Term_Paper

Impeachment Trial on Chief Justice Is the clash between the president of the Philippine Republic and the Chief Justice had begun' Does the executive department oppose the judicial one' In a country where laws, rights and righteousness have been undermined in many instances, people heave a sigh of justice and continuously hope to get their due, while equally hoping for others to get theirs. In a democratic country like ours, JUSTICE is the key. But I keep on figuring out if our Chief Justice deserves to be the King of the Supreme Court... CJ Renato Corona must have the “crown” as his last name goes but I might have doubted him because he was appointed by the block- listed former president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo (May 12, 2010) . His loyalty and allegiance is questioned by my stand to the issue for he had even threw arts of war to President Aquino that Noynoy builds dictatorship, controlling the three branches of government which is irrational. As the head of the judiciary department, does he need to prove his worth' “I have not wronged you, Mr. President. I don’t have any sins against the people. I oppose this relentless persecution, intimidation and bullying. I oppose this dictatorship that President Benigno Simeon Aquino III is slowly establishing.” This was the turning point as Corona freed these words without brakes. He is really desperate and indomitable towards the impeachment trial whistle- blown to him. This gave me the red hint that the executive is indeed, having an opposition with the judiciary which must be resolved for the principle of the nature of government. As raised unto raging news, the Chief Justice failed to meet the stringent standards to be a person of competence, integrity, probity and independence. He also blatantly disregarded the principle of separation of powers by issuing a status quo ante order against the House of Representatives in the case concerning the impeachment of Ombudsman Merceditas Navarro- Guttierez. Another doubt, why did he chose to disclose his SALNs to the public' On Corona’s case, being impeached on trial, “A corrupt judiciary is totally unacceptable as it severely handicaps the legal and institutional mechanism designed to curb abuses in government. As such we shall continuously cleanse the court’s ranks by strengthening the integrity of the judiciary and raising it to the highest level possible. I believe that a member of the judiciary who is found guilty of dishonesty should not only be dismissed from the service but also disbarred. No ifs, no buts.” And impeachment should be defined as a formal process in which an official is accused of unlawful activity, the outcome of which, depending on the country, may include the removal of that official from office as well as other punishment. At the first few months of Aquino's presidency, he consolidated power by removing government officials closely associated with the Arroyo administration. Aquino said in a speech that Corona, who was seated meters away from him, is beholden to Arroyo. Aquino asked the court's granting of a temporary restraining order lifting the watch list order of the Department of Justice against Arroyo, Arroyo's midnight appointment of Corona. The divisions of powers of the government : executive branch and the judiciary. One headed by the president whereas it represents the government as a whole and sees to it that all laws are enforced by the officials and employees of his department and one vested in the Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be established by law. The Philippines is a democratic and republican state. As a republican state, sovereignty resides in the People and all government authority emanates from them (Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 1). “A Republican form of government rests on the conviction that sovereignty should reside in the people and that all government authority must emanate from them. It abhors the concentration of power on one or a few, cognizant that power, when absolute, can lead to abuse, but it also shuns a direct and unbridled rule by the people, a veritable kindling to the passionate fires of anarchy. Our people have accepted this notion and decided to delegate the basic state authority to principally three branches of government — the Executive, the Legislative, and the Judiciary – each branch being supreme in its own sphere but with constitutional limits. One should know how does a wrong impression begins and the people behind. Background of the problem Renato Corona, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines was impeached on December 12, 2011. Corona was the third official, after President Joseph Estrada on 2000 and Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez earlier on 2011, to be impeached by the House of Representatives. Corona was perceived as an ally of former president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo who had appointed him as chief justice of the Supreme Court, days after the 2010 presidential election. This comes after the Supreme Court ruled that the president's ban on appointments does not extend to the judiciary. Since then, the Supreme Court has been accused