47% in poll say Corona guilty

Close to five in every 10 adult Filipinos have found Chief Justice Renato Corona guilty even if a majority of them have little or no knowledge of the impeachment case against him, results of a Pulse Asia survey released on Tuesday showed.

The nationwide survey was conducted from Feb. 26 to March 9 before lawyers of Corona started presenting their evidence in the Senate impeachment court.

Of the 1,200 respondents, 47 percent said Corona was guilty while 43 percent were undecided. Only 5 percent believed Corona was innocent. Another 5 percent said they didn’t have enough basis to make a decision.

The noncommissioned survey used face-to-face interviews and had a margin of error of plus-or-minus 3 percentage points at the 95-percent confidence level. Estimates for Metro Manila, the rest of Luzon, the Visayas and Mindanao had a margin of error of plus-or-minus 6 percentage points.

Sixty-six percent of the respondents who said Corona was guilty formed their opinion in the course of the impeachment trial, while 34 percent said their opinion was formed even before the trial began.

Among the regions, Mindanao accounted for the biggest percentage of respondents (54 percent) who found Corona guilty. Corona was also found guilty by the majority of those in the socioeconomic class ABC (52 percent).

Half of the respondents in Metro Manila said the Chief Justice was guilty. The same opinion was shared by 48 percent of the respondents in Luzon outside the metropolis, 37 percent in the Visayas, 48 percent among Class D and 45 percent among Class E.

When broken down, those who said Corona was innocent were as follows: 1 percent among Class ABC; 3 percent among Class E and in the rest of Luzon; 4 percent in Metro Manila and the Visayas; 6 percent among Class D and 9 percent in Mindanao.

Those who could not say whether Corona was guilty ranged from 31 percent to 48 percent across all geographic areas and socioeconomic classes.

Check out the latest Philippines Current Events

Santiago: There is no hell

This was how Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago countered on Monday a statement by a priest that she should be consigned to the fires of hell supposedly for calling as “fool” the prosecution team in the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona.

“Under Vatican 2, there is no hell; but even if there is, there is nobody there,” Santiago said in a statement.

“In theology, hell is not a geographical place, but is a metaphor for distance from God,” she said, reacting to Fr. Catalino Arevalo, who took a swipe at her during the weekend.

Santiago then went on attacking the priest, who she said sounded like a “publicity hound.”

“The priest is saying that he is close to God, and I’m not. I say to the priest, judge not, that you shall not be judged,” she said.

Santiago said she was told that Arevalo had approached certain journalists to make sure that his homily would be reported in the print media.

“It is like St. Paul writing letters to the Corinthians, and begging them to publicize his letters.  This priest sounds very much like a publicity hound.  And I thought humility in spiritual matters is a virtue.”

Under Vatican 2, Santiago said, the Catholic Church no longer clings to the monopoly on truth.

“Under Vatican 2, priests and nuns should be treated like everyone else.  They are not special people just because they have joined a religious community.  It does not make them any more smarter or holier than you and me.”

Instead of meddling in politics, Santiago said the priest should spend his energy fighting pedophilia within the Catholic Church.

“That priest should spend his energy fighting pedophilia within the Catholic Church, instead of meddling in politics and serving to divide church practitioners,” she said.

The senator also criticized Arevalo for making a literal interpretation of the Bible.

“Under Vatican 2, the story of Genesis is no longer a historical fact but a myth.  The Bible should not be read literally, but should be read in its Aramaic context.  Unfortunately, some of the religious refuse to accept the changes started by Vatican 2,” she said.

“I can engage in a public debate with the priest, and we can exchange quotation for quotation from the Bible.  But that would be foolish, because the Bible can be interpreted in as many ways as there are Christian churches,” Santiago added.

Read more about Philippines Current Events

Santiago blasts priest over ‘hell’ warning

She isn’t the type who would back down when challenged by a fellow politician or by a fellow lawyer. Neither would she when confronted by a man of the cloth.

Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago on Sunday came out firing against a Catholic priest who criticized her for repeatedly scolding prosecutors over their supposed incompetence in the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona.

Santiago took exception to a remark by Fr. Catalino Arevalo in his homily suggesting she could be “worthy of the fires of hell,” particularly for referring to the prosecution team as gago (fool) during a trial session last week.

“The Constitution provides for a wall of separation between Church and State. A priest cannot violate the law in the guise of criticizing a senator-judge with the ulterior motive of promoting his own political agenda,” Santiago said in a statement.

