resolves the issue of whether or not the Prosecution may present evidence to prove the allegations in Paragraphs 2.3 and 2.4 under Article II of the Impleachment Complaint. The resolution of this issue becomes imperative in view of the Defenses consistent objections to the Prosecutions presentation of evidence exposing the properties of Respondent Chief Justice Renato C. Corona, his wife Senator Sotto. Mr. President. With due respect, Mr. President, a number of our colleagues are asking that we just read the dispositive portion. Just distribute copies of the Resolution to the Defense and the Prosecution because this was alreadyor this was manifested by the Senate President last week. The Presiding Officer. If there is no objection, then I will approve the motion of the Floor Leader. [Silence]
The Chair hears none, the motion is approved. Proceed. The Secretary and acting as Clerk of this Court may now proceed to read the Resolution, the resolutory portion of the Resolution of this matter by this Court. The Secretary. Yes, sir. IN SUM, THEREFORE, this Court resolves and accordingly rules: 1. To allow the Prosecution to introduce evidence in support of Paragraphs 2.2 and 2.3 of Article II of the Articles of Impeachment. 2. To disallow the introduction of evidence in support of Par. 2.4 of the Articles of Impeachment, with respect to which, this Court shall be guided by and shall rely upon the legal presumptions on the nature of any property or asset which may be proven to belong to the Respondent Chief Justice as provided under Section 8 of Republic Act No. 3019 and Section 2 of Republic Act No. 1379. SO ORDERED. January 27, 2012. (Sgd.) JUAN PONCE ENRILE Presiding Officer Senator Sotto. Mr. President. The Presiding Officer. The Floor Leader.
Senator Sotto. Thank you, Mr. President. Yes. On January 17, 2012, Mr. President, the Impeachment Court issued subpoena duces tecum et ad testificandum directing Mr. Giovanni Ng, Finance Director of Megaworld Corporation; Aniceto V. Bisnar Jr. and Lourdes R. Reyes of Fort Bonifacio Development; Grace Evangeline F. Manangkil-Sta. Ana and Nerissa Josef of Community Innovations Inc.; and Rogelio T. Serafica of Burgundy Development Corporation, to testify and bring with them certain documents purportedly showing evidence of ownership of properties by Chief Justice Renato Corona and/or his family members. Mr. President, for the information of the parties and for the record, the Presiding Officer issued an order earlier today concerning the said subpoena duces tecum et ad testificandum. May I ask the Clerk of Court to read the Order. The Presiding Officer. The Clerk of Court may proceed. The Secretary. The whole Order or the dispositive, Your Honor? Senator Sotto. The dispositive portion, if possible, Mr. President. The Secretary. Dispositive portion. In view of the foregoing, Messrs. Giovanni C. Ng, Aniceto V. Bisnar, Jr. and Rogelio T. Serafica and Mesdames Lourdes R. Reyes, Grace Evangeline F. Manangkil-Sta. Ana and Nerissa N. Josef sought to be presented by the Prosecution as their witnesses by virtue of the
subpoena duces tecum et ad testificandum issued by this Impeachment Court may not be compelled to surrender and/or show documents and/or give testimony on details of transactions not involving Chief Justice Renato C. Corona and/or his family members in order not to violate the constitutional right of privacy of private persons and so as not to infringe upon the right of such private persons to secure their papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. SO ORDERED. January 30, 2012. (Sgd.) JUAN PONCE ENRILE Presiding Officer. Senator Sotto. Mr. President. The Presiding Officer. The Floor Leader. Senator Sotto. Shortly before noon today, January 30, 2012, the Prosecution filed a Manifestation stating, among others, that in order to facilitate an expeditious trial, it behooves the Prosecutors to present evidence for Article III before presenting the previously manifested Articles I and VII. The Prosecution further manifests that, consequently, the Prosecutors are constrained to seek the liberality of this Honorable Court to allow it to present Article III prior to Article I as previously manifested and as a measure of good faith and fairness to the Respondent, the Prosecutors also manifest that they shall exert its best efforts to present the Impeachment Articles in the following order: Article II, Article III, Article VII, Article I, Article VIII, Article IV, Article V and Article VI. Mr. President, inasmuch as this seeks to change the order of presentation of evidence previously allowed by the Court, I move to submit the Manifestation for the consideration of the Presiding Officer. The Presiding Officer. May we hear from the Defense Counsel? Mr. Cuevas. Thank you, Your Honor. In compliance with the Order of this Court earlier made, Your Honor, we were made to believe that the order of presentation of evidence on the part of the Prosecution will be as follows: first, Article II; second, Article I; and third, Article VII. The proposed change now is entirely an overhaul of the said previous order made known to this Honorable Court by the Prosecution. We do not question, Your Honor, the prerogative and the authority of the Prosecution to determine the order of presentation of their evidence in connection with the Impeachment proceedings. But there was already a previous Order of the Court, that Order had been complied with and we rode along on that Order of this Court following the suggestion made by the Prosecution, Your Honor. We see no reason, therefore, why there should be again a deviation, otherwise there may be no end. The next day, there may be another Order, another setup on another day. And that will further delay the proceedings in this case, Your Honor. It is not that we are not prepared to tackle the evidence that will be presented in connection with the order suggested. But we are made to believe that it is the right of the Respondent Chief Justice, Your Honor, to due process also. Give him time to prepare for whatever eventuality may happen in the change of the order, Your Honor. This is precisely for that reason that we are making of record our objection to another proposed order of procedure in presenting the Prosecutions evidence, Your Honor.
The Presiding Officer. Thank you. What is the pleasure of the Representative Tupas. We just want to The Presiding Officer. Chief of the Defense panel? Representative Tupas. Yes, Your Honor. We just want to say something
The Presiding Officer. Proceed. Representative Tupas. and respond to the statements made by the Defense Counsel. Your Honor, it is not a total overhaul of the Articles. We just put Article III ahead of Article I because of thewe believe in the orderly presentation of the Articles. And Article II is about the dishonesty of the Chief Justice. Then Article III is about the moral fitness. So it goes with the storyline and the proper presentation of our case. And in good faith, Mr. President, we filed a Manifestation today to give, not only the Senators, time, but as well as the Defense Counsel. The earliest that we could finish Article II would be this week. So, at least, the Senators and the Defense Counsel will have, at the very least, one week before we can present Article III. Further, we already enumerated all the Articles of Impeachmentmeaning, the eight (8) Articles. And we will not change it again, Mr. President. That is the order now of the presentation. And we beg the indulgence of the Defense Counsel. This is in good faith. This is for the orderly presentation of our case. We want to finish presenting our evidence, witnesses, documents as soon as possible. Thank you, Mr. President. The Presiding Officer. The Chair would like to know, do the Rules of the House with respect to Impeachment specifically state the ordering of the Articles of Impeachment? Representative Tupas. It does not, Mr. President. Under the Rules of the Impeachment of the House of Representatives, there is no specific provision on the sequence of the Articles. The Presiding Officer. So, under your Rules, in the presentation of your evidence in chief, you can reorder the presentation. Representative Tupas. That is correct, Mr. President. The Presiding Officer. In the spirit of liberality, the Chair will allow the reordering of the presentation, of the sequence of the presentation of evidence of the Prosecution in accordance with their best lights. But I would like to request the Prosecution to now fix the order of presentation. We have enough time to go over the Articles of Impeachment and the assessment of your evidence. And by this time, I suppose the panel of Prosecutors are now familiar with the storyline, if I may use your term, of the Prosecution. And so, therefore, I would like you to tell us whether this is now the order that you want to be followed henceforth. Representative Tupas. Yes, that is correct, Mr. President. That is the order that we would like to present our evidence: Articles II, III, VII, I, VIII, IV, V, VI. That is the order that we filed in the Manifestation. The Presiding Officer. So, the Chair approves the reordering of presentation Mr. Cuevas. Your Honor.
8
The Presiding Officer. of Articles. Representative Tupas. Thank you, thank you, Mr. President. Mr. Cuevas. Mr. President. Senator Sotto. The Defense wants to be
Mr. Cuevas. I was about to say something, Your Honor, in connection with the The Presiding Officer. The Defense Counsel. Mr. Cuevas. Thank you, Your Honor. This new order now, in reality, partakes the nature of a Motion for Reconsideration. Why? Because based on previous manifestation of this Honorable Court, Your Honor, it was specifically stated that the order, as suggested by the Prosecution, will be: II, I and VII, Your Honor. Any deviation from this order, therefore, partakes the nature of a Motion for Reconsideration. And secondly, Your Honor, the House Rules on Impeachment could not possibly provide for the order of presentation because that falls exactly within the domain of the Honorable Senate of the Philippines, Your Honor. Because insofar as the House is concerned, it has only something to do with initiation and nothing more. The Presiding Officer. But the form and content of the Articles of Impeachment is a function of the House. And when we talk of ordering of allegations, it is a matter of form. And so, therefore, in the spirit of liberality, this Chair approves the request of the Prosecution. Let us proceed with the trial. Mr. Cuevas. All right, thank you, Your Honor. Senator Sotto. Mr. President. The Presiding Officer. The Floor Leader. Senator Sotto. Thank you. Mr. President, before I move to recognize Senator Bong Revilla for a manifestation, I am in receipt of a letter from Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago and the request is for me to read this letter during her sick leave and read the following questions just after the start of the session. So, if I may, Mr. President? Question from Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago: I read to you the following provisions of the Rules of Court, Rule 133, Section 1. Preponderance of Evidence: How Determined. The Court may also consider the number of witnesses, though the preponderance is not necessary with the greater number. Under this provision, the Supreme Court ruled the weight of evidence is not determined mathematically by categorical superiority of the witnesses testifying to a given fact, Lim V. Court of Appeals, 254 SCRA 170 [1996]. Further Rule 133, Section 6 provides, Power of the Court to Stop Further Evidence. The Court may stop the introduction of further testimony beyond any particular point when the evidence upon it is already so full that more witnesses to the same point cannot be reasonably expected to be additionally persuasive. But this power should be exercised with caution.
Thus, the power of the Court to stop further evidence refers to corroborative testimony. The question is this: If there is no objection from our colleagues and the Court, could each of the panel please submit a list of witnesses listing them either as primary witnesses or as corroborative witnesses? When the Court is finished with this information, then the Court could be guided in stopping further evidence consisting of corroborative witnesses. With that, for the record, Mr. President, may I move to recognize Sen. Bong Revilla. The Presiding Officer. The gentleman from Cavite, the distinguished Sen. Bong Revilla a.k.a. Panday. Senator Revilla. Just a short manifestation, Mr. President. I am just a bit worried finding out that the Prosecution intends to present around 100 witnesses, aside from the voluminous pieces of documentary evidence they are planning to present. Kung isasama pa natin ang mga testigo ng Depensa at kailangan ng mga ebidensiya tiyak na napakahaba pa ng itatakbo ng paglilitis na ito. Without trampling on the Prosecutions right to present their evidence and the Respondents right to establish the best defense, baka maaring tingnan natin ang listahan ng kanilang mga testigo at ebidensiya to determine kung ang lahat ng ito ay kailangan o ang iba ay yong tinatawag na corroborative na lamang. Walong araw na po tayong naglilitis, Ginoong Pangulo, at iilan pa lamang sa mga testigong ating naririnig. We are going at the rate of just one witness per day, on the average. At kung magpapatuloy ang ganitong takbo, mukhang magtatagal pa tayo rito at baka aabutin pa tayo ng isang (1) taon. We are spending time and resources that could be spent on other equally important activities. Ang matitipid nating gastusin ay maaari pa nating ilaan sa mga bagay na mas kailangan ng ating mga kababayan. Alam nating importante ang isyung ito para sa buong bansa. Kaya naniniwala tayong nakabantay ang ating mga kababayan sa kahihinatnan ng paglilitis na ito. Ang apila ko lang po sa magkabilang panig, sa Prosekusyon at Depensa, wag na natin po itong patagalin. Noong umpisa, we were led to believe that the Prosecution would be finished presenting their case in three (3) weeks, pero mukhang imposible na yan. Three (3) weeks na tayo ngayong linggo at hindi pa tayo natatapos sa isang Article. After this Article, may pito (7) pa. At ang bawat araw na lumilipas ay malaking epekto sa ating bansa at sa ating ekonomiya. Aminin man natin o hindi, ang malaking porsyento ng oras ng ating lehislatura, hudikatura at ehekutibo ay nailaan na sa Impeachment na ito. Maging ang marami sa ating mga kababayan ay mistulang tumigil na rin ang buhay dahil sa pagbabantay sa kahihinatnan ng pagdidinig nating ito. We are all looking for the truth so let us bring out the truth. Bigyan natin ng katarungan ang magkabilang panig sa pinakamabilis at epektibong pamamaraan. Maraming salamat po, Ginoong Pangulo. Representative Tupas. Mr. President. The Presiding Officer. Thank you. Just a minute.
10
First of all, I would like to inform the public and the Court that I understand the Prosecution in their manifestation reserved the right to dispense with the presentation of their prospective evidence presentation of their evidence as the need arises. Is this correct, Counsel? Representative Tupas. Yes, tama po yan, Mr. President. The Presiding Officer. Ngayon ang mungkahi ko sana kung maaari, I am not going to dictate on you, but I think we cannot spend more time than is reasonably required in this case. And so, may I present this proposal to both sides and think about it and tell us in the next hearing whether you agree or not: For you to come together and lay your cards on the table and try to stipulate what testimonial evidence and documentary evidence could be agreed upon between the parties without the need of any probative matters to establish the truth or falsity of those facts. And if that is possible, then we limit the area where evidence will be introduced by the Prosecution as well as with the Defense. Of course, the Defense, we cannot curtail their right to defend their client because that is in the nature of our adversary proceedings. But maybe the Prosecution would explore the possibility of stipulation of facts. Representative Tupas. We are willing to do that, Mr. President. The Presiding Officer. Counsel for the Defense. Mr. Cuevas. Thy shall be done, as suggested, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Yes. So, let us now proceed with the trials so that we can move on. And with respect to the statements or remarks of the distinguished Senator from Iloilo, Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago, we will take that under advisement that will be taken up by the Members of the Court in a caucus so that we can decide the quantum of evidence needed as a guide for us in making adjustment in this Impeachment case, as well as the manner by which we deal with the testimonies or testimonial evidence and documentary evidence that will be presented to us in such a number and volume. So, we are going to discuss this. So we proceed with the trial today. Senator Sotto. Mr. President, we are now ready to, or we are now ready for the continuation of the presentation of evidence by the Prosecution. Representative Tupas. Yes. But Mr. President, siguro pwede lang mailagay lang sa record, na yong Compliance na ito, Mr. President, this is 39 pages, Compliance of the List of Witnesses and Documentary Evidence, is actually dahil doon sa directive noong January 24, 2012 by this Honorable Tribunal through the Senate President na mag-submit kami ng list of witnesses and documentary evidence. That is why, we submitted within three days. We submitted on January 27 and we just want to assure the Senators and the public, Mr. President, that we agreed with the Presiding Officer when he said that Kailangan yong speedy trial. At sa amin po, nag-manifest na rin kami noong isang Linggo na on the part of the Prosecution, ang gusto talaga namin ay mapabilis ang trial at hindi ho namin ipe-present yong lahat ng witnesses. Ngayon po, nag-comply kami dito sa directive. Nakalantad na po ito lahat, very detailed. We just want to know, Mr. President, kung nag-comply rin yong kabila, yong Defense. The Presiding Officer. What is the pleasure of the Defense? Mr. Cuevas. We have it ready, Your Honor. We are supposed to have filed it this morning. But we wanted to know further, based on the evidence that will be presented, whether we should present more or additional witnesses from the standpoint of rebuttal, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Well, without prejudice toyou just submit your list.
11
Mr. Cuevas. We will, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. And we are not going to hold you to it. If there is a need for this Court to allow other witnesses in order to amplify what is not clearly proven, then so be it. We will not be that inflexible. Mr. Cuevas. We will do that, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. So let us proceed with the trial. Please call your next witness.
Representative Tupas. Yes. Our next witness, Mr. President, the first witness for today and the seventh for the trial is the finance director of the Megaworld Corporation, Mr. Giovanni Ng. May we call on our first witness for today. The Presiding Officer. Call the witness to take the stand and swear him. And who will present this witness on the part of the Prosecution? Representative Tupas. On the part of the Prosecution, may we request that Atty. Joseph Joemer Perez be recognized, Your Honor, to conduct the direct examination. The Presiding Officer. Atty. Perez has the floor. Proceed. Mr. Perez. Thank you, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. You are welcome. The Secretary. Sir, please raise your right hand. Do you swear to tell the truth and nothing but the truth in this Impeachment Proceeding? Mr. Ng. Yes, I do. The Secretary. So help you God. Mr. Ng. So help me God.
The Presiding Officer. Proceed. Mr. Ng. Thank you. Mr. Perez. Your Honor, I will first ask the witness to identify himself. The Presiding Officer. Please go ahead. You can proceed to ask the preliminaries. Mr. Perez. Mr. Witness, can you give your full name? Mr. Ng. My name is Giovanni Ng.
Mr. Perez. And your age. Mr. Ng. I am 38 years old.
Mr. Perez. And your nationality. Mr. Ng. I am a Filipino.
Mr. Perez. Your Honor, this witness is being presented to produce, identify and authenticate documents mentioned in the subpoena dated January 17, 2012 issued to Giovanni C. Ng, Finance Director, Megaworld Corporation.
12
The testimony of the witness is also being offered to prove that Respondent Renato Corona bought and acquired a property in McKinley Hill Village, Fort Bonifacio, Taguig City as well as the circumstances and particulars of said transaction. This McKinley Hill property was not reported or disclosed in any of the SALNs of Respondent Corona. The testimony of the witness is also being offered to prove that the spouses Renato Corona and Cristina Corona bought and acquired a penthouse unit with three parking slots in the Bellagio 1 Condominium in 2009 as well as the circumstances and particulars of the said transaction and of the property subject thereof. This Bellagio penthouse was not reported or disclosed in Coronas SALN for 2009. In his SALN for 2010, Corona did not truthfully disclose this Bellagio penthouse. And also, Your Honor, for other related matters. May I proceed, Your Honor? Mr. Cuevas. If Your Honor please. The Presiding Officer. The Defense Counsel. Mr. Cuevas. If Your Honor please, if the testimony of the witness that will be elicited apparently will deal with the alleged unexplained wealth, then we will object, Your Honor. Because this had already been the subject of the Resolution of this Honorable Court. In any and all matters dealing or tending to prove illegally acquired wealth, the same is excluded, Your Honor, and the Prosecution is debarred from presenting the same. Mr. Perez. Your Honor, may I respond? The Presiding Officer. Counsel, just a minute. Mr. Perez. I never mentionedI am sorry, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Just a minute. Counsel for the Defense, the Court has just ruled that allegation Paragraph 2.3 of Article II was authorized to be the subject of proof. So I will disallow your objection. You may proceed. Mr. Perez. Thank you, Your Honor. Mr. Witness, what is your current occupation? Mr. Ng. I am the finance director of Megaworld Corporation. Mr. Perez. And how long have you held said position? Mr. Ng. Well, I have been finance director for probably around seveneight years. Mr. Perez. Before that, what was your occupation? Mr. Ng. Before that, I was in industrial relation for the same company. Mr. Perez. So when did you start working for Megaworld Corporation? Mr. Ng. I have been with the company for probably around 1617 years. Mr. Perez. As finance director, what are your basic duties and responsibilities?
13
Mr. Ng. As finance director, it is part of my responsibilities to allocate financial resources to support our construction efforts. In addition, as authorized signatory of the company, I am tasked to represent the company in signing Deed of Absolute Sale once financial review clearance has been completed indicating that the client has fully paid for the unit they have acquired. Senator Sotto. Mr. President, may we ask the witness to speak louder? The other Members are having difficulty listening to the statements. The Presiding Officer. The witness is so instructed to fix the microphone and please speak clearly during the proceedings. Mr. Perez. Mr. Ng, there is on record a subpoena dated January 17, 2012 issued to Giovanni C. Ng, Finance Director, Megaworld Corporation. Did you receive the said subpoena? Mr. Ng. Yes, sir.
Mr. Perez. Under the subpoena, you were required to bring the Deed of Absolute Sale involving the Bellagio penthouse unit and three parking slots now titled in the name of Spouses Cristina and Renato Corona. Did you bring the said Deed of Absolute Sale? Mr. Ng. Yes, sir.
Mr. Perez. Will you produce it before the Honorable Court? The Presiding Officer. Can you produce it, Witness? Mr. Ng. Yes, sir.
The Presiding Officer. All right. Mr. Perez. Will you produce it before the Honorable Court? Your Honor, for the record, the witness has presented to this representation a document entitled Deed of Absolute Sale consisting of three pages. For identification purposes, the seller indicated is Megaworld Corporation; the buyer are the Spouses Cristina Corona and Renato Corona; the subject matter is Unit 38-B of the Bellagio Condominium with three parking slots; the unit consists of 303.5 square meters, while the parking slots consist of 12.5 square meters each. Mr. Cuevas. With the indulgence of this Honorable Court, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Yes. Mr. Cuevas. I think the document will be presented in evidence, Your Honor. The data therein appearing will be of no more The Presiding Officer. Well, anyway, Counsel, he is just describing the evidence. And it will not vary the contents of the document. Mr. Cuevas. Okay.
The Presiding Officer. Please proceed. Mr. Perez. Thank you, Your Honor. Purchase price indicated is P14,510,225. This is a notarized instrument, Your Honor, acknowledged before Notary Public Buenaventura U. Mendoza. It is undated but it is entered in the Notarial Book,
14
Series of 2009. Photocopy of this document was previously marked as Exhibit AAAA and has been compared with the original during the pre-marking. Mr. Witness, you were also required to produce the Contract to Sell for this same property. Did you bring the said Contract to Sell? Mr. Ng. Yes, Sir. The Presiding Officer. May the Chair know the relevance of that Contract to Sell? You have already the Deed of Absolute Sale. What is the relevance of the Contract to Sell? Mr. Perez. Your Honor, the Contract to Sell would be material regarding the circumstances of the transaction, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Proceed. Mr. Perez. Mr. Witness, again, did you bring the said document? Mr. Ng. Yes, sir. Mr. Perez. Can you produce the said document? For the record, Your Honor, witness has presented a document entitled Contract to Buy and Sell. Mr. Cuevas. Your Honor please, at this juncture, may we request the Honorable Court to permit us to have this Exhibit AAA as our Exhibit 25? The Presiding Officer. What is that Exhibit AAA? Mr. Cuevas. Deed of Absolute Sale, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Ah, the Deed of Absolute Sale. Mr. Cuevas. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Perez. Ah, it is AAAA, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. AAAA. Mr. Cuevas. And the document denominated as Exhibit BBBB. which is a Contract to Buy and Sell be marked as Exhibit 26 for the Defense, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. So, let it be marked as requested. You know, in this particular caseas an example, if you can come together, you can already agree/ stipulate on this so that we will not waste time. Anyway, the Defense is accepting this document as its own exhibit so I think we will be able to shorten the proceedings. Please proceed. Mr. Perez. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Witness, you were also required under the subpoena to produce the official receipts for the payments of this property. Did you bring those official receipts? Mr. Ng. Yes.
15
Mr. Perez. Your Honor, for the record, the witness produced three official receipts. For identification purposes, Your Honor, the first receipt is dated April 20, 2009 for the amount of P5 million; Payor: Corona Spouses, Cristina and Renato; Subject: 38B-The Bellagio Building-1. Mr. Cuevas. If Your Honor please, may we request that the said exhibit be marked as Exhibit 27, for the Defense, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Mark it accordingly for the Defense. Mr. Perez. Your Honor, I am presuming that those exhibits which are also adopted by Defense Counsel are stipulatedthey are stipulating on the authenticity of said exhibits. Mr. Cuevas. We will mark them asYes. The Presiding Officer. Wait a minute. I think, as I said, you sit down together and then you can agree about these things. Mr. Perez. Yes, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Let us just proceed with the trial. Mr. Perez. Yes, Your Honor. The second receipt, Your Honor, is exhibitis Official Receipt No. 677400 dated October 16, 2009 for the amount of P4,510,225; Payor: Corona Spouses, Cristina and Renato. Mr. Cuevas. Your Honors please, may we request that this document be marked as Exhibit 2728", Your Honor, for the Defense, Your Honor The Presiding Officer. Mark it accordingly for the Defense. Mr. Cuevas. which is Official Receipt No. 677400 dated October 16, 2009. Mr. Perez. The third Official Receipt, Your Honor, is dated October 17, 2008, for the amount of P5 million. Payor: Corona, Spouses Cristina and Renato. All of these Official Receipts, Your Honor, have been previously marked as Exhibits CCCC, CCCC-1 and CCCC-2. Mr. Cuevas. May we request, if Your Honor please, that the said document be marked as Exhibit 29 for the Defense, Your Honor. I am referring to Official Receipt The Presiding Officer. Mark it. Mark it accordingly for the Defense. Mr. Perez. Now, Mr. Witness, let us go to the documents involving the McKinley Hill property. Under the subpoena, you were required to produce the Deed of Absolute Sale with respect to the McKinley Hill property, now titled in the name of Maria Charina Corona. Did you bring the said document? Mr. Ng. Yes, Sir. Mr. Perez. Will you produce it before the Honorable Court? Your Honor, the witness produced a document entitled Deed of Absolute Sale, consisting of two pages, with a single page Annex A. Mr. Cuevas. If Your Honor please, may we request that the said document be marked as Exhibit
16
The Presiding Officer. It has not been marked for the Plaintiff yet. Let us wait until the marking for the Plaintifffor the Prosecution, rather. Mr. Cuevas. I seem to have Mr. Perez. Your Honor, the photocopy of the same document was previously marked as Exhibit DDDD. The Presiding Officer. So, let the request of the Defense Counsel be approved, then mark it accordingly for the Defense. Mr. Perez. Thank you, Your Honor. For the record, under this Deed of Absolute Sale, it refers to the sale of Lot 1, Block 16 of the McKinley Hill Project between Megaworld Corporation and Maria Charina R. Corona, represented by her attorney-in-fact Renato C. Corona. The property consists of 203 square meters, total purchased price of P6,196,575. This document, Your Honor, is acknowledged before Notary Public Buenaventura U. Mendoza. The buyer Maria Charina R. Corona was represented by attorney-in-fact Renato C. Corona. Mr. Cuevas. May we request, if Your Honor please, that Exhibit EEEE for the Plaintiff be marked as Exhibit 31, Your Honor, for the Defense? The Presiding Officer. Mark it accordingly for the Defense. Mr. Perez. Mr. Witness, is there any contract to sell for this property? Mr. Ng. No, Sir. Mr. Perez. How about a reservation agreement? Mr. Ng. Yes, Sir. Mr. Perez. Will you produce the said document? The Presiding Officer. What agreement is that? Mr. Perez. Your Honor, this document is entitled Request for Reservation and Offer to Purchase. The Presiding Officer. Thank you. Mr. Perez. Dated May 9, 2006. Property described as McKinley Hill Village, Phase II, Block 16, Lot 1, 203 square meters. For the record, Your Honor, the buyers name indicated is Cristina R. Corona. May I request the Defense to stipulate on this documenton the authenticity of this document? Mr. Cuevas. We will not merely stipulate. We will admit, Your Honor, because we are adopting the said exhibit as our Exhibit 32. The Presiding Officer. Counsel for the Prosecution, please proceed with the presentation of your evidence. Mr. Perez. Yes, Your Honor.
17
The Presiding Officer. They are marking it also as their exhibit. Mr. Perez. Yes, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. So, there is no need for that side remark. Proceed. Mr. Perez. For the record, Your Honor, this Request for Reservation was previously marked as Exhibit EEEE for the Prosecution. Mr. Witness, is there any buyers information sheet for this transaction? Mr. Ng. Yes, Sir. Mr. Perez. Will you produce it before the Honorable Court? Your Honor, the witness produced a single-page document entitled Buyers Information Sheet, photocopy was previously marked as Exhibit IIII. The Presiding Officer. What is the materiality of that piece of paper or that document when there is already completed transaction? Mr. Perez. This document, Your Honor, will show that it was actually Renato Corona who acquired the property because the buyer indicated in this Buyers Information Sheet is Renato C. Corona. And, in fact, under this Buyers Information Sheet, the Deed of Absolute Sale was requested to be in the name of the Spouses Renato and Cristina Corona. The Presiding Officer. All right. Mr. Cuevas. Your Honor please. The Presiding Officer. Proceed. Counsel for the Defense. Mr. Cuevas. Your Honor please, that is no longer a stateThat is conclusion of fact made by the lawyer. Mr. Perez. No, it is not, Your Honor. Mr. Cuevas. Yes. The best evidence will be the document they are presenting. Are they doubting the authenticity, correctness and veracity of this? The Presiding Officer. Never mind. Let the document be marked. Anyway, there is already a completed transaction. It does not vary at all the nature of the transaction. Mr. Cuevas. Okay then. May we request, if Your Honor please, that this document Exhibit IIII be marked as Exhibit 32 for the Defense, Your Honor. Mr. Perez. By the way, Your Honor, the said document was previously marked as Exhibit IIII for the Prosecution. The Presiding Officer. Proceed. Mr. Perez. Mr. Witness, you were also required to bring the official receipts for the payments for these property. Did you bring these official receipts?
18
Mr. Ng. Yes. Mr. Perez. Will you produce them before the Honorable Court?
Your Honor, the witness has just produced 27 Official Receipts previously marked as Exhibits FFFF up to FFFF-26. For identification purposes, Your Honor, Exhibit FFFF-26 refers to Megaworld Official Receipt dated July 3, 2006 for the amount of P200,000. Name of Payor: Renato Corona, for property described as 16-01, Mckinley Subdivision, Phase II. Mr. Cuevas. May we request, Your Honor, that the said document be marked as Exhibit 33, Your Honor, for the Defense. The Presiding Officer. Mark it accordingly for the Defense. Mr. Perez. Exhibit FFFF-24 refers to Megaworld Official Receipt dated August 8, 2006 for the amount of P494,016.40. Name of Payor: Renato and Cristina Corona. Exhibits FFFF-1 up to FFFF-23 and FFFF-25 refer to 24 Megaworld Official Receipts with various dates between September 2006 until August 2008, for the amount of P57,834.70 each. Name of Payor: Renato and Cristina Corona. Lastly, Exhibit FFFF refers to Megaworld Official Receipt dated August 29, 2008 for the amount of P4,858,114.80. Payor: Renato and Cristina Corona. Mr. Cuevas. All right. May we request, if Your Honor please, that the Prosecutions evidence FFFF-24 be marked as Exhibit 34, for the Defense. Exhibit 2222, Your Honor, which is Official Receipt No. 268856 be marked as Exhibit 35. The Presiding Officer. Mark the document accordingly as requested by the Defense. Mr. Cuevas. And Exhibit FFFF-26, Your Honor, which is Official Receipt No. 268665 dated July 3, 2006, be marked as Exhibit 36. The Presiding Officer. Mark it accordingly for the Defense. Mr. Perez. Mr. Witness, I refer you back to the Request for Reservation and Offer to Purchase involving this McKinley Hill property. Can you state for the record the name of the buyer indicated in the said Request for Reservation? The Presiding Officer. What is the materiality of that and Mr. Perez. Your Honor, to show The Presiding Officer. Let me see. Just a minute. Is that corroborating evidence or what? Mr. Perez. Your Honor, it is primary evidence to show, Your Honor, who actually bought and acquired the property. The Presiding Officer. But it is already in the Deed of Sale. It is already in the other documents. Mr. Perez. Your Honor, but the Deed of Absolute Sale was not in the name of the Spouses Corona but rather in the name of the spousesof Charina Corona contrary to the fact, Your Honor,
19
established by these documents that it was actually Renato Corona who bought, acquired and paid for the property. The Presiding Officer. Proceed. Mr. Perez. Thank you, Your Honor. Again, Mr. Witness, who is the buyer indicated in the Request for Reservation? Mr. Ng. The name written as the buyer is a certain Cristina R. Corona. Mr. Perez. And in the Buyers Information Sheet, who is the buyer indicated? Mr. Cuevas. Will not the best evidence be the document itself, Your Honor? Mr. Perez. Your Honor, just for the record, because I am laying the basis for my future questions. The Presiding Officer. May answer. Mr. Ng. The name indicated in the Buyers Information Sheet is Renato C. Corona and the spouses name, Cristina R. Corona. Mr. Perez. Thank you. And in the Deed of Absolute Sale for this property the buyers name indicated is Maria Charina R. Corona. Can you explain why this is so? The Presiding Officer. The witness may answer if he knows. Mr. Perez. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Ng. We received a letter indicating that we accomplished the Deed of Absolute Sale for Lot 1, Block 16, Phase II of McKinley Hills in favor of Maria Charina R. Corona. Mr. Perez. Your Honor, the witness is reading from a single-page handwritten Letter Request dated September 8, 2008. Photocopy of this document was previously marked as our Exhibit HHHH and has been compared with the original during the pre-marking. HHHH for the Prosecution. Mr. Cuevas. We will request, Your Honor, that this Exhibit HHHH of the Prosecution be marked as Exhibit 37 for the Defense, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Mark it accordingly. Mr. Perez. After your receiving that letter, Mr. Witness, what steps did you take with respect to the letter? Mr. Ng. We proceeded in having a Deed of Assignment accomplished. Mr. Perez. Your Honor, the witness refers to a Deed of Assignment dated October 3, 2004, photocopy of which was previously marked2008, I am sorry, Your Honor, copy of which was previously marked as Exhibit GGGG, Your Honor. It is a public document acknowledged before Notary Public Buenaventura U. Mendoza. Mr. Witness, may I
20
Mr. Cuevas. Your Honor please, may we request that this exhibit GGGG of the Prosecution be marked as Exhibit 38 for the Defense, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Mark it accordingly. Mr. Perez. Mr. Witness, for the record, can youI refer you back to the letter request September 8, 2008. Can you read for the record the contents of this letter which is very brief, Your Honor? The Presiding Officer. I think you are going to transgress the best evidence rule. It is written there. Mr. Perez. Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. That is open to the appreciation of this Court. Mr. Perez. Yes, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Yes. Mr. Perez. Mr. Witness, according to this letter dated September 8, 2008, Justice Renato Corona and Mrs. Maria Cristina Corona stated that it was their daughter who made all the payments for the said lot. Now, Mr. Witness, I refer you to the Official Receipt No. 499170. Based on that official receipt, who made the payment? Mr. Cuevas. The best evidence will be the document itself. Mr. Perez. Your Honor, just for the record, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Let the witness answer. Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. And based on Official Receipt No. 479367, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. Based on Official Receipt 478719, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR No. 478511, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR No. 458882, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR No. 441210, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR No. 440875, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR No. 413285, who made the payment?
21
Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR No. 412971, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR No. The Presiding Officer. Will you kindly pronounce the last part of your answer because the Chair cannot understand the last word? Mr. Ng. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Perez. OR No. 412707, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR No. 386359, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR No. 386050, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR No. 385812, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR No. 358394, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR No. 358169, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR No. 357916, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR No. 357636, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR No. 321371, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR No. 321184, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR No. 320995, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR No. 320851, who made the payment?
22
Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR No. 320755, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR 320561, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR 268973, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR 268780, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. OR 268856, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Mr. Perez. Lastly, OR No. 268663, who made the payment? Mr. Ng. Corona, Renato.
Mr. Perez. In all of these 27 official receipts, does the name Maria Charina Corona appear? Mr. Ng. No, Sir. Mr. Perez. Thank you. (Manifestation stricken off per order of the Presiding Officer.) Mr. Cuevas. Your Honor please, will that not be a conclusion, Your Honor? Mr. Perez. It is a statement of fact, Your Honor. Mr. Cuevas. But you are not testifying under oath. How can we cross-examine you? Mr. Perez. That is why it was a manifestation, Your Honor. Mr. Cuevas. Precisely. The Presiding Officer. Reform the question. Mr. Perez. Your Honor, I move on to another point. The Presiding Officer. Just reform the question. Mr. Perez. It was just a manifestation, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Okay. Mr. Perez. Thank you, Your Honor. Mr. Cuevas. Then we will move for the striking out of that manifestation, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Strike it out.
23
Mr. Perez. Mr. Witness, we will now move on to the Bellagio property. Can you first tell us where is this Bellagio located? Mr. Ng. The Bellagio is located in Fort Bonifacio, Global City. Mr. Perez. Would you consider that a prime location? Mr. Ng. Yes, sir.
Mr. Perez. The Deed of Absolute Sale states The Bellagio Golf View Residences. Do you have an idea why it states Golf View? Mr. Ng. It would be because the property has a view of the golf course. Mr. Perez. Which golf course? Mr. Ng. The Manila Golf Course. Mr. Perez. And where is Manila Golf Course located? Mr. Ng. This would be near Forbes Park. Mr. Perez. In terms of quality, how would you describe this Bellagio Condominium? Mr. Ng. The property iswell, would basically have the amenities fitting for an upscale residential condominium. Mr. Perez. Condominium? In terms of socioeconomic class, who are the usual residents of The Bellagio
Mr. Ng. I believe this would be around the AB class. Mr. Perez. The unit bought by the Spouses Renato Corona and Cristina Corona, is it a penthouse or an ordinary unit? Mr. Cuevas. No basis, Your Honor. There were no previous questions relative to the character of the property being testified. The Presiding Officer. Let the witness answer. Mr. Perez. Again, Mr. Witness, is it a penthouse or an ordinary unit? Mr. Ng. This is a penthouse unit. Mr. Perez. How many bedrooms are there in this penthouse unit? Mr. Cuevas. Witness is incompetent. Mr. Perez. If he knows, Your Honor. Mr. Cuevas. It had not been established. The Presiding Officer. Lay the basis. Answer. Mr. Perez. Mr. Witness, are you familiar with the basic characteristics of this penthouse? Mr. Cuevas. Very leading, Your Honor.
24
Mr. Perez. Your Honor, I am precisely asking if he is familiar. The Presiding Officer. Let us take it as preliminary. Go ahead.
Mr. Perez. Are you familiar with the basic characteristics or layout of this property? Mr. Cuevas. This is precisely the same question, Your Honor, that we have been objecting to and we were sustained by the Court. There is no basis yet. There is not even any showing Mr. Perez. Actually, Your Honor, the objection was overruled. The Presiding Officer. Witness, are you familiar with this penthouse? Mr. Ng. Well, basically The Presiding Officer. Are you familiar with the penthouse? Have you been there? Mr. Ng. No, Sir.
The Presiding Officer. So, objection sustained. Mr. Perez. Do you know, Mr. Witness, how many floors there are in the Bellagio penthouse? Mr. Cuevas. Immaterial, Your Honor, unless we are shown the materiality, Your Honor. Mr. Perez. Your Honor, we will show. The Presiding Officer. Let the question be answered. Then let us see whether it is relevant or material to the proceedings. Mr. Cuevas. Submitted, Your Honor. Mr. Ng. Thirty-eight (38) floors. Mr. Perez. And this particular subject property Unit 38-B, where is this located, which floor? Mr. Ng. On the 38th floor.
Mr. Perez. Do you know how many penthouse units are there on the 38th floor? Mr. Ng. We have basically three penthouse floors, two units each. Mr. Perez. Two units each floor? Mr. Ng. Yes.
Mr. Perez. Thank you. Do you know if Bellagio 1 is still under construction or is it already completed? Mr. Cuevas. Again, Your Honor, the witness now is being made to testify on personal knowledge and there is no basis. The Presiding Officer. If he knows. Go ahead. Mr. Ng. This was completed already.
25
Mr. Perez. When was it completed, if you know? Mr. Ng. Sometime between the end of 2008 or late 2009. Mr. Cuevas. May we ask that the witness speak louder, Your Honor. I am having a hard time The Presiding Officer. I am also having a hard time. Mr. Cuevas. deciphering his statement, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Kindly articulate your vowels and your consonants. Mr. Perez. Again, Mr. Witness, when was this completed? Mr. Ng. This was completed sometime between the end of 2008 and early 2009. Mr. Perez. Mr. Witness, based on the Deed of Absolute Sale, previously marked as Exhibit AAAA, you represented Megaworld in the sale of the Bellagio penthouse to Corona. According to this Deed of Absolute Sale, the subject property was sold at P14,510,225. Is this a regular price or a discounted price? Mr. Cuevas. No basis, Your Honor. Mr. Perez. Your Honor, I am precisely asking the witness. The Presiding Officer. You reform it first. Mr. Perez. Yes, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Whether they are giving discounts or fixed price. Mr. Perez. Mr. Witness, at the time that the Coronas bought the penthouse in late 2008, what was the regular selling price for a penthouse unit per square meter? Mr. Cuevas. Well, I thoughtYour Honor please, with the kind indulgence of the Honorable Court. I thought the witness is being made to testify solely on the basis of the documents that he had produced in connection with the transaction. The Presiding Officer. No, but he is asking whether there is a discount given. Mr. Perez. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Cuevas. Yes, Your Honor. But this is now a question which elicits an answer based on the personal knowledge of the witness and there is no predicate yet laid. The Presiding Officer. Wait a minute. My understanding is that this witness was presented as a finance officer of the corporation and in charge of salecontracts dealing with the sale of units. So therefore, that being the case, he must know the prices at which these units are being sold. So he may answer. Mr. Perez. Mr. Witness. Mr. Ng. If I may clarify certain matter, sir? I have to explain that for that matter, pricing is really under our Marketing Department and they would be the one that would be more familiar for that matter. However, prior to this, since I have been subpoenaed, I have had made some inquiries. And based
26
on what I was told, for a long payment term which normally reaches up to around four years, you are talking of an estimated average price of around P78,000 The Presiding Officer. Witness, wait a minute. You are now saying that you are basing your knowledge on the information of another? Mr. Ng. That is right, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. So this is hearsay. I will sustain the objection. Mr. Perez. Your Honor please, the witness is the one who represented Megaworld. The Presiding Officer. Yes. But he is testifying, giving a hearsay evidence here and that is prohibited. Mr. Perez. Your Honor, we will invoke the independently relevant rule. So at the very least, Your Honor, we The Presiding Officer. Explain, explain. Mr. Perez. Yes, Your Honor. It is independently relevant to know what was the information given to this witness with respect to the regular selling price of this particular property. The Presiding Officer. Qualify then the witness so that he will be competent to testify. Mr. Perez. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Cuevas. Your Honor please. With the kind indulgence of the Honorable Court. The Presiding Officer. Yes. Mr. Cuevas. There is no question as to the conversation taking place between this witness and the other witness. As to the accuracy of what was stated or transmitted, we do not object. But what we are objecting is the nature of the testimony. Will that not be strictly hearsay, Your Honor? The Presiding Officer. Anyway, Counsel, I will allow the answer and it is up to you to use your skill as a cross-examiner. Mr. Cuevas. Thank you. Thank you, Your Honor. Mr. Perez. Mr. Witness, you stated that after receiving this subpoena, you made inquiries with respect to the regular price of this Bellagio penthouse. Based on that inquiry, what did you learn? Mr. Cuevas. Again, definitely hearsay, Your Honor. Pagkaliwa-liwanag. What did you learn from what was transmitted? Mr. Perez. There has already been a ruling, Your Honor, in this point. Mr. Cuevas. No. I havenone. The Presiding Officer. Counsel for the Defense, let us allow the Counsel for the Prosecution to present. Mr. Cuevas. Okay. Submitted, Your Honor.
27
The Presiding Officer. Just be understanding. I will allow him tothis is just a preliminary question. Go ahead. Witness, answer. Mr. Ng. For a long payment term, I was given an estimated average of around P78,000 to P80,000 per square with inputted pro rata cost per parking. The Presiding Officer. Did you say, estimate? Mr. Ng. That is right, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. So you areit is not a fixed price? You are just estimating. Mr. Ng. Yes, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. How valid is your estimate? What is the basis of your estimate? Mr. Ng. Your Honor, I was just informed of this estimate. The actual method by which it was computed, I would not have been The Presiding Officer. You see, Mr. Witness, you are telling us that you have no information sufficient to form a belief. You are simply estimating. So, Counsel, reform the question. Lay the basis so that we will not be dealing with this kind of an evidence. We are dealing here with the sale of property with fixed values. Mr. Cuevas. With the kind indulgence of the Honorable Court, therefore, I now exercise my right to my reservation to ask or to request this Honorable Court for the striking out of the answer of the witness because The Presiding Officer. You can record your objection, if you want. But I will allow this for purposes of liberality. But, Counsel, I admonish you to lay the basis for your questions so that we will not have these objections. And if the witness is notyou are not sure of the competence of the witness, qualify the witness. Mr. Perez. Yes, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. So ordered. Mr. Perez. Mr. Witness, you stated that among your functions was the execution of Deed of Absolute Sale. Before you execute a certain deed of absolute sale, do you take any steps to ensure the regularity of the said transaction? Mr. Ng. We would normally have a financial review done, and under financethis is basically just to ensure that a unit or a property is fully paid based on what was agreed upon bywithin the Contract to Buy and Sell or Reservation Agreement. Mr. Perez. And you earlier stated that after you received the subpoena in this case, you made inquiries with respect to the pricing of the Bellagio penthouse. Is that correct? Mr. Ng. Yes, Sir.
28
Mr. Perez. And with whom did you inquire?
Mr. Ng. I have inquired with our Senior Vice President for Marketing and Sales, Noli D. Hernandez. Mr. Perez. And do you havebased on these inquiries that you conducted, what did you learn about the price given to the Spouses Renato Corona and Cristina Corona in their purchase of the property? Mr. Cuevas. With the kind indulgence of the Honorable Court, Your Honor, it is not merely reasonably apparent but it is very clear that his testimony on this subject will definitely be hearsay, Your Honor. Unless Mr. Perez. Your Honor, Your Honor, may I respond, please? The Presiding Officer. Mr. Counsel, why do you not bring here the marketing director of Megaworld to testify on the prices? So that we will not wrangle with this kind of line of questioning because, indeed, this witness was presented by you to testify on documents, on actual transactions already. But you are going far beyond and you are dealing with the question of bargaining. And I do not think he was involved in the bargaining. Mr. Perez. In that case, Your Honor, we will just request for a subpoena addressed to the person named by the witness, Mr. Noli Hernandez, with respect to the pricing of the property. The Presiding Officer. Then the Clerk of Court is ordered to issue the subpoena against the concerned person. Mr. Perez. Thank you, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. The gentleman from Misamis, Sen. Koko Pimentel. Senator Pimentel. Thank you, Mr. President. I want to ask a question to the Counsel for the Prosecution, Your Honor. What is you theory? Why are you focusing on the price and if there was a discount given? What is the importance of all of these? Mr. Perez. To be candid, Your Honor, we were informed by the witness that Chief Justice Renato Corona received a 40 percent discount from Megaworld Corporation, equivalent to about P10 million. And we believe, Your Honor, this is highly material because it goes into the valuation of the property in the SALN. Because in the SALN Senator Pimentel. So under what Article will that fall into? Mr. Perez. Article II, Your Honor. Because Senator Pimentel. Failure to disclose? Mr. Perez. Failure to disclose and failure to truthfully disclose. Because, Your Honor, as we all know, a SALN is not just a piece of paper. It must be under oath. Senator Pimentel. Because we were thinking receiving benefits, but there is no Article based on receiving benefits. So that is why I get curious about your theory why you are pursuing this line of questioning.
29
Mr. Perez. I was about to add, Your Honor Senator Pimentel. So, you are sticking to that. It is Article II because its failure to Mr. Perez. Among others. Senator Pimentel. truthfully disclose the price. Mr. Perez. Among others, Your Honor, not just Article II. Senator Pimentel. What are the other Articles?
Mr. Perez. Article III, Your Honor, refers to the probity and integrity of the Chief Justice. We believe that a person with integrity and probity, especially a high public official, would not accept a P10- million discount from a developer who mightwhich might well be having a pending litigation. Senator Pimentel. So in effect, the witness will testify on the discount. You will be presenting him or her twice because for two Articles. Is that it, Articles II and III? Mr. Perez. Our position, Your Honor, is that if the witness can serve more than one purpose, then we might as well ask him at the first instance so as to save time. Senator Pimentel. Well, I just wanted a preview on where this is all going to.
Mr. Perez. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Pimentel. So thank you very much. The Presiding Officer. What is the pleasure of the Counsel for the Prosecution? Mr. Perez. We have no further questions for this witness, Your Honor. Mr. Cuevas. Your Honor please. Before we start The Presiding Officer. Defense. Mr. Cuevas. on our cross-examination, may request for a five-minute recess, Your Honor. Senator Sotto. Yes. The Presiding Officer. Are you going to cross-examine now? Senator Sotto. Mr. President Mr. Cuevas. Yes, Your Honor, if the Court so allows. Senator Sotto. Mr. President. The Presiding Officer. Yes. Senator Sotto. The Defense is requesting for five (5) minutes. We are more liberal than that. I move to suspend the trial for 15 minutes. Mr. Cuevas. Thank you. Thank you very much. The Presiding Officer. You prepare for your cross. Mr. Cuevas. Yes, Your Honor.
30
The Presiding Officer. Trial suspended. The trial was suspended at 3:39 p.m. At 4:05 p.m., the trial was resumed. The Presiding Officer. Trial resumed. Prosecution.
Representative Tupas. Mr. President, with the permission of the Defense, we just want to request the Presiding Officer to excuse one of our witnesseswe may not call her today Undersecretary Virginia Torres of the DOTC. May we request, Mr. President, that she be excused? The Presiding Officer. Any objection? [Silence] There being none Mr. Cuevas. No objection. The Presiding Officer. the request of the Prosecution is approved. Representative Tupas. Thank you, Your Honor, Mr. President. Senator Sotto. Mr. President. The Presiding Officer. The Floor Leader. Senator Sotto. Before we proceed with the cross-examination by the Defense, may we recognize Sen. Jinggoy Ejercito Estrada? The Presiding Officer. The President Pro Tempore has the floor. Senator Ejercito Estrada. Thank you, Mr. President. I just would like to ask some clarificatory questions addressed to the witness. Mr. Witness, are you comfortable in speaking Tagalog? Mr. Ng. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Ejercito Estrada. All right. Ginoong Testigo, kailan ba ho nagsimula ang pagpapatayo ng Bellagio? Mr. Ng. The Bellagioshould I speak in Tagalog? Senator Ejercito Estrada. Your choice. Mr. Ng. Basically, I believe that Bellagio should have been started somewhat around four (4) to five (5) years prior to its completion. Senator Ejercito Estrada. Doon sa 38-storey, yung completion noon will take around four (4) to five (5) years. Mr. Ng. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Ejercito Estrada. So, when did it start, 2003? When did the construction of the Bellagio start, what year?
31
Mr. Ng. I would not have the exact date, but it should be around 2003 or thereabout, Sir. Senator Ejercito Estrada. Kailan po natapos? Mr. Ng. Around the end of 2008, early 2009. Senator Ejercito Estrada. All right. Ito pong nasa akin ngayon, iyong Contract to Buy and Sell, ang nakalagay po na ang purchase price nitong Penthouse 38B ay nagkakahalagang P14,510,225. Ang tanong ko ho ay ito bay binili as a pre-selling price o nakatayo na po yung condominium unit? Kasi sa aking pagkakaintindi, pag bumili ka ng condominium na hindi pa tapos, ang tawag po doon pre-selling, mas mura po yun, tama po ba ako? Am I correct? Mr. Ng. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Ejercito Estrada. So, yung pagbiliyung pag-purchase ni Chief Justice Corona nitong Penthouse, itong 38B, ano ho ang presyong binigay niyo sa kanya, pre-selling o hindi? Mr. Ng. The purchase price of the unit purchased by Spouses Corona would probably be close to completion rate. So, in terms of pricing, it should be close to completion. Senator Ejercito Estrada. So, you would not consider it as a pre-selling. Mr. Ng. I would suppose that it would not exactly be considered fully completed as well. So, it is not exactly what we would call ready for occupancy unit. Senator Ejercito Estrada. All right. You mentioned a while ago in your statement o nabanggit mo kanina sa iyo yung salaysay na mayroon pong anim (6) na penthouse, tama po ba ako? Mr. Ng. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Ejercito Estrada. Sa tatlong palapag. Mr. Ng. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Ejercito Estrada. So, that means 36, 37, and 38. Mr. Ng. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Ejercito Estrada. And you have two (2) penthouses in each floor. Mr. Ng. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Ejercito Estrada. Alam niyo ba ho kung magkano ang penthouse doon sa ibang floor? Dahil nais ko lang pong ikompara yong pagbili nung condominium ni Chief Justice Corona doon sa ibang penthouse. Mr. Ng. I am afraid, Your Honor, I do not have the information to that. Senator Ejercito Estrada. You are not competent to answer my question. So, more or less, if you just know. Mr. Ng. If I may, Your Honor? If I may just at least mention what I am familiar with and basically a little understanding of the situation of the company. In our side, which is finance, normally, we sign documents and Deed of Sales probably around almost 3,000 a year. So, we do not really go into the detail of the price of each and every unit. This is the responsibility of our Marketing Department. Now,
32
as I mentioned before, prior to coming to this, because I was subpoenaed, I did have some inquiries regarding the purchase. And all I really know is what I have been told on this matter by our marketing. Now, would it be okay if I then mention this or share this? Senator Ejercito Estrada. You are free to do so. Mr. Ng. Well, basically, I was informed that normally we give almost all buyers a 15-percent discount for a shorter term payment. In this case, the unit was paid in roughly around a year, if I am not mistaken. So we would normally give around 15 percent to most if not practically all buyers. Secondly, I was informed as well by our Marketing Department that there are certain marketing considerations as well that is intricate in this actual purchase. You see, according to the explanation given to me by marketing, this Unit 38-B, it actually had some technical and finishing issues at that time that they had actually determined that it would be to the best interest of selling or marketing that they would have to rectify the unit and to do some reworks on the unit. They did, however, say that fortunately they were able to find their client. In this case would be the spouses, and that rather than going through a costly rectification of the unit, they just decided to factor in this cost and lower the price accordingly. So, if we were to say they would say that the unit is not exactly the same as other units because they intended to rectify it. Another factor is that at that time of acquisition, they have this glooming sentiment. Because in 2008, at the time of acquisition, that was the exact moment of the onset of the global financial crisis when Lehman Brothers, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae had gone intoyou know, you had bankruptcy, conservatorship. And at that time, they had a very bearish attitude towards sales so they just decided to factor this in when they decided the price. So they were responsible. Marketing is responsible for the price that they have to decide for them to sell. So it is reallyhow would you say?their lookout. It is their decision, it is their judgment decision and they have to be accountable for their decision. Now, the exact intricacies coming into this exact discount computation, I am afraid I would not be, if all you would say, competent enough to know the details. Senator Ejercito Estrada. And one more point, Mr. Witness, are not you checking the background or financial background of your prospective buyers or you just take them at face value? Mr. Ng. Well, basically, what we would have is that normally, if we just say normally, we would just require the clients to give us postdated checks and therefore Senator Ejercito Estrada. Without even verifying their financial background, Mr. Witness? Mr. Ng. We would have the Buyers Information Sheet. But again, a sale, for us, is a sale. So if we would be able to procure the postdated checks and the likes, then we would proceed with the sale. If they do not have the financial capacity to pay, eventually these checks would bounce and we just have to forfeit and other proceedings. Senator Ejercito Estrada. So hihintayin ninyo pang tumalbog yung tseke bago kayo magko-conduct ng background information? Is that my understanding? Mr. Ng. Well, it is not exactly a background investigation, Your Honor, but rather when we have a purchase we would have the buyer. They give us an understanding who they are but we would not really go into their financial capabilities. We would require them to give us postdated checks and if they bounce, then we would just forfeit the payments and the unit as well.
33
Senator Ejercito Estrada. Okay. My last question. Paano ba nakakakuha ng malaking discount sa Bellagio ng 40 percent or 50 percent discount? Mr. Ng. Well, again, as Senator Ejercito Estrada. Yun ba ay dahil may puwesto, dahil kilala ng developer o kahit sinong ordinaryong mamamayan puwedeng mag-avail ng 50-percent discount? Kasi nagtatanong ho sa akin si Senator Drilon kung paano makakakuha ng malaking discount. [Laughter] Please. Mr. Ng. Yes, Your Honor. Well, as I had previously explained, normally we give 15-percent off if you pay in a very short period of time, even higher if it is paid fully in one installment. Now, the rest of thewell, if you would say or you would rather term it as an adjustment in price is primarily because ofat least what they have told me is that there are issues with the unit. So if you were to come to us with buying a unit with the samethe very same unit, the way I believe at least is, if you come to us and you buy the very same unit that has the very same issues at the time that Lehman Brothers collapses, maybe we would give youmost likely, we would give you a better consideration, Your Honor. Senator Ejercito Estrada. So ibig niyong sabihin, pag mayroong diperensya po ang unit katulad ng sinasabi niyo, mayroong mga defects, mas malaki ang discount. Mr. Ng. Well Senator Ejercito Estrada. Tama po ba? Mr. Ng. I would say it depends on the actual amount that you need to rectify in a unit. It would vary from unit to unit because each Senator Ejercito Estrada. Eh, kung wala pong depekto ang unit, magkano pong discount ang puwedepinakamalaking discount ang puwede niyong ibigay? Mr. Ng. Again, I would have to say that I am only familiar with the cash discount and the payment term discount which is 15 percent. And I believe, maybe, up to 20 for full cash. But the intricacies of the marketing and their strategies, I would have to admit that I am not exactly that competent on that matter. Senator Ejercito Estrada. Doon sa mga VIPs na gustong bumili? Mr. Ng. I am sorry, I would not be very familiar with that. Senator Ejercito Estrada. Okay. Yun lang po. Maraming salamat po. The Presiding Officer. Thank you. The Defense Counsel may proceed with his cross-examination. Mr. Cuevas. Thank you. The Presiding Officer. Just a minute. The Prosecution presented this evidence under Article III? Mr. Perez. Article II, Your Honor. Article II. The Presiding Officer. Ah, Article II. So this is under Article II. Mr. Perez. Yes, Your Honor.
34
The Presiding Officer. Ah, okay. Proceed. Mr. Cuevas. With the kind indulgence of the Honorable Chairman. The Presiding Officer. Proceed. Mr. Cuevas. Magandang hapon po, Mr. Ng.
Mr. Ng. Good afternoon, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. Now, I had stated a while ago that you are Vice President for Finance of Megaworld, am I right? Mr. Ng. I am the finance director. Mr. Cuevas. What does that mean, you are not the vice president? But are they two different offices? Mr. Ng. Well, vice president for us is actually a rank so you have higher rank as you go up. They have different titles. In my case, it is the finance director. Mr. Cuevas. So you are higher than the vice president. Mr. Ng. That is right, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. Okay. Thank you. Now, at the timeI am showing to you this Deed of Absolute Sale which had been marked as Exhibit DDDD for the Prosecution and Exhibit DDDD for the Defense. Will you kindly go over the same and Mr. Ng. Which? Pardon. Which Mr. Cuevas. I will show it to you. I will show it to you. Mr. Ng. Okay. McKinley Hills. Deed of Absolute Sale, yes, McKinley Hills. Mr. Cuevas. Kindly go over the same, more particularly Page 2 thereof. Mr. Ng. Yes, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. Now, may I direct your attention to an item under Acknowledgment, under No. 2, Renato C. Corona, in his personal capacity and as attorney-in-fact of Maria Charina R. Corona. Did you notice that? Mr. Ng. Yes, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. You have no reason to doubt M. Ng. No, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. that the Renato C. Corona spoken of or mentioned in here is Chief Justice Corona? Mr. Ng. Are you
Mr. Cuevas. You have no reason to doubt
35
Mr. Ng. Uh-huh. Mr. Cuevas. that he is the Chief Justice Corona? Mr. Ng. Well, I do not personally meet the people that I sign but Mr. Cuevas. No, but that is not my question. Mr. Ng. Uh-huh. Mr. Cuevas. My question to you isthere is a statement here: Renato C. Corona in his personal capacity and as attorney-in-fact for Maria Charina R. Corona, did you notice that entry? Mr. Ng. Yes, Sir.