of ruling unfavorably of the Aquino administration in cases concerning Arroyo. The Senate, which had already convened as an impeachment court, began the trial on January 16, 2012. This is the second impeachment trial in the history of the Philippines, as Gutierrez resigned prior to the trial. On the December 12, 2011 flag-raising ceremony at the Supreme Court, Corona revealed that there was "a secret plan to oust me from office by any means, fair or foul." Corona said that he would not resign. Later in the day, a caucus amongst Aquino's allies in the House of Representative was called. Minority leader Edcel Lagman said that discussion amongst Aquino's allies heightened when the Committee on Justice passed an impeachment case involving Associate Justice Mariano del Castillo on his alleged plagiarism. Lagman further said that if the vote passed, he would question its "legal and factual basis.” The deputy presidential spokesperson, on the other hand, stated that the Palace "is not privy to the discussions of the Liberal Party in the House." At the conclusion of majority bloc's caucus, Committee on Justice chairman Niel Tupas Jr. presented the impeachment complaint; after the presentation, only two representatives asked for more questions, while an overwhelming majority asked to sign the complaint. He said that there were no instructions from the Palace to impeach Corona, nor was the pork barrel of representatives who did not sign would be held back, but he said that he informed the president of their decision to impeach Corona, and that the president supported it. The House of Representatives then voted in session to endorse the complaint, getting 188 votes, well above the one-third (95) of the members required by the constitution. Corona impeachment trial now three days old is turning out to be somewhat of a disappointment. The month-long period form December 14, 2011 when the Senators first took their oaths as Senator-Judges to the January 16 start, only served to heighten the public’s anticipation for a blockbuster court drama that would play out live in their livingrooms. An exception to this noteworthy group of Senator-Judges, has been the distinguished gentleman from Bicol, Sen. Joker Arroyo. Even after the witness, Ms. Vidal confirmed that she had indeed brought with her the subpoenaed SALN documents, Arroyo still put forward the convoluted argument it was best if Vidal took those documents back with her instead of turning them over to the impeachment court as required. Overseeing this entire "three-ring circus" is Senate President Johnny Ponce Enrile who so far appears to not be his combative, supercilious self and seems to be bending over backwards to accommodate Cuevas’s constant and oftentimes pointless interruptions and objections. Media people mold public opinion the way they want it. They can make a person look very good and look very bad in the minds of the public. Take the case of GMA and the Chief Justice for example. People are craving for their heads (like the Jews who asked relentlessly for Jesus to be crucified) as if they are higher than the law. Without the due process, they are already convicted (Ala, kangaroo court). Day 1 showed the ineptness of the congressmen prosecutor and the Administration as a whole. The other sector will not allow this stupidity, they will be beaten black and blue. During the past three days, only the Senator-Judges get a barely passing grade of C-minus. The reason for this is because judges (even Senator-Judges of an impeachment court) should not be fraternizing, chit-chatting or shooting the breeze with people in the gallery, members of the prosecution, or members of the defense during breaks or recesses. Viewers may get the impression that they are not taking this matter seriously—and the impeachment trial for a sitting Chief Justice should be treated by all as an extremely serious matter. We suggest that Senator-Judges instead all retire to a private chamber during breaks and recesses. I The 1987 (current) constitution limits the number of impeachment complaints that can be filed against an official to one per year. There has been controversy over what counts as an impeachment complaint. While some argued that for a complaint to count against the limit it must be voted on, and others have proposed other interpretations, the House has decided that any complaint filed fulfills the quota regardless of how well-formed it is or who filed it. Therefore, supporters of a vulnerable official can file a weak, flawed, or unconstitutional complaint, thereby using up the quota and protecting that official from impeachment for that year. There has also been debate about whether a year should be a calendar year, say 2006, or a full 12-month period. An example of how this limit works in practice are the attempts to impeach President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. While the Philippine impeachment procedures parallel the United States' impeachment procedures, the two procedures differ in two significant ways: the percentage needed to impeach and the numerical limit on impeachment procedures. Impeachment followed by conviction is often the only way to forcibly remove a sitting official. While "impeachment" is often used to refer to the entire process of removing an official from office, it only formally refers to the indictment stage in the House of Representatives, not the trial stage in the Senate. Under the current Constitution, an official can be impeached if one third of the House of Representatives votes in favor. Since it takes only a simple majority to set the agenda or to adjourn the House, it can be difficult for a minority of one third to bring a vote and impeach an official. One last point, Everyone involved in this trial should keep in mind that it is the people’s money that is ultimately paying for all this so don’t waste time, be professional and please…take it seriously. The Nature and Extent of the Problem The Senate received the articles of impeachment on December 13. Tupas and Reynaldo Umali delivered the articles of impeachment, with Tupas saying that the process was not railroaded. Employees of the judiciary staged a court holiday on December 13 in support of Corona; this meant many courts were closed. In a speech delivered in front of Supreme Court employees, Corona branded Aquino as building a dictatorship, stated that he will not quit, and that his conviction will result in Aquino controlling all three branches of government. The Executive replied via Executive Secretary Edwin Lacierda that it not out to control all branches of government but wanted a independent Supreme Court, told Corona to go on a leave on absence, and that the impeachment is "not an attack on the judiciary. This is a case of accountability against Chief Justice Corona." These are the articles of impeachment: # Case Violation 1 Partiality and subservience in cases involving the Arroyo administration from the time he was appointed as associate justice to the time of his 'midnight appointment' as chief justice. Betrayal of public trust 2 Failed to disclose to the public his statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth as required under the constitution. Betrayal of public trust and/or culpable violation of the constitution 3 Failing to meet and observe the stringent standards under the constitution that provides that "[a] member of the judiciary must be a person of proven competence, integrity, probity, and independence" in allowing the Supreme Court to act on mere letters filed by a counsel which caused the issuance of flip-flopping decisions in final and executory cases; in creating an excessive entanglement with Mrs. Arroyo through her appointment of his wife to office; and in discussing with litigants regarding cases pending before the supreme court. Betrayal of public trust and/or culpable violation of the constitution 4 Blatantly disregarded the principle of separation of powers by issuing a status quo ante order against the House of Representatives in the case concerning the impeachment of then Ombudsman Merceditas Navarro-Gutierrez. Betrayal of public trust and/or culpable violation of the constitution 5 Wanton arbitrariness and partiality in consistently disregarding the principle of res judicata in the cases involving the 16 newly-created cities, and the promotion of Dinagat Island (sic) into a province. Betrayal of public trust 6 Arrogating unto himself, and to a committee he created, the authority and jurisdiction to improperly investigate a justice of the Supreme Court for the purpose of exculpating him. Such authority and jurisdiction is properly reposed by the constitution in the House of Representatives via impeachment. Betrayal of public trust 7 Partiality in granting a temporary restraining order (TRO) in favor of former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and her husband Jose Miguel Arroyo in order to give them an opportunity to escape prosecution and to frustrate the ends of justice, and in distorting the supreme court decision on the effectivity of the TRO in view of a clear failure to comply with the conditions of the Supreme Court’s own TRO. Betrayal of public trust 8 Failed and refused to account for the Judiciary Development Fund and Special Allowance for the Judiciary collections. Culpable violation of the constitution and/or graft and corruption Legal teams: Prosecution The prosecution team includes the members of the House of Representatives, who are all members of the majority bloc, with several private prosecutors. Niel Tupas, Jr. is the chief of the prosecution team. The prosecutors from the House of Representatives enlisted the help of private practitioners to assist them; this was opposed by the defense, saying that only the prosecutors from the House of Representatives are the "sole prosecutors". The Senate allowed the existence of the private prosecutors citing "matter of rule and precedence". The private prosecutors who are allowed to assist the public prosecutors in impeachment proceedings are: • Mario Bautista • Arthur Lim • Clarence Jandoc • Ernesto Viovicente • Frederick Vallestero • Winston Ginez The prosecution also named representatives Miro Quimbo, Lorenzo Tañada III and Juan Edgardo Angara as their spokespersons. Defense Supreme Court spokesperson Jose Midas Marquez described Corona's defense team as a "powerhouse legal team". 