Arevalo, a Jesuit in his 80s who is close to the family of President Benigno Aquino III, quoted Matthew 5:20 in taking a swipe at the mercurial senator: “But I say to you that if you are angry with a brother or sister, you will be liable to judgement. And if you insult a brother or sister, you will be liable to the council. And if you say, ‘You fool,’ you will be liable to the fires of hell.”

Read more about the latest Local News in the Philippines

Key defense witness is lawyer-accountant

Defense lawyers are gearing up for a crucial phase in the proceedings, putting “finishing touches” on the testimony of a key witness who will “lay the groundwork” for Chief Justice Renato Corona’s likely appearance as the “climax” of the impeachment trial.

Describing Article 2 of the impeachment complaint as the real “battleground,” defense counsel Ramon Esguerra said the witness—a lawyer and a certified public accountant (CPA) —would discuss in detail that “there is every justification for the entries” in Corona’s statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN).

Esguerra said the Chief Justice would then explain the sources of money declared in the SALNs, including those used to purchase properties mentioned in the documents.

“The emerging consensus is he will take the stand,” Esguerra told the Philippine Daily Inquirer in an interview shortly after Corona met with his 12 lawyers for around three hours in Makati City on Friday afternoon.

Asked how soon the Chief Justice would testify, the defense counsel said: “I think logically, he should be the last to take the (witness) stand because it would be anticlimactic if he would come first.”

Trial will resume on March 12 with the defense presentation after the prosecution rested its case last week.

Article 2 alleges that Corona failed to publicly disclose his SALNs and thus, committed a culpable violation of the Constitution.

Esguerra (no relation to this reporter) said Corona made it clear to his lawyers that he had “no problem” testifying in his own impeachment trial. “It cannot be foreclosed,” he said.

In the defense panel’s list of witnesses and documents submitted to the impeachment court on January 31, the CPA-lawyer was not named but was described as an “expert witness” who would “testify that CJ Corona did not violate the Constitution and pertinent laws on the SALN, and that (his) assets came from legitimate sources and the values he used thereon have legal basis.”

The testimony will be backed by documentary evidence purportedly showing that Corona “also received allowances and other emoluments as justice of the Supreme Court” and that “he and his wife have the lawful means to acquire the alleged properties.”

Check out the latest Philippines Current Events

Corona urged to testify

With the prosecution resting its case, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile on Wednesday said Chief Justice Renato Corona’s best defense was to take the witness stand and personally rebut charges he fudged his asset declarations and showed bias in favor of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.

Before adjourning Day 25 of the trial, which will resume on March 12 for the defense presentation, the court gave the prosecution until Friday to submit a formal offer of documentary evidence and Corona’s lawyers five days to respond.

Enrile warned prosecutors against claiming that they had presented overwhelming evidence to convict Corona.

“You are putting this court in a very serious predicament because you already make pronouncements about the weight and the quantum of the evidence that you have presented for your side,” Enrile said.

“Please do not make sweeping statements outside that may befuddle or confuse the people or convince them that you’ve won already,” he said. “There’s no winner yet. Don’t be too sure.

The tribunal’s presiding officer agreed that it would be in Corona’s “best interest” to take the witness stand and testify, particularly on Articles 2 and 7 of the impeachment complaint.

“That’s my view,” Enrile said in Filipino in an ambush interview. “To me, he needs to explain only on two things, Article 2 and Article 7.”

Article 2 refers to Corona’s alleged failure to publicly disclose his statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN). In the course of the trial, the prosecution noted alleged discrepancies between entries in his SALN and the actual value of his properties and peso bank accounts.

Article 7 alleges that Corona had favored Arroyo, now a Pampanga congresswoman, through the Supreme Court’s issuance of a Nov. 15, 2011, temporary restraining order (TRO) allowing her to seek medical treatment abroad while she was facing charges of electoral sabotage.

Enrile offered a theory on why the prosecution announced on Tuesday to drop five of its eight articles of impeachment for alleged betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution.

“They know that if they pursued (the rest of the articles), they could not secure the required votes to remove the respondent using those five articles that they removed … They didn’t want to waste their effort on these anymore,” he said in Filipino in a radio interview.

Prosecutors need to secure the vote of at least 16 senators in at least one article of impeachment to convict Corona.

“Psychologically, many interpretations could be drawn (from the prosecution move) because you make an allegation and then you withdraw it. That means that you have no evidence to prove it,” Enrile said in an ambush interview.

Continue reading about this Local News in the Philippines

Row over testimony of Supreme Court justice looms

Will Associate Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno’s testimony end up with Supreme Court justices washing their dirty linen in public?

Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago on Sunday cautioned against the prosecution’s insistence to have Sereno appear as its witness in the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona.

“Even if she’s willing to testify alone, it would be a slippery slope. It would open the door for other Supreme Court justices appearing in an impeachment trial over one pretext or another,” Santiago told the Philippine Daily Inquirer in a phone interview.

“When the time comes for the defense to present its case, what would prevent them from inviting other justices who, as you say, were critical of Justice Sereno’s dissenting opinion? The prosecution can’t claim this (privilege) alone.”

Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III said he would give a “word of caution” to fellow senator-judges when the caucus took up the matter at 11 a.m. today.

“There might be a conflict within the Supreme Court and we might only worsen it,” Sotto said in Filipino in a separate interview.

Prosecutors want Sereno, an appointee of President Benigno Aquino III, to testify on her dissenting opinion on the effectivity of the high tribunal’s Nov. 15, 2011, temporary restraining order (TRO).

Bayan Muna Representative Neri Colmenares on Sunday said he would file a motion for reconsideration of a February 14 resolution issued by the high tribunal that the court could “not waive privileges attendant to the proposed testimony” of its officials and employees in Corona’s impeachment trial “on matters covered by privilege and confidentiality.”

“It is absurd,” Colmenares said. “This practically means that anyone, from Chief Justice to Supreme Court drivers cannot testify.”

He said the prosecution would press the Senate to subpoena court officials, otherwise it would weaken its power to try impeachment cases.

Continue reading about Local News in the Philippines

Enrile won’t hear PAL exec’s testimony

An incensed Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile on Tuesday rejected a prosecution witness called to testify that Chief Justice Renato Corona and his wife allegedly enjoyed special treatment from Philippine Airlines (PAL) while a case involving the company was pending in the Supreme Court.

On Day 21 of Corona’s trial, Enrile noted that Enrique Javier, PAL vice president for sales, was “incompetent” in proving that Corona committed betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution under Article 3 of the impeachment complaint because he had a “platinum card” that allowed him “special benefits” from the airline.

Bribery would have been the charge, but this was not included in Article 3, Enrile pointed out, warning that the prosecution would then have to prove that this is a high crime and an impeachable offense.

The prosecution also would have to go back to the House of Representatives to amend the impeachment complaint, said Enrile, presiding officer of the Senate tribunal.

Article 3 accuses Corona of “failing to meet stringent standards under Article 8, Section 7, Paragraph 3 of the Constitution that provides that ‘a member of the judiciary must be a person of proven competence, integrity, probity and independence.’”

Enrile said the instances indicated in Article 3 of the impeachment complaint did not include Corona’s alleged abuse of PAL flight privileges.

The prosecution only accused Corona of “allowing” the Supreme Court to act on “mere letters” filed by PAL lawyer Estelito Mendoza which caused the issuance of a “flip-flopping decision” in the “final and executory case” involving the company’s entanglement with the Flight Attendants and Stewards Association of the Philippines (Fasap).

Article 3 also charges Corona with creating excessive entanglement with then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo through her appointment of his wife, Cristina, to Camp John Hay Development Corp. and discussing with Lauro Vizconde the pending murder case filed against Hubert Webb then pending before the tribunal.

Enrile said Javier’s testimony was not relevant to any of the three charges and advised the prosecution that the impeachment court would not “allow the expansion” of Article 3 “unless you amend it.”

Continue reading about this Local News in the Philippines

Gov’t warned on bank records leak: Palace blackmailing critics

Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile on Tuesday warned about the larger implications of the claim that the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) or the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) could have leaked Chief Justice Renato Corona’s bank records.

Enrile agreed with Senator Joker Arroyo who expressed alarm at the impeachment trial on Monday over the possibility of Malacañang using the AMLC to blackmail its enemies.

“Yes, because the (AMLC) is not supposed to examine any account without going to court,” Enrile said in Filipino, noting that the bill seeking to amend  the Anti-Money Laundering Law “will be examined very thoroughly.”

Enrile added: “If that’s true, then they’re not respecting the law anymore. They’re not following the law, which they’re supposed to obey and implement. The executive department is the implementing body.”

The AMLC, tasked with investigating money laundering offenses, is composed of the BSP governor as chair, and the insurance commissioner and the Securities and Exchange Commission chair as members.

The BSP on Monday said its examiners did not access any records of the deposit accounts of Corona.

The AMLC on Tuesday said it could not have been the one that leaked his signature cards or his other deposit account records because it had not received copies of or any documents related to the deposit accounts of Corona.

Continue reading about this Philippines Current Events

‘Bourne’ star urges Oscar winner to visit PH

Seems “The Bourne Legacy” has won at least one famous tourist for the Philippines, long before the movie debuts onscreen.

If plans push through, the new visitor is a hunky Oscar winner. A “Bourne” Actor convinced Oscar Hunk to visit the country—specifically, its famous beaches. OH is expected to fly in this week and visit a posh resort outside of Metro Manila accompanied by another “Bourne” Star.

No need to be suspicious. BS’ partner has just arrived and will join the other two.

More pliant hunk

No wonder Controversial Celeb is not as hurt as everyone thought about Young Lover’s indiscretions.

Turns out, while YL was carrying on with Perky Mestiza, CC was seeing Younger Hunk! Yup, playboy YL is yesterday’s news.

YH is fresh and more flexible, being a new age fitness freak. Moreover, CC and YH reportedly went on a holiday recently.

PAULEEN Luna says she’s not pregnant.

But wait, wasn’t YH once involved with Imported Anchor?

Shrill hunk

Naïve Production Assistant barged into the dressing room shared by Hunky Star with Handsome Actor.

PA saw HS  in an unguarded moment—screaming, swooning, chattering excitedly on the phone with a presumably gay friend.

Noticing that PA was stunned speechless, HA casually remarked: “Don’t mind him. He’s really that shrill in person.”

Hidden desire

They’ve been competitors for a long time; who knew they could’ve been sweethearts, too?

Senior Actress once sat beside Beautiful Rival on a 10-hour flight. Though pitted against each other in the biz, they were friends in real life, so BR didn’t mind traveling with SA.

CRISTINE Reyes: No plans of marrying soon (photo: cristinereyesphotogallery.blogspot.com)

While BR was sleeping soundly, however, SA feasted on the sight of her seatmate’s snow-white neck and … it was quite a ravishing view. Yup, SA swings both ways.

Leftovers

Colorful Celeb often brags about the fact that Greying Husband was previously involved with Screen Goddess and other society girls.

“My rivals were rich and famous,” CC quips.

SG’s supporters have another take on that. “CC was content with leftovers … second-hand items.” Ouch.

Continue reading about this Philippines Current Events

Senators to tackle contempt issue, Supreme Court records in caucus

The plate of the senator-judges will be full on Day 20 of the impeachment trial as they tackle three crucial issues, including the possibility of citing Chief Justice Renato Corona’s lawyers for contempt for claiming that Malacañang was trying to bribe senators.

The matter will be the subject of their caucus at 11 a.m. Monday after defense counsels submitted a 12-page explanation wherein they also “humbly apologize … for any misunderstanding or lack of clarity in their intentions and words.”

At the resumption of the trial at 2 p.m., the senators will grill Quezon City Representative Jorge “Bolet” Banal for approaching a bank manager on January 31 to verify apparently leaked documents of Corona’s deposits in his possession.

“We cannot discuss the matter in caucus because we don’t know anything about it,” Senate Majority Leader Tito Sotto told the Philippine Daily Inquirer. “Banal will instead be asked in open court.”

At Thursday’s trial, manager Annabelle Tiongson of Philippine Savings Bank’s Katipunan branch said Banal had sought her assistance on the leaked documents, a request she said she rejected.

Banal later briefly explained in court that he got the documents after someone allegedly left them at his gate in his St. Ignatius residence. The trial was adjourned afterward, with senators asking Banal to appear again this afternoon.

Supreme Court resolution

The caucus, according to Sotto, would take up the Supreme Court’s February 14 resolution allowing only limited access to certain court records the prosecution wanted scrutinized in the impeachment trial.

Defense counsel Ramon Esguerra on Saturday night criticized the “fishing expedition” in the past few trial days. During this period, the court tackled details of Corona’s bank accounts, with senator-judges and not prosecutors making bank officials admit to their existence.

‘Fake documents’

“Given all the realities in the trial, we know they’re wearing our patience thin, wearing us out,” Esguerra said by phone, referring to prosecutors.

“It’s been haywire, a fishing expedition the last three days. Since we cannot object to senator-judges asking questions of the witness, what else can we do? We are really at a disadvantage,” he said.

Tranquil Salvador III, also a member of the defense team, on Sunday said “all evidence (by the prosecution) will fall” in case it turned out that the Senate had subpoenaed Corona’s bank records based on fake documents provided by prosecutors.

“But assuming that they (evidence) stand, we have a good explanation,” he told the Inquirer, referring to discrepancies between money declared in Corona’s statements of assets, liabilities and net worth, and those deposited in his accounts.

Continue reading about this Local News in the Philippines