MONDAY, MAY 7, 2012
3
Representative Tupas.
Good afternoon, Mr. President and Honorable Members of the Senate.For the House of Representatives Prosecution Panel, same appearance. We are ready, Your Honor.
The Presiding Officer.
Noted.The Defense.
Mr. Cuevas.
For the Defense, Your Honor, the same appearance.
The Presiding Officer.
Noted.
Mr. Cuevas.
We are ready, Your Honor.
The Presiding Officer.
Noted.The Floor Leader.
Senator Sotto.
Mr. President, before the business for today, there were three (3) Motions thatwere decided on by the caucus. So, may I be allowed, with the permission of the Court, to start off?
The Presiding Officer.
Yes. What are the Motions?
Senator Sotto.
Yes. The first one is a letter of DOJ Secretary De Lima and Reply of the Senate.In her letter to the Senate President dated March 22, 2012, DOJ Secretary Leila De Lima conveyedher apology for her failure to comply with the subpoena issued by the Court which directed her to testifyand bring certain documents before the Court last March 22. Secretary De Lima added that while sheis willing to appear before the Court, she also requested that her further appearance be dispensed withsince the matters on which she is being asked to testify on by the Defense have already been coveredby her direct testimony when she appeared as witness for the Prosecution or that such matter shouldhave been brought up by the Defense during their cross-examination of her.Acting on her request for discharge, the Presiding Officer, in a letter dated March 27, 2012,informed Secretary De Lima that in the interest of justice and fair play, Counsel for Chief Justice Coronashould be similarly afforded the opportunity to raise direct examination questions in defense of theirclient just as the House panel of prosecutors was afforded the same opportunity to propound directexamination questions to her.On May 4, 2012, the Prosecution filed a Motion to Quash the subpoena contending that theDefense has been previously afforded the chance to cross-examine Secretary De Lima and to ask theirquestions for two days. The Prosecution also claims that to recall Secretary De Lima will be violativeof her rights and would be unfair to the Prosecution and the Court as it will unduly lengthen theproceedings.With that, Mr. President, and as agreed in the caucus, I move that the Presiding Officer rule onthe matter.
The Presiding Officer.
The subpoena requested by the Defense is based on their notion that theywant to present the Secretary of Justice as their own witness. Although she was presented by theProsecution and she was subjected to a cross-examination, the appearance of the Secretary of Justicethen was not at the behest of the Defense.So, therefore, given the fact that the Respondent is entitled to compulsory process to set up hisdefense, the motion is denied. The Motion to Quash is denied. And the Defense is directed to conferwith the Secretary of Justice so that you can determine the date and time when she will have to beasked to appear in this Court to be presented as a witness for the Defense.