Sandigan junks P130 million civil forfeiture case vs Corona

MANILA, Philippines — The anti-graft court Sandiganbayan has dismissed the P130.59-million civil forfeiture case against the late chief justice Renato Corona, which stemmed from his failure to declare several cash assets and properties in his statements of assets, liabilities and net worth or SALNs.

In its 48-page decision released yesterday, the court’s Second Division said that while Corona may have been “negligent” and “careless” in filing his SALNs, the Office of the Ombudsman’s prosecution team still failed to prove that the former chief magistrate’s assets were ill-gotten, especially as his heirs – his wife Cristina and their three children – were able to present sufficient documents to explain the sources of their family’s wealth.

“At this juncture, it is undeniable that respondents have other sources of income apart from their salary as public officials. Since respondents were able to sufficiently explain the legality of their undisclosed cash assets, they cannot be held liable for the forfeiture of their properties,” the decision, penned by Associate Justice Arthur Malabaguