MONDAY, MARCH 19, 2012
3
The Secretary will now please call the case.
The Secretary.
Case No. 002-2011, in the Matter of Impeachment Trial of Honorable Chief Justice Renato C. Corona.
The Presiding Officer.
Appearances, the Floor Leader.
Senator Sotto.
May we ask the parties to enter their appearances, Mr. President?Prosecution.
Representative Tupas.
Good afternoon, Mr. President.For the Prosecution Panel of the House of Representatives, same appearances. We are ready,Your Honor.
The Presiding Officer.
Noted.Defense.
Mr. Bodegon.
Good afternoon, Mr. President and members of the Impeachment Court. For theDefense, Your Honor, same appearance.
The Presiding Officer.
Noted.The Floor Leader.
Senator Sotto.
Mr. President, for a manifestation, may we recognize Sen. Miriam DefensorSantiago?
The Presiding Officer.
The lady Senator from Iloilo is recognized.
Senator Defensor Santiago.
Thank you, Mr. President.It appears to me that we have come to the point in this Impeachment Trial when we are faced withthe centerpiece of the Prosecution, meaning to say, the accusations against the filing of the SALN(Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth) by the Chief Justice. It appears to be the showpieceof the Prosecution and therefore we must take time, not only take time out of number crunching whichwe are doing last week and see what the Constitution and what the Supreme Court have said aboutthe filing of the SALN.First, let me begin with Article II of the Articles of Impeachment. I will read it verbatim:“Respondent committed culpable violation of the Constitution and/or betrayed the public trust when hefailed to disclose”—I repeat—“when he failed to disclose to the public Statement of Assets, Liabilitiesand Net Worth as required under Section 17, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution.” Notice that thisheading under the Articles of Impeachment only uses the phrase “failed to disclose.” If he had disclosedand we are going to apply this Article literally and very strictly, then there is no more case. Becauseit turns out now that he disclosed his Statement of Assets and Liabilities as provided by law as I shallexplain later.So, in my view, Article II is suffering from at least incompetence in phraseology. Because if wewere to apply it strictly, if there is evidence and evidence has been shown in this Court that Defendantfailed to disclose, meaning to say, failed to show his statement or make his Statement of Assets,Liabilities and Net Worth unavailable or inaccessible to the public, then he would have committed theimpeachable offense. But if he already took steps to do otherwise, then the whole case falls. What