1. Serafin Cuevas, former Supreme Court associate justice 2. Jacinto Jimenez, professor at the Ateneo Law School 3. Jose Roy III, former dean and president of the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila 4. Eduardo delos Angeles, former dean of the Ateneo Law School 5. German Lichauco II, partner of the Siguion Reyna, Montecillo, Ongsiako law firm 6. Dennis Manalo, partner of the Siguion Reyna, Montecillo, Ongsiako law firm 7. Ramon Esguerra, general counsel of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines 8. Tranquil G.S. Salvador III, former dean of the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Pasay 9. Karen Jimeno, formerly of the Quisumbing, Torres, Evangelista firm Holiday recess The next day, the impeachment court served summons to Corona, which was received by the Supreme Court. Four days later, Vicente Millora, a former president of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), filed a petition at the Supreme Court questioning the constitutionality of the impending trial, asking for a temporary restraining order (TRO), and to declare the articles of impeachment null and void. Millora contended that the impeachment case did not go through constitutional means as it was passed "undue haste, railroaded, fast-tracked, and signed but not sworn to by the 188 respondent lawmakers." The prosecutors responded by asking the Supreme Court to dismiss the petition. Additional petitions questioning the constitutionality of the impeachment were filed by Vladimir Cabigao, Danilo Lihaylihay, Oliver Lozano, and Allan Paguia and Homobono Adaza. January 18, 2012 (SALNs revealed) Supreme Court clerk of court Enriqueta Esguerra-Vidal, turned over copies of the statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALNs) of Chief Justice Corona from the years 2002 to 2010 to the Senate. This was after the constant compelling of senator-judges and the prosecutors. Esguerra-Vidal insisted that she be given permission to release the said documents citing a Supreme Court ruling dated on May 2, 1989; that prohibits “deceptive requests for information” with regard to the release of SALNs of the judiciary. Senate President Ponce Enrile told that she had to comply with the said subpoena and give the said documents to the Senate. Supreme Court spokesperson Jose Midas Marquez would later said that the clerk was not in any legal hurdle as Corona authorized the release of the documents. Meanwhile, Marianito Dimaandal, head director of the Malacañang Records Office testified and said that SALNs of Chief Justice Corona from 1992 to 2010 exist. As custodian, Dimanadal stated that the SALNs are certified true copies and had attested to their authenticity. Yet, he later said that he was position on the veracity of the contents of the documents. Defense counsel Cuevas asked the Senate to remove the second article of the complaint. Cuevas said that “The fact alone that there is SALN is proof enough that he has filed and complied with the rules and regulation on the matter, that resolves the problem.” Senate President Ponce Enrile clarified that such release of the SALNs is response to the subpoena given to the clerk and doesn't overrule the said articles. The following are the SALNS filed by Chief Justice Corona from 2002 to 2010 with assets declared during those years. Year of SALN Date of filing Assets declared (in terms of PHP) 2002 March 10, 2003 PHP 14.96 million 2003 April 12, 2004 PHP 7.359 million 2004 April 25, 2005 PHP 7.359 million 2005 April 20, 2006 PHP 8.359 million 2006 Sept. 23, 2007 PHP 9.559 million 2007 April 11, 2008 PHP 11.059 million 2008 April 28, 2009 PHP 12.559 million 2009 April 11, 2010 PHP 14.559 million Solution As a citizen of the Republic of the Philippines, it is our aspect to collate the facts and which are not. We must not arrive to a certain point that we will fix our decisions to choose between the executive and judiciary department. Both departments are adjacent, they have the same vertex but varied from their sides. What would satisfy is . . . Integral PROSECUTION: State and county governments employ prosecutors to represent their local communities in complaints against impeached defendants. On the federal level, the president appoints prosecutors to represent the Republic in complaints against impeached defendants. In some states a prosecutor must present the court with a written statement of the charges, called an information. In other states a prosecutor is required to convene a grand jury before charging a defendant with a serious case. A grand jury is a collection of laypersons selected by the prosecutor to examine evidence and decide whether to indict the defendant and so authorize prosecution. On the federal level, the 5th Amendment requires prosecutors to obtain an indictment for capital or "otherwise infamous" crimes, with the exception of crimes arising out of active military service. Prosecutors have a broad discretion in determining whether to prosecute a criminal defendant. A prosecutor does not have to personally believe beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the alleged act. “TREASON, BRIBERY, AND MISDEMEANORS must be annihilated either through the executive power or the judiciary even the legislative one.”