Mr. Cuevas. That is absolutely correct and right? Mr. Ng. Yes, Sir.
Mr. Cuevas. That the Chief Justice Corona is acting as attorney-in-fact for Charina R. Corona? Mr. Ng. Well, that Renato C. Corona is acting. Mr. Cuevas. Right? Mr. Ng. Yes, Sir.
Mr. Cuevas. And did you come to know why was he attorney-in-fact? Was it because Charina Corona was abroad for several years prior to this transaction? Mr. Ng. I am not familiar with the matter itself but Iwe refer to a special power of attorney? Mr. Cuevas. Yes.
Mr. Ng. Wherein Maria Charina Corona Mr. Cuevas. Are you through? Mr. Ng. Maria Charina Corona of legal age, Filipino citizen and permanent resident of United States hereby appoint and constitute my parents, Renato C. Corona and/or Maria Cristina R. Corona, to be my true and lawful attorneys. Mr. Cuevas. So that is correct Mr. Ng. Yes, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. based on your examination of the evidence you have gone over in connection with this transaction, Bellagio transaction? Voice. No, McKinley. Mr. Cuevas. McKinley transaction? Mr. Ng. Yes, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. Now, I am showing to you a photocopy of the special power of attorney mentioned in here which we request, Your Honor, to be marked as Exhibit 39 for the Defense, Your Honor.
36
The Presiding Officer. Mark it accordingly.
Mr. Cuevas. And ask you whether you have seen that document before and therefore you are acquainted with it? Mr. Ng. It is a copy.
Mr. Cuevas. Okay, thank you. So when you stated, Mr. Ng, that the payments were made by Renato Corona, you did not bother to inquire was this payment made by him in his capacity as attorney-in-fact of Charina or you just accepted the payment? Or you have nothing to do at all with the payment made? Mr. Perez. Your Honor, objection. The Presiding Officer. What is the ground for the objection? Mr. Perez. The best evidence of the payor, Your Honor, would be the official receipt. And this witness testified on official receipt. The Presiding Officer. Well, let the witness, he is under cross. Mr. Perez. Yes, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Let the witness answer. Mr. Ng. Pardon again, can you kindly Mr. Cuevas. I think my question is: When you were receiving payments from the Coronas and you mentioned that the payment was made by Renato Corona, were you aware or not of that power of attorney? You were? Witness examining the same, Your Honor. Mr. Ng. Basicallycan I just explain the system? Mr. Cuevas. No, just kindly answer my question. The Presiding Officer. Just answer the question of the Counsel. Mr. Ng. Well, basically, the The Presiding Officer. And you can explain afterwards. Mr. Ng. The special power of attorney is dated after the last payment made. Mr. Cuevas. What do you mean last payment, please? Mr. Ng. The lastit was dated after the OR dates, official receipts dates. Mr. Cuevas. Will that matter whether it was prior or succeeding? Mr. Ng. Well, we were not informed at that point. Mr. Cuevas. I see. You wanted to let us know that you are not familiar with the facts surrounding the transaction? Mr. Ng. That is right.
37
Mr. Cuevas. All right. As in fact, you made mention a while ago that insofar as pricing is concerned, this does not fall within the ambit of your authority? Mr. Ng. Yes, Sir.
Mr. Cuevas. And that everything you mentioned about the pricing was based on the information gathered from the Marketing Department, am I right? Mr. Ng. Yes, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. All right. And you came to the conclusion that so much amount had been paid and payments were made by Renato Corona based also on what your marketing director told you? Mr. Ng. Theagain on that part, yes. Mr. Cuevas. If Your Honor please. The Presiding Officer. Proceed. Mr. Cuevas. No answer. Mr. Ng. The Mr. Cuevas. Kindly listen because I am already old. I cannot remember my question. [Laughter] Eh sa iba, ulyanin na itong 83 eh. [Laughter] The Presiding Officer. Will you kindlydo we have any stenographic notes of the Mr. Cuevas. Wala po eh. Wala po yata eh. Kung meron I will Senator Sotto. Meron, meron. Mr. Cuevas. Ah, meron. The Presiding Officer. Ah, kindly repeat the question. Read the question to the witness. Mr. Cuevas. Then we will request that it be read from the transcript. The Presiding Officer. Read the question to the witness. Stenographers, read the question to the witness. Senator Sotto. Yes, Mr. President, we have stenographic notes. We will just give the microphone to the stenographer. The Presiding Officer. Witness, pakinggan mong mabuti yung question para masasagot mo ano. Mr. Cuevas. Ano na, binasa na? The Stenographer (Ms. Astrero). Your Honor, the question: And you came to the conclusion that so much amount has been paid and payments were made by Renato Corona based on what your marketing director told you? Mr. Ng. No, Sir. Paymentswe basically use our records as payments. At the time the official
38
receipts were issued, we werewell, our Accounting Department has not yet been informed of the assignment which is why they reflect the official receipts under the name of the original buyer which was written in the Buyers Information Sheet and the Reservation Agreement. Once the Deed of Assignment is executed, that is the only time that we, on file, amend anyour records and, therefore, any official receipts that are issued afterwards would be named under the name of an assignee. Mr. Cuevas. Why do you agree to an amendment or a correction of the receipts? Mr. Ng. No, not amendment. We would amend our record on file and any ORs issued after an assignment will be in the name of the assignee. Mr. Cuevas. So, it could beit is probable that the original receipt may not be in the name of the real owner. Is thatam I right? Mr. Perez. Hypothetical, Your Honor. Mr. Cuevas. Why Mr. Perez. Objection. Mr. Cuevas. That is an illicit Mr. Perez. Let the witness answer if he knows. Mr. Ng. Well, hypothetically, the official receipts, in actual practice, sometimes you would see that the name on the official receipts would besome of them would be in the name of an original buyer and some of them will be in the name of an assignee. Mr. Cuevas. Clearly indicating that there may be a difference in the state of the name stated in the receipt and the actualand the person actually making the payment. Mr. Ng. Hypothetically, yes. Mr. Cuevas. Thank you. Thank you. Now, let us go to this Bellagio property. Have you examined this Bellagio property before and after the sale in favor of the Coronas? Mr. Ng. How would you explain examine? Physically visit the unit or Mr. Cuevas. I do not know. That is up to you. You are a businessman. Have you gone there personally? Mr. Ng. I have not gone to the unit personally. Mr. Cuevas. You have not seen it personally. Mr. Ng. No, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. Even at the time that the transaction took place? Mr. Ng. No, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. So, you would not know whether when it was purchased it was in skeletal form? Mr. Ng. I would not know, Sir.
39
Mr. Cuevas. Correct. As of today, before you took the witness stand, have you gone to the place? Mr. Ng. No, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. I suppose you have not seen what it is? Mr. Ng. No, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. You do not know whether it is habitable or an improved unit? Mr. Ng. I would not know, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. You will not be able to tell the Honorable Court whether it is still in skeletal form? Mr. Ng. No, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. All right. So, how about the reasonableness of the amount that your company charged the buyer? Did you examine the condition of the unit with the amount paid? I suppose not. Mr. Ng. No. I did not, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. You did not? Mr. Ng. No, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. That is not part of your function. Mr. Ng. That is not part of my function. Mr. Cuevas. That is part of the Marketing Department. Mr. Ng. Yes, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. All right. Now when, for the last time did you have a talk with the marketing people in connection with the Bellagio unit, Mr. Ng? Mr. Ng. Well, I had talked to them Mr. Cuevas. Before you take the Mr. Ng. when I received the subpoena. I had inquired with them. That is the time. Mr. Cuevas. So it is only about two or three days ago? Mr. Ng. Well, 18th of January. Mr. Cuevas. Prior to that, you never did have any conference with them? Mr. Ng. No, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. You did not ascertain from them what is the condition of this unit? Mr. Ng. No, Sir.
40
Mr. Cuevas. So you would not know whether this is still in its skeletal form, uninhabited? Mr. Ng. I would not know, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. So you will not be able to tell the Honorable Court whether it is occupied or habitated as of now? Mr. Ng. I would not, Sir. Mr. Cuevas. Thank you very much. That is all with the witness, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. All right. The Minority Floor Leader. Senator Cayetano (A). Good afternoon, Mr. President. Mr. President, I would like to ask some clarificatory questions? The Presiding Officer. Proceed. You have two (2) minutes. Senator Cayetano (A). Mr. Witness, good afternoon. You were looking at some receipts a while agothe yellow receipts. That refers to the McKinley property, is that correct? Mr. Ng. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Cayetano (A). Okay. Para lang maintindihan natin yung proseso. First question muna, cash ba yun or check yung pinambayad dun sa resibo? Naka-indicate ba yun sa receipt? Would you have any knowledge regarding that? Mr. Ng. Based on the official receipts, there is an indication BPI, which would mean that it was paid via check from BPI. Senator Cayetano (A). And would it say kung kaninong checking account? Mr. Ng. No, Your Honor. Senator Cayetano (A). But you would have the records of the check numbers? Mr. Ng. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Cayetano (A). Yes? Mr. Ng. So, all of these are supposed to be in the official receipt. Senator Cayetano (A). Okay. Yung proseso lang no, kung bibili ka ng condominium unit so in that case, installment to, no? Mr. Ng. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Cayetano (A). Okay. So, hindi mo naman basta ia-approve yung installment sale ng hindi mo muna nakikita kung capable to pay ang bumibili, tama po ba? If I come to you and say, I want to buy a condo, and nagkasundo tayo sa price and I say, installment, you will still ask me if I am capable to pay, right? Or my capacity to pay?
41
Mr. Ng. Well, Your Honor, normally, if someone would come to us to purchase, our mainwell, this is handled by our marketing and then the main consideration is that they would execute the reservation along with a reservation agreement and the reservation fee or the first installment basically or first payment thereof. Senator Cayetano (A). Yes. Mr. Ng. Then once we have that, we will then, most of the time, require that they submit postdated checks for the rest of the balances. In terms of actually going into the capacity Senator Cayetano (A). Let me clarify lang. Kung cash ang ibabayad wala nang problema yun because you do not even have to know kung capable to buy. Precisely, may cash siya, no. Pero kung hindi cash ang ibabayad, he can go to a bank and borrow money or puwedeng in-house sa inyo, no? So, itong sinasabi mo na postdated checks, ito yung in-house financing niyo? Mr. Ng. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Cayetano (A). Okay. So ang sinasabi mo basta magbigay ng postdated checks. So you mean, pagka nagbigay ng post dated check kahit sino hindi niyo na titingnan kung capable siya? Mr. Ng. If I may explain a bit. Senator Cayetano (A). Yes, please. Mr. Ng. Most of the time, as was mentioned before, they made reference to a pre-selling which we are still constructing something. So at that point, in a financial point of view, there is actually no risk because you are actually paying us while we are still building something for you. Senator Cayetano (A). Okay. So pag tumalbog iyong tseke, di hindi mo ibibigay at saka Contract to Sell naman iyan, eh. Hindi naman Contract of Sale, right? Mr. Ng. That is right. Senator Cayetano (A). Okay. So what is the policy of your company? Nagba-background check pa ba sila or nagtse-check or bastat mayroon kang tseke, tatanggapin mo na? Mr. Ng. We would not really go into a background. Senator Cayetano (A). Okay. Then, last line of questioning. Usual ba iyong may nagre-reserve or may nagbibigay ng tseke? Then before mo makuha iyong titulo or iyong Condominium Certificate, papapalitan iyong pangalan? Mr. Ng. From time to time, we do see that. We do see some of the clients assigned units. Some of them would beYes. Senator Cayetano (A). So when you say assign, you are not using assignment in the legal sense which means sale, no? Youre simply saying the laymans term na ibibigay mo doon or pangalan nya? Mr. Ng. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Cayetano (A). In law kasi pag sinabi mong in-assign mo, binenta mo sa kanya, eh. So when you are using the word assignment when counsel for the Defense was talking to you, you are simply saying that kung nasa pangalan ni X, gusto niyang ilipat sa pangalan ni Y, iyon ang tawag niyong assignment.
42
Mr. Ng. Well, I have to admit that I am not very familiar with the legal matters. Senator Cayetano (A). No. What do you mean by assignment? Mr. Ng. When we have an assignment, we are putting the name of the unit to whoever they are assigning to. Senator Cayetano (A). Okay. Mr. Ng. And if the unit is not yet fully paid, then they would have to assume the obligation of paying the balance. Senator Cayetano (A). And it does not matter to you how it was transferred, whether it is a donation, whether sa pangalan talaga niya binili iyon, whether he sold it to them. You are using assignment in a generic sense. Mr. Ng. Yes, Sir. Senator Cayetano (A). Thank you, Mr. Presiding Officer. The Presiding Officer. Who else would want to ask question? The gentleman from Iloilo. Senator Drilon. Thank you, Mr. President. Just a few clarificatory questions. The Presiding Officer. You have two minutes. Senator Drilon. First of all, with this Exhibit DDDD, in the acknowledgment it says, Renato C. Corona, in his personal capacity and as attorney-in-fact for Maria Charina R. Corona. Can you explain to us what this means? Mr. Ng. I am afraid I am not very familiar with the legal matter, Sir. Senator Drilon. Yes. Because on your part, it says, Giovanni C. Ng, in his capacity as Finance Director of Megaworld. And then in the case of Renato C. Corona, it says, Renato C. Corona, in his personal capacity and as attorney-in-fact for Maria Charina R. Corona. You do not know what this means? Mr. Ng. Well, that he is signing in his personal capacity and as attorney-in-fact. Senator Drilon. He is signing in his personal capacity as attorney-in-fact. Does that mean that he also own the property? Mr. Ng. I would not know that, sir. Senator Drilon. You do not know. So I will just ask you a few questions. Do you confirm that, in fact, payments were made by Renato Corona and Cristina Corona for both the McKinley Hill property and the Bellagio Condominium? Mr. Ng. Your Honor, I can only refer to the ORs on file and they too state those names. Senator Drilon. And the ORs on file marked as series FFF and CCC would, in fact, confirm that?
43
Mr. Ng. The ORs would state the names Corona, Renato C. and Cristina R. Senator Drilon. All right. Now, you would confirm that a Deed of Assignment was executed between Spouses Corona and Charina Corona, the Assignee, on October 3, 2008, marked in fact as GGGG. Mr. Ng. We have that on file, Your Honor. Senator Drilon. Answer yes or no. What? Mr. Ng. Yes, Sir. Senator Drilon. All right. Now, you are a signatory in the Deed of Assignment as Conforme. What does this mean? Mr. Ng. Well, I can only answer for all practicality why we do that is that normally, we want to know on record who we will transfer the title to, so we needforas a policy, we usually require that for any assignment, the company conforms to it so that we, on file, know who we will transfer the title to. Senator Drilon. All right. So in this particular case you knew the transferor to be Renato C. Corona and the transferee to be Charina Corona? Mr. Ng. Well, in all honesty when we signed this document it is just sent to my office to sign. I do not personally meet the clients. Senator Drilon. Uhmm. Okay. Now, what about the other signatories, were they present? You would not know? Mr. Ng. I would not be there at that time when it was signed. Senator Drilon. Have you ever met Chief Justice Corona? Mr. Ng. No, Your Honor. Senator Drilon. And the wife? Mr. Ng. No, Your Honor. Senator Drilon. You did not have an opportunity to inquire why they executed the assignment between them? Mr. Ng. No, Your Honor. Senator Drilon. Now, the purchase price is stated at P6,196,575 for 203 square meters. A simple computation would indicate that the unit, per square meter, it would cost P30,525. Would you confirm that? The Presiding Officer. Witness, what is your answer? Senator Drilon. It is a mathematical computation. Mr. Ng. Thirty thousand five hundred twenty-five. Senator Drilon. Thirty thousand five hundred twenty-five.
44
Mr. Ng. By dividing the total purchase price of the unit with the area. Senator Drilon. Sorry? Mr. Ng. By dividing the total purchase price Senator Drilon. By the area. Mr. Ng. indicated in the Deed of Absolute Sale with the area of 203. Senator Drilon. Yes. And the price is P30,525 per square meter. Mr. Ng. Thirty thousand five hundred twenty-five per square meter. Senator Drilon. On or about that time did you execute, I assume, similar sale agreements? Mr. Ng. I supposed so. Senator Drilon. Yes. Mr. Ng. We sign normally but we do notI do not really remember anymore. Senator Drilon. Would a price of P30,525 per square meter be a normal price? Mr. Ng. I am afraid, I am not familiar with the pricing. Senator Drilon. All right. Do you confirm that there was a discount here on the basis of this document marked EEEE? Mr. Ng. Which is the? Senator Drilon. Which is the Request for Reservation and Offer to Purchase. Mr. Ng. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Drilon. A discount of P2,313,388 was granted? Mr. Ng. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Drilon. That is all, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. What is the pleasure of the Prosecution? Mr. Perez. Your Honor, we have no redirect questions for this witness. The Presiding Officer. So are you discharging this witness? Mr. Perez. Yes, Your Honor. Representative Tupas. Yes, please, Mr. President. The Presiding Officer. The witness is excused. Next witness. Representative Tupas. Yes, Mr. President. Before we call on our next witness may we just request that another witness of the Prosecution, Ms. Editha Orcilla, Chief, Document Division of the NSO, be excused for today.
45
The Presiding Officer. You are presenting her as a witness? Representative Tupas. Not anymore. Not anymorenot for today, at least. The Presiding Officer. You are allowing her to go? Representative Tupas. Please. Yes. The Presiding Officer. Well, the witness mentioned is excused for todays hearing. Representative Tupas. Mr. President, Your Honors. And now we want to call on our second witness for today,
The Presiding Officer. Proceed. Representative Tupas. The name is Mr. Constante Caluya Jr., the Registrar of Deeds of Makati City. The Presiding Officer. Let the witness enter the room and place him on the witness stand and swear him. Representative Tupas. To conduct the direct examination is Congresswoman Marlyn PrimiciasAgabas, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Let the lady Member of Congress do the examination. The Secretary. Please stand up. Mr. Witness, please raise your right hand. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth in this impeachment case? Do you? Mr. Caluya. Yes, I do. The Secretary. So, help you God. Representative Primicias-Agabas. Your Honor, may I proceed? Mr. Witness, will you kindly state your name, your address, your occupation? Mr. Caluya. Yes, Maam. Representative Primicias-Agabas. And your other personal circumstances. Mr. Caluya. Your Honor, I am Atty. Constante Caluya Jr. , Registrar of Deeds, Makati City. We hold office at the Fifth Floor, Makati City Hall, J.P. Rizal St., Makati City. Representative Primicias-Agabas. Your Honors, we offer the testimony of the witness for the following purposes: one, to establish that he is the incumbent Register of Deeds for the City of Makati, and as such he is the official custodian of Certificates of Title evidencing ownership of the real properties in the City of Makati and other related documents; two, to prove that in the Register of Deeds of the City of Makati, Respondent Chief Justice Renato Corona and spouse, Mrs. Cristina Corona, are the owners of condominium unit 31-B located at The Columns, Ayala Avenue, evidenced by Condominium Certificate 85716; three, to identify and authenticate documents in his official custody pertaining to ownership of condominium unit in the name of Chief Justice Renato Corona and spouse covered by CCT 85716; and four, to establish material allegations in Article II of the Verified Complaint. The Presiding Officer. Proceed.
46
Representative Primicias-Agabas. Mr. Witness, will you kindly inform this Honorable Court what is your present employment? Mr. Caluya. I am the Registrar of Deeds of Makati City, Maam. Representative Primicias-Agabas. When did you become the Register of Deeds for the City of Makati? Mr. Caluya. I assumed my post last November 2, 2011. Representative Primicias-Agabas. Before you became the Register of Deeds for the City of Makati, what other positions, if any, did you occupy? Mr. Caluya. I was the Deputy Register of Deeds of Quezon City since 1999. Representative Primicias-Agabas. As the Register of Deeds for the City of Makati, what are your primary duties and responsibilities? Mr. Caluya. Yes, Maam. Our office is the custodian of all Transfer Certificates of Title and Condominium Certificates of Title of properties situated in Makati City, Maam. We are also tasked with the registration of transactions involving these properties. Representative Primicias-Agabas. Mr. Witness, why are you here in todays hearing of the Impeachment Court? Mr. Caluya. I am here in compliance with the subpoena issued by this Impeachment Court, Maam. Representative Primicias-Agabas. Do you have a copy of the said subpoena with you, if any? Mr. Caluya. Yes, Maam. Representative Primicias-Agabas. Your Honors, permission to approach the witness? Your Honors, the witness handed to this representation his copy of the subpoena ad testificandum et duces tecum. Mr. Witness, in the said subpoena, you were required to bring with you the original of Condominium Certificate of Title 85716 in the name of Cristina R. Corona married to Renato C. Corona. In relation to this order, what document or documents, if any, did you bring with you? Mr. Caluya. I have with me, Maam, the original copy of CCT No. 85716. Representative Primicias-Agabas. Can you please hand it too?
Your Honors, may I make of record that the witness handed to this representation the original copy of Condominium Certificate of Title No. 85716 in the name of Cristina R. Corona married to Renato C. Corona pertaining to Unit 31-B, one-bedroom type, with an area of 48 square meters, located on the 31st Floor, with one parking unit of The Columns, Ayala Avenue, entered at the City of Makati on the 3rd day of November, 2004. The Presiding Officer. What village is that?
47
Representative Primicias-Agabas. Your Honor? The Presiding Officer. What village? Representative Primicias-Agabas. The Columns, Ayala Avenue, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. The Columns, yes. Proceed. Representative Primicias-Agabas. Your Honor, we would like to manifest that during the pre-marking a photocopy of the original, consisting of four (4) pages, was marked as Exhibit JJJ, JJJ-1 and JJJ-3 inclusive for the Prosecution. Mr. Witness, do you have a copy of the said document? Mr. Caluya. Yes, Maam. Representative Primicias-Agabas. Mr. Witness, will you kindly tell this Honorable Court what is the relation of that photocopy to the original? Mr. Caluya. The photocopies are true and faithful reproduction of the original, Maam. Representative Primicias-Agabas. Your Honors please, may we request the Defense to please also compare the original with the photocopy and tell to this Honorable Court whether or not it is a true and faithful reproduction of the original? The Presiding Officer. The Defense may do so if they wish. Mr. Cuevas. No objection to the substitution, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Proceed. Representative Primicias-Agabas. Mr. Witness, also in the said subpoena you were required by this Honorable Court to bring with you the original of the Deed of Absolute Sale and the Certificate Authorizing Registration issued by the Bureau of Internal Revenue? Mr. Caluya. Yes, Maam. Representative Primicias-Agabas. In relation to this order, what document or documents did you bring, if any? Mr. Caluya. I have with me the original of the Deed of Absolute Sale and the original of the Certificate Authorizing Registration. Representative Primicias-Agabas. Your Honors, may I make of record that the witness handed to this representation the original Deed of Absolute Sale dated October 1, 2004 entered between Community Innovations Inc., as seller, and Cristina R. Corona married to Renato C. Corona, purchaser, pertaining to Unit No. 31-B, one bedroom type, 48 square meters, more or less, with one parking slot for and in consideration of the total sum of P3,588,931.82. Your Honors, we would like also to manifest unto this Honorable Court that during the pre-marking a photocopy of the said document was marked as Exhibits KKK, KKK-1 to KKK-3 consisting of four (4) pages for the Prosecution, Your Honor. Mr. Witness, do you have a copy of the said document? Mr. Caluya. Yes, Maam.
48
Representative Primicias-Agabas. What is the relation of that document to the original, Mr. Witness? Mr. Caluya. Exhibit KKK is a true and faithful reproduction of the original, Maam, except for the size. Representative Primicias-Agabas. Your Honors, we would like to request the Counsel for the Defense to please make a comparison as to whether or not the said photocopy is a faithful reproduction of the original? The Presiding Officer. The Defense may do so if they wish. Mr. Cuevas. If Your Honor please. If the purpose is substitution we have no objection. The Presiding Officer. So Counsel may proceed. Representative Primicias-Agabas. Thank you, Your Honors. Lastly, the witness handed to this representation the original Certificate Authorizing Registration issued by the BIR in the name of Cristina Corona in the amount of P3,588,931. Your Honors, a photocopy of the said document was also marked as Exhibit LLL, LLL-1 for the Prosecution. Mr. Witness, do you have a copy of the said photocopy? Mr. Caluya. Yes, Maam. Representative Primicias-Agabas. What is the relation of that photocopy to the original, Mr. Witness? Mr. Caluya. It is also a faithful reproduction of the original, Maam. Representative Primicias-Agabas. May I request the Counsel for the Defense to make a stipulation as to whether or not said photocopy is a faithful and true reproduction of the original? Mr. Cuevas. If the purpose is substitution, Your Honor, we have no objection. It is a faithful reproduction of the original. The Presiding Officer. Counsel may proceed. Representative Primicias-Agabas. Thank you, Your Honor. That is all for the witness. The Presiding Officer. Any cross? Mr. Cuevas. No cross, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. What is the pleasure of the Prosecution? Are you discharging this witness? Representative Primicias-Agabas. Yes, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. The witness is discharged from the witness stand. Mr. Caluya. Thank you, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Next witness.
49
Representative Tupas. Mr. President, we call now on our third witness for the day, from Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation, Mr. Aniceto Bisnar Jr. May we call on now on the witness? The Presiding Officer. Aniceto Bisnar Jr. is called to the witness stand. Take the stand and to be sworn in to testify in this Court. Representative Tupas. May we request that Atty. Jose Antonio Hernandez be recognized to conduct the direct examination for the Prosecution, Mr. Senate President. The Presiding Officer. Atty. Hernandez is recognized. Representative Tupas. Thank you. Mr. Hernandez. Thank you, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Where is the witness? Where is your witness? Mr. Hernandez. I believe he is being called, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. He is on the way? Mr. Hernandez. Yes, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Thank you. The Secretary. Mr. Witness, please rise and raise your right hand to swear. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth in this Impeachment proceeding? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. The Secretary. So help you God. The Presiding Officer. Proceed, Counsel. Mr. Hernandez. Thank you, Your Honor. Mr. Witness, could you please state for the record your name, your age, address and your current occupation? Mr. Bisnar. Your Honor, I am Aniceto V. Bisnar Jr., 47 years old, with address at 31st Floor, Ayala Tower 1 Building, Makati. I am presently vice president of Ayala Land under the Strategic Landbank Management Group. Mr. Hernandez. Your Honor, we are presenting this witness for the following purposes: number one, to prove that Cristina Corona and Chief Justice Renato Corona purchased a condominium unit at the Spanish Bay Tower, Bonifacio Ridge in Fort Bonifacio in the year 2005 for over P9.1 million; number two, to have the witness identify and authenticate documents relating to that purchase, and; number three, in the end, to prove that Chief Justice Corona committed culpable violation of the Constitution and/or betrayal of public trust when he failed to include this condominium in his SALN for the years 2005 to 2009; and lastly, to prove other matters relating to the details of the foregoing and in general to support the Complaint for Impeachment.
50
The Presiding Officer. What are the other matters that you have in mind? Mr. Hernandez. Just the details of the purchase, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Proceed. Mr. Hernandez. Thank you, Your Honor. Now, Mr. Bisnar, you stated that you work for Ayala Land Incorporated. Before working for Ayala Land, what other positions did you hold, if any? Mr. Bisnar. I was seconded by Ayala Land in Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation way back in October of 2004 up to July of 2008. Mr. Hernandez. And what exactly was your position at Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation? Mr. Bisnar. I was designated as the head of Commercial Operations. Mr. Hernandez. What is the relationship, if any, of Ayala Land with Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation? Mr. Bisnar. Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation wasAyala was part of the controlling company, Bonifacio Land Corporation, which owns 55 percent of Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation. The other 45 percent of is owned, Your Honor, by BCDA. Mr. Hernandez. And going back to when you were the head of Commercial Operations of Fort Bonifacio or FBDC, for brevity, could you tell us what were some of your primary functions and duties in this position? Mr. Bisnar. Your Honor, as head of Commercial Operations, I was overseeing and managing the planning, development, estate management, sales and marketing of commercial lots, office spaces, leasing of properties and sales of projects of FBDC. Mr. Hernandez. Okay. Mr. Bisnar. Part of my duties then was also to sign contracts on behalf of FBDC. Mr. Hernandez. Okay. And, Sir, you are here before this Court by virtue of a subpoena? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Hernandez. Okay. Now, this subpoenathis property subject of the subpoena is Unit 1902 Spanish Bay Tower, Bonifacio Ridge located at the Fort, Taguig City covered by CCT No. 5582 in the name of Cristina R. Corona, married to Renato Corona. Are you familiar with this property, Sir? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor.
Mr. Hernandez. Why are your familiar with it? Mr. Bisnar. It was one of the projects that we took over from Metro Pacific when Ayala Land came back into Bonifacio Global City. Mr. Hernandez. And this project isis it a condominium or a piece of land? Mr. Bisnar. It is a condominium project, Your Honor.
51
Mr. Hernandez. And where exactly is this condominium located? Mr. Bisnar. The condominium project is located along 1st Avenue near the corner of 31st Street, near the office of FBDC in Bonifacio Global City. Mr. Hernandez. Okay. Just by way of reference, could you tell us what are some of the familiar landmarks which are nearby? Mr. Bisnar. Bonifacio Ridge Condominium is just beside Manila Golf. It is along the boundary of Bonifacio Global City and Manila Golf. Mr. Hernandez. Okay. And was this condominium project finished, Sir? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. The project was completed way back in 2005. Mr. Hernandez. Okay. The subject unit is Unit 1902, on what floor is this unit? Mr. Bisnar. The unit, Your Honor, is at the 19th floor of the 20-level condominium tower called the Spanish Bay Tower. Mr. Hernandez. Nineteenth floor out of how many total storeys? Mr. Bisnar. The building hasfor marketing purposes, has 20 levels of residential condominium units; although there are no 4th floor and 13th floor. Mr. Hernandez. So, it is on the 19th floor of a 20-storey building, is that correct? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Hernandez. Okay. And who purchased this Unit 1902? Mr. Bisnar. The Unit 1902, Spanish Bay Tower was acquired by a certain Cristina R. Corona. Mr. Hernandez. And when was this purchase made, Sir? Mr. Bisnar. The purchase was done in October 14, 2005 with the signing of the Deed of Absolute Sale. Mr. Hernandez. Okay. Was the purchase price paid in full? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Hernandez. Was the purchase price paid in cash or in installment? Mr. Bisnar. The condominium unit was paid under the cash category of payment terms. Mr. Hernandez. Could you explain that to uswhat do you mean exactly when you say a cash category? Mr. Bisnar. The unit was acquired in an almost cash basis with the buyer issuing checks for payment of the unit. Mr. Hernandez. So in that case you give the same terms and conditions as if it were a cash purchase. Is that correct? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. It was considered as a normal cash payment term as compared to installment payment which may take several years.
52
Mr. Hernandez. And you said that it was paid in full, how can you be sure that it was paid in full, Sir? Mr. Bisnar. We have the Deed of Absolute Sale, Your Honor, and the CCT transferred to the owner. We will not transfer the CCT unless the owner has fully paid his obligations related to the Deed of Sale. Mr. Hernandez. And offhand, do you recall the purchase price for this unit, Sir? Mr. Bisnar. Your Honor, the unit was sold for P9.15 million in 2005. Mr. Hernandez. Okay. Now, Mr. Bisnar, the subpoena issued by the Court asked you to bring documents relating to this purchase. Did you bring those documents with you? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor, I brought documents related to the Unit 1902 Spanish Bay Tower of Bonifacio Ridge Condominium. Mr. Hernandez. May I approach the witness, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Proceed. Mr. Hernandez. For the record, Your Honor, the documents brought by the witness and showed to Counsel were pre-marked as the Prosecutions Exhibits QQQ up to ZZZ. Now, Mr. Bisnar, going to your documents, you stated that the Spanish Bay Tower Unit 190 The Presiding Officer. What are these documents? Mr. Hernandez. We will identify them one by one, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Go ahead. Mr. Hernandez. Thank you.
You earlier stated that the Unit 1902 was paid in full. What documents did you bring to evidence the payment in full? Mr. Bisnar. Your Honor, I have the originala copy of the original Deed of Sale and also receipts for the payment of the unit. Mr. Hernandez. Could you produce the receipts first, please? Your Honor, for the record, witness is producing three separate receipts which have been previously marked as Exhibits QQQ, RRR, and SSS for the Prosecution. May we request the Defense to confirm that the marked exhibits are faithful reproduction of the originals. Mr. Cuevas. No objection to the substitution, Your Honor. Mr. Hernandez. Aside from this The Presiding Officer. Are you going to adopt the documents as your exhibit, Counsel? Mr. Cuevas. As of this moment, no, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. All right, proceed.
53
Mr. Hernandez. Aside from the three receipts you showed to me, Mr. Bisnar, is there any other receipt which you did not include in the pre-marking which you have before you today? Mr. Bisnar. Your Honor, I just have a xerox copy of the provisional receipt, dated March 31, 2004. Mr. Hernandez. For the record, witness is producing the original document entitled Provisional Receipt No. 3762, dated March 31, 2004, Received from Renato C. Corona in the amount of P2,200,000. And we would request that the marking be done on the photocopy after comparison, that the marking be our Exhibit SSS-1, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Mark it accordingly. Mr. Cuevas. We admit, Your Honor, that the document being identified is a faithful reproduction of its original. Mr. Hernandez. And the Deed of Absolute Sale which you producedfor the record, witness also produced a document entitled Deed of Absolute Sale which was previously marked as the Prosecutions Exhibit UUU. On Annex C of the Deed of Absolute Sale, there is the purchase price which is P9,159,940 and exclusive of Value-Added Tax in the amount of P915,994. We request that Counsel, after comparison (Counsel for the Defense making a comparison) On the third to the last page of this document, Mr. Bisnar, there appears signatures above the typewritten words, Aniceto Bisnar Jr. and Lourdes R. Reyes, do you know whose signatures these are? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Hernandez. Whose signatures are these? Mr. Bisnar. That is my signature and my colleague, the CFO, Lourdes R. Reyes. Mr. Hernandez. And how do you know that this is Ms. Reyes signature? Mr. Bisnar. I have been working with her for several years in FBDC. Yes, I am familiar with the signature, Your Honor. Mr. Hernandez. Again, for the record, Your Honor, that was Exhibit UUU for the Prosecution. Now, another document you brought, Mr. Bisnar, is a one-page document entitled Buyers Information Sheet, could you please produce that? For the record, witness is handing over a document entitled Buyers Information Sheet which was previously marked as our Exhibit TTT. Mr. Cuevas. Substitution? No objection to the substitution, if Your Honor please. Mr. Hernandez. Mr. Bisnar, another document you presented appears to be photocopies of two checks, both dated January 28, 2005; both paid to the order of Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation; the account name is Renato C. Corona in the amounts of P290,007.40, for the first one. For the second one, P915,994 which was pre-marked as our Exhibits VVV and VVV-1.
54
Mr. Bisnar, what does this document represent?
Mr. Bisnar. Your Honor, the checks were issued to FBDC in payment of the VAT and the transaction taxes. Mr. Hernandez. Okay. Mr. Bisnar, another document that you presented is a one-page document under the heading Bonifacio Ridge which has the entry Breakdown of Other Charges with a total, P290,007.40, previously marked as our Exhibit WWW. Could you produce that document, sir? And what is the relevance of this document, Mr. Bisnar? Mr. Bisnar. Your Honor, that shows the breakdown of the transaction cost that the buyer has to shoulder. Mr. Hernandez. And did the buyer shoulder these costs? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Hernandez. After comparison by the Defense Counsel. Mr. Cuevas. No objection. No objection. If Your Honor please, no objection to the substitute. Mr. Hernandez. Mr. Bisnar, you also presented a document consisting of two pages, entitled Receipt for Title and its attachment which appear to be photocopies of a drivers license and a passport. Could you tell us the relevance of this document in relation to that transaction? Mr. Bisnar. Your Honor, this document shows that the buyer has received the buyers copy of the owners duplicate of condominium Certificate Title No. 5582, issued by the register of Taguig, Metro Manila, in the name of Cristina R. Corona, covering Condominium Unit 1902, with an area of 113 square meters located at 19th Floor, Spanish Bay, Bonifacio Ridge, Fort Bonifacio, Taguig, Metro Manila. Mr. Hernandez. So it simply means that they received the title already? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Hernandez. And the attached photocopies of the drivers license and the passport, who is this person whose identification appears on the attachment? Mr. Bisnar. The identification states the name of Maria Cristina Roco Corona. Mr. Hernandez. Your Honors, previously marked as our Exhibits XXX and XXX-1, we respectfully request that the Counsel compare the photocopies with the original. Last two documents, Your Honor. You also presented, Mr. Bisnar, one-page document, entitled Certificate Authorizing Registration which is previously marked as our Exhibit YYY. Could you produce that document? Could you tell us what is the relevance of this document in relation to the transaction? Mr. Bisnar. Your Honor, the CAR signifies that all the taxes due with the government has been paid, which is a requirement for the transfer of the Condominium Certificate of Title. Mr. Hernandez. And who paid for these taxes, Sir?
55
Mr. Bisnar. Your Honor, the buyer paid for the transaction taxes. Mr. Hernandez. On the face of the document, would you be able to tell us how much the buyer paid in taxes? Mr. Bisnar. It says here that: for documentary stamp tax, a total of P457,000; certification fee of 137; and other fees of 100 for securing this CAR from the BIR. Mr. Hernandez. We request Defense Counsel to compare the marked exhibit with the original. Mr. Cuevas. No objection to the substitution, Your Honor. Mr. Hernandez. The last document would be a document, entitled Documentary Stamp Tax Declaration/Return which was previously marked as our Exhibits ZZZ and ZZZ-1, ZZZ-1 being the document entitled BIR Taxpayment Deposit Slip. Please produce those documents, Sir. For the record, these documents have previously been marked as our Exhibits ZZZ and ZZZ-1. We request Counsel to compare the marked exhibit with the document presented by the witness. Mr. Cuevas. No objection to the proposed substitution, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Let it be recorded. Mr. Hernandez. Thank you. Now, Mr. Bisnar, you said that the title to the property has been turned over to Mrs. Corona, is that correct? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Hernandez. And aside from the expenses that they had to incur in purchasing the property, would there be any other expenses that they would have to incur being property owners? Mr. Bisnar. After acquisition, the expenses that they have to shoulder is the condominium association dues. Mr. Hernandez. And how much would this condominium association dues be? Mr. Bisnar. Roughly, Your Honor, it is about P9,100 per month. Mr. Hernandez. That is for their unit of 113 square meters? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Hernandez. I have no more questions, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Cross? Mr. Cuevas. Your Honor please, may we request or ask that Atty. Esguerra of the Defense panel be allowed to conduct the cross- examination? The Presiding Officer. Proceed. Mr. Esguerra. With the permission of the Honorable Presiding Officer and the rest of the Members of the Impeachment Court.
56
The Presiding Officer. Proceed. Mr. Esguerra. I did not quite get your name. You are? Mr. Bisnar. Your Honor, I am Aniceto V. Bisnar Jr.
Mr. Esguerra. And how long have you been connected with the company Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation? Mr. Bisnar. I was seconded way back in 2004 to 2008. Mr. Esguerra. What exactly is your position in this company now after having been seconded? Mr. Bisnar. Right now, Your Honor, I am with Ayala Landback to Ayala Land in the Strategic Landbank Management Group. Mr. Esguerra. During the development of this projectwhat is the name again of this development project? Mr. Bisnar. The condominium project is called Spanish Bay Tower-Bonifacio Ridge Condominium. Mr. Esguerra. Were you involved in any way of the development, Mr. Bisnar? Mr. Bisnar. I was overseeing the completion of the project since we had taken over Bonifacio Global City, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. The unit in question, which according to you on the basis of the document you have identified this afternoon to have been sold by your company to Mrs. Cristina R. Corona, have you seen the unit? Mr. Bisnar. Not exactly the unit, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. Not exactly the unit. And you did mention that apart from the cost in acquiring this particular unit from your company by Mrs. Corona, there were additional costs by way of condominium association dues? Did I hear you right? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. And are you monitoring the payments of the condominium dues or association dues by the unit owner, now Mrs. Corona? Mr. Bisnar. No, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. So you do not know whether or not Mrs. Corona is actually paying the dues since the purported acquisition of this unit in 2005? Mr. Bisnar. No, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. Thank you. Now, would you know when the acceptance of the unit has been made, the turnover exactly, the unit being handed physically to Mrs. Corona? Mr. Bisnar. The unit was turned over sometime 2005, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. Is there a Notice of Acceptance that should accompany this delivery, Mr. Bisnar?
57
Mr. Bisnar. Usually, Your Honor, our people from our Sales and Marketing Services Group accompany the buyer so that they can see the unit and see if there are defects that need correction and other things that need to be corrected before they accept the unit. Mr. Esguerra. Let me be specific, Mr. Bisnar. Is there a Notice of Acceptance of the unit, evidence in writing, that you have in your possession? Mr. Bisnar. I do not have a copy of an exact acceptance of the physical Mr. Esguerra. So you are just telling the Honorable Court based on your memory, on your recollection, when the unit was actually physically delivered to Mrs. Corona? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. And normally, ordinarily, Mr. Bisnar, is it not that there is a Notice of Acceptance that must be signed by the buyer when the unit is physically transferred to the buyer by the developer? Mr. Hernandez. Objection, Your Honor. Already answered. The Presiding Officer. Let the witness answer. The question is different. Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor, the buyer is usually written that the unit is available for acceptance. Mr. Esguerra. And you do not have that again? Mr. Bisnar. I think we have documents stating that the buyer was informed that the unit was available. Mr. Esguerra. That the unit is available, Mr. Bisnar, is different from the unit being accepted. And what I am asking you very, very clearly, I do not know if you understand me clearly, is a Notice of Acceptance that you may have in your possession as representative of the developer to show when exactly Mrs. Corona received the unit. Mr. Bisnar. I do not have a specific record as of now, Your Honor, of the exact date that the unit was accepted in 2005. Mr. Esguerra. That will be fine, Mr. Bisnar. Can you go to that particular document. May I ask the good Counsel from the Prosecution who has examined you to hand you over what has been marked as Receipt for Title. I think this is XXX. Pakibigay sa kanya. That document has been markedthe document is entitled Receipt for Title under the letterhead of Ayala Land Inc., Exhibit XXX, for the Prosecution. Can you hand it over to him? Thank you. Do you have it with you now, Mr. Bisnar? Mr. Bisnar. Yes. Mr. Esguerra. May I invite your attention to the date indicated and this is handwritten in that particular entry date. There is a date there, 04 July 2006. Can you confirm that? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor.
58
Mr. Esguerra. So while the unit has been sold in 2005, according to you, on the basis of the Deed of Absolute Sale, the title was actually given and received by Mrs. Corona only on 04 July 2006, am I right? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. Thank you. Now, the delivery of the title, Mr. Bisnarthe date rather of the delivery of the title evidenced by this Exhibit XXX for the Prosecution would not be the same date as the acceptance date of the physical delivery of the unit. Would I be right in saying so? Mr. Bisnar. It is different, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. So it could be possible that the unit was physically delivered, although you do not have the Notice of Acceptance, sometime after the delivery of the title? Possibility lang. I am not misleading you. Mr. Bisnar. The unit was received before the delivery of the title, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. But you do not have the acceptance, that is what I am saying. How possible is it, therefore, Mr. Bisnar, that the title may have been received on this particular date, 04 July 2006, but the unit was actually physically transferred or received by the buyer only after? Mr. Bisnar. Usually, Your Honor, the buyer accepts the unit before we even give the title to them. Mr. Esguerra. That is our problem. You are only basing your testimony on this particular aspect on your recollection. Am I right? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. Thank you. Now, have you seen any copy of the Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Networth of Chief Justice Renato Corona? Mr. Hernandez. Objection, Your Honor. It is beyond the scope of the direct examination. Mr. Esguerra. Well, Your Honor, the purpose was very clear earlier, that they are presenting this witness to show that this particular unit was only reported in 2010, not in 2005. The Presiding Officer. Let the witness answer. Mr. Bisnar. No, Your Honor. I have not seen any Statement of Assets and Liabilities Mr. Esguerra. By the way, before coming over, do you ever talk to anyone of the Prosecutors on the subject matter of your testimony? Mr. Bisnar. We conferred, Your Honor, when we were bringing the documents last January 19 and January 24. Mr. Esguerra. When was this? When was this conference that you had with the Prosecutors? Mr. Bisnar. As I said, they conferred with us, Your Honor, when we brought the documents and they examined the documents that were subpoenaed by the Senate. Mr. Esguerra. When? Where was this? Where rather.
59
Mr. Bisnar. Here at the Senate. Mr. Esguerra. Where did you meet with them, at the Holding Room? Mr. Bisnar. At the Holding Room, I think, Your Honor. Yes. Mr. Esguerra. Who among the good Prosecutors were with you in that conference? Mr. Bisnar. Atty. Noni Hernandez shortly met with us, Sir. Mr. Hernandez. That is me, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. Very good. Any other from the Prosecution? Mr. Bisnar. None that I can remember, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. So it was only the good Counsel now, you know, in the rostrum of the Prosecution who were with you in that conference? Mr. Bisnar. Together with my other colleagues, Sir, in Ayala Land, Sir, when we were seated at the witness waiting area, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. Did the good Counsel explain to you the subject matter of your testimony? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. He explained that we are being subpoenaed in relation to the impeachment case. Mr. Esguerra. The details of your possible testimony, Mr. Bisnar, were those discussed? Mr. Bisnar. No, Your Honor. He browsed on the documents that we had and just advised us to tell the truth. Mr. Esguerra. Did the good Counsel ever machined-copy these documents that he brought? Mr. Bisnar. During the marking of the documents, Your Honor. On January 24 when we came back, we presented the documents for marking together with the Defense and Prosecution representatives. Mr. Esguerra. Thank you, Mr. Bisnar. Going back to the physicalI mean, the unit. You said that you have not visited the unit exactly. I mean, the onethe subject matter of this examination. Mr. Bisnar. No, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. And therefore you would not know whether or not the unit is bare? Skeletal is the word used to describe the unit insofar as the other condominium units are concerned, so it is bare. You do not know? Mr. Bisnar. When we sold the units at the whole Bonifacio Ridge, it was semi-finished. Mr. Esguerra. Semi-finished? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. What do you mean by semi-finished? Mr. Bisnar. There are wooden plank floors, Your Honor, together with individual airconditioning units, some built-in cabinets. All the units are two bedrooms, it is a uniformaverage size of 113 square meters, Your Honor.
60
The Presiding Officer. The floors are completed? Mr. Bisnar. The floors, Your Honor, are completed with The Presiding Officer. The partitions were completed? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. There are partitions. The Presiding Officer. The walls are completed? Mr. Bisnar. The walls have basic paint, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. What do you mean by basic things?
Mr. Bisnar. A few layers of paint, Your Honor, but the buyer has the option to repaint it again. The Presiding Officer. And the ceilings? Mr. Bisnar. The ceilings are fixed, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. And the fixtures? Mr. Bisnar. The basic fixtures, Your Honor, are the built-in cabinets, like the faucets and the other finishings on the basin. The Presiding Officer. Lighting system? Mr. Bisnar. Basic lighting only, Your Honor, not the expensive ones. The Presiding Officer. Proceed, Counsel. Mr. Esguerra. Thank you, Your Honor. Mr. Bisnar, you said you have not seen the unit? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. And the details which you just testified on aboutin describing that the unit is semi-finished will be based on your general idea of how a unit is when it is delivered to the buyer? Mr. Bisnar. I had been going in the project during my tenure as head of Commercial Operations as I was also inspecting complaints of buyers so that we can address them. Mr. Esguerra. Okay. The question is the unit, according to you is semi-finished? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. And you described in detail what do you mean by semi-finished, did I hear you right? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. So my question is simple. The unit when delivered, if at all delivered, and the exact date of which you do not know would not necessarily be based on your specific knowledge of how the unit looks like when it was actually delivered?
61
Mr. Bisnar. The exact details, Your Honor, are actually attached to the Deed of Sale, the exact specifications of the unit that was sold to the buyer. Mr. Esguerra. You mean, the semi-finished nature? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. And then you are telling that you have not seen the actual unit? You are basing it simply on what is stated in the document that you have identified? Mr. Bisnar. I have seen other units in the Bonifacio Ridge but not the exact unit acquired by Mr. and Mrs. Corona. Mr. Esguerra. That is my point, Mr. Bisnar. You have not seen the actual unit and you are describing for the Court a unit different from this actual unit? Mr. Bisnar. Because, Your Honor, the units we were selling at that time have uniform finishes. Mr. Esguerra. That is your assumption. Whether or not there are problems insofar as this unit delivered to Mrs. Corona, you know, is beyond you because you did not see the actual unit? Mr. Bisnar. I did not see the actual unit. Mr. Esguerra. Okay, that will be fine. We will go to another point, Mr. Bisnar. The SALN, you said that you have not seen a copy of any of the Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth of Respondent Chief Justice. You would not, therefore, know whether or not in 2005, the SALNif I may refer it, Your Honor, as just SALN for brevityit seems that you have not seen the SALN or any copy of the SALN of the Chief Justice, you would not know whether or not this particular unit bought in that year was stated in the 2005 and 2006 SALN of the Chief Justice? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. And you will have the same answer The Presiding Officer. Just a minute. What do you mean by yes? Mr. Bisnar. I did not know, Your Honor, whether the unit was included or not in the SALN of the Honorable Chief Justice. The Presiding Officer. Proceed. Mr. Esguerra. And you will agree with me that you will give the same answer to this Honorable Court if I ask you for the SALN of the Chief Justice in 2007, that youhaving not seen the SALN of the Chief Justice for that year? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. And the same is true if I ask you insofar as or relative to the SALN of the Chief Justice for 2008? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. And that will be true also for 2009. Because you have not seen the SALN of the
62
Chief Justice for 2009 on whether or not the unit bought from your company has been stated in the SALN of the Chief Justice for 2009? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. And what about the SALN for 2010? Will your answer be the same as in your previous answers with respect to the SALNs? Mr. Bisnar. I have not seen the 2010 SALN, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. And, therefore, you are not in a position to tell the Honorable Court whether or not this particular unit that was bought by Mrs. Corona from your company has been stated, declared in the SALN for 2010? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. Now, you would not also know that in the 2010 SALN of the Chief Justice, there is an entry there about the purchase of the unit from your company. Mr. Bisnar. No, Your Honor. Mr. Hernandez. Objection, Your Honor, the Mr. Esguerra. Already answered, Your Honor. He said, No. Mr. Hernandez. Your Honor, with respect to this line of questioning, the witness already answered that he did not see the SALN. I do not see the purpose of continuing with The Presiding Officer. He is under cross. Mr. Hernandez. Yes, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. Let him answer. Mr. Esguerra. Okay. So you would not know, therefore, whether or not the Chief Justice declared in that particular SALN of his in 2010 that he indicated there that the two units were sourced fromor the purchased price of this unit from your company was sourced from a loan that he obtained. You would not know that. Mr. Hernandez. I object, Your Honor. The best evidence rule. Now he is going into the contents of the SALN Mr. Esguerra. I am on cross, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. He is asking whether he knows whether if the source were from a loan per the SALN. Mr. Hernandez. Yes, Your Honor. But the witness already testified that he has not seen any of the SALNs. The Presiding Officer. All right. I will sustain the objection. Reform the question.
63
Mr. Esguerra. Your Honor, may I ask the witness straight? You have not seen the SALN for 2010 of the Chief Justice. And, therefore, you would not know whether or not there is an indication there in the SALN that the purchased price for the unit bought from your company was actually sourced from a loan. You would not know. Mr. Hernandez. Same objection, Your Honor, best evidence. Mr. Esguerra. Same questionhow can that be the best evidence? The Presiding Officer. Anyway, already answered. So, let it stand on the record. Mr. Esguerra. There were payments made to your company, of course, in the purchase of this unit in question, Mr. Bisnar. Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. And I do not want to be presumptuous. But let me clarify this for the Honorable Impeachment Court. You would not know where the income or where the sources of funds of the Coronas in buying this property? Mr. Bisnar. No, Your Honor. Mr. Esguerra. I think that will be all for the witness, Your Honor. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. Bisnar. The Presiding Officer. All right. Cross ended. The gentleman from Pampanga. Senator Sotto. And then Senator Estrada, Mr. President. The Presiding Officer. Yes. You have two (2) minutes. Who is the next one? Senator Sotto. Senator Estrada. The Presiding Officer. Senator Estrada, two minutes. Senator Pangilinan. Maraming salamat. Thank you very much, Mr. President. Just a few clarificatory questions to the witness. The Presiding Officer. Proceed. Senator Pangilinan. Mr. Witness, good afternoon. Just a clarification. The Unit 1902 was paid in full when? Kailan binayaran ng buo yung Unit 1902? Mr. Bisnar. Based on the receipts that we have, the unit was paid almost in full by April 2004. Senator Pangilinan. By April?
64
Mr. Bisnar. April 2004, Your Honor.
Senator Pangilinan. So, pag sinabing almost in full, anong ibig sabihin ng almost in full, 90 percent? Mr. Bisnar. Your Honor, there was a P2.2 million check issued in a PDC, then the balance of 6.9 million. But the VAT was paid January 2005. Senator Pangilinan. Teka, two point two (2.2) and then six point (6.)? Mr. Bisnar. Nine (9). Senator Pangilinan. Gaano katagal yon? Mr. Bisnar. Within one month. Senator Pangilinan. Sa isang buwan. Mr. Bisnar. Oo. Senator Pangilinan. Okay. At ang total noon would be? Mr. Bisnar. Nine point one five (9.15) million, Your Honor. Senator Pangilinan. So, hindi ito payment by installment. Mr. Bisnar. Hindi ho, Your Honor. Senator Pangilinan. So, hindi installment ang bayad. Dalawang bulto within a period of one month. Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. The Presiding Officer. In two different years. Senator Pangilinan. And two different checks. The Presiding Officer. In two different years. Mr. Bisnar. Same year, Your Honor, 2004. Senator Pangilinan. Same year. The Presiding Officer. Ah, same year, same year. Mr. Bisnar. April 1 and April 30, 2004, Your Honor. Senator Pangilinan. So, hindi siyawell, sorry, no. Sabi mo cash payment pero tseke ang binayad, parang managers check siguro. Mr. Bisnar. I-check ko ho, Your Honor, but in our term, it is considered cash payment term. Senator Pangilinan. Oo. And the check was signed by Cristina Corona. Mr. Bisnar. One of the check, I think, was issued by Renato C. Corona and the other one by Cristina R. Corona. Senator Pangilinan. So, one check was by Renato Corona, another check by Cristina Corona.
65
Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Pangilinan. Which was which, would you recall? Alin yung binayad ni Renato Corona check payment, ano yung binayad ni Cristina Corona check payment? Mr. Bisnar. Based on the Provisional Receipt No. 3762, Your Honor, we received the 2.2 million from Mr. Renato C. Corona, on March 31, 2004. Senator Pangilinan. And the other one was Mr. Bisnar. While the otherthe other one was Senator Pangilinan. April. Mr. Bisnar. Yes. The other one was April 30, 2004 official receiptbased on Official Receipt No. 6259 with an amount of P6.959 million. Senator Pangilinan. Okay. So, sino ang buyer dito, si Cristina Corona ba o si Renato Corona? Mr. Bisnar. Your Honor, based on the Deed of Sale, the buyer was Cristina R. Corona. Senator Pangilinan. But on the basis of the check payments, mayroong payments si Corona Chief Justice, may payment si ano, si Cristina. Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Pangilinan. Tapos, medyo confused ako dahil dito sa VVV-1 may dalawang (2) tseke na naman addressed to Fort Bonifacio, isang 200 plus thousand at isang 900 plus thousand parehong binayaran ni Renato Corona, VVVito VVV-1 Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation, 28, January 2005, P290,000, and then Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation, 28, January 05, P915,000 both paid by Renato Corona. Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Pangilinan. What did he pay for? Mr. Bisnar. This is for the VAT and for the other transaction taxes, Your Honor. Senator Pangilinan. So, while Cristina Corona is the buyer, Renato Corona is the one who pays for the VAT and the documentary stamp tax based on this check payment. Mr. Bisnar. It appears on this document, Your Honor. Senator Pangilinan. So, this happens, no, na yung mag-asawa nagtutulungan, nagbabayad, ganoon ba yun, nangyayari ba sa mga sales ng Fort Bonifacio yun na minsan yung lalake ang nagbabayad, minsan yung babae? Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Pangilinan. Okay. But in this case nga ang owner is Cristina Corona. Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor. Senator Pangilinan. Based on the Deed of Absolute Sale. Mr. Bisnar. Yes, Your Honor.
66
Senator Pangilinan. No other question. Maraming salamat.
The Presiding Officer. Suspended for onewhat? One long minute. The trial was suspended at 5:49 p.m. At 5:53 p.m., the trial was resumed The Presiding Officer. Trial resumed. The Floor Leader. Senator Sotto. Mr. President, Senator Estrada has withdrawn but Senator Pimentel wishes to ask a question. The Presiding Officer. Senator Estrada has the floor. Senator Sotto. Senator Pimentel wishes to have the floor, Mr. President. Senator Pimentel. Just one clarificatory question, Your Honor, to the witness about the Certificate of Acceptance of the unit. I just want to be clarified. Did you say that you do not have the certificate of attendance with you today or you do not have it at all? Certificate of Acceptance, I am sorry. Certificate of Acceptance of the unit. Mr. Bisnar. We cannot find the document, Your Honor, considering it was seven years ago. Senator Pimentel. Lost? Mr. Bisnar. Yes. We cannot find it. Senator Pimentel. Thank you very much. Senator Sotto. Mr. President, the Prosecutionyes. Representative Tupas. We are done. Mr. President, we are done with our witness and may we request that he be discharged. The Presiding Officer. I thought Senator Estrada wanted to ask. Senator Sotto. He has withdrawn, Mr. President. The Presiding Officer. He has withdrawn. Senator Sotto. Yes. The Presiding Officer. So you are discharging this witness? Representative Tupas. Yes. We are requesting. The Presiding Officer. The witness is discharged. What is the pleasure of the Floor Leader? Senator Sotto. The Prosecution has informed us that there are other witnesses that they have but they are ready and the Impeachment Court will be ready to receive them tomorrow.
67
Just as a little housekeeping, Mr. President. Earlier, you already mentioned the compliance of the Prosecution to the Order of the Court for list of witnesses and documentary evidence but there is just this request by Senator Santiago about the classification of primary and corroborative witnesses. So with that Mr. President, may we ask the Sergeant-at-Arms to make an announcement? The Sergeant-at-Arms. Please all rise. All persons are commanded to remain in their places until the Senate President and the Senators have left the Session Hall. Senator Sotto. Mr. President, I move to adjourn until two oclock in the afternoon of Tuesday, January 31, 2012. The Presiding Officer. Is there any objection? [Silence] Hearing none, the trial is hereby adjourned until two oclock of Tuesday, January 31, 2012. The trial was adjourned at 5:56 p.m.

Jan 30 Senate Impeachment Court Record

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jan 30 Senate Impeachment Court Record

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

Republic of the Philippines

Record of the Senate

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

Mr. Perez. And your age. Mr. Ng. I am 38 years old.

Mr. Perez. And your nationality. Mr. Ng. I am a Filipino.

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

Mr. Cuevas. You have no reason to doubt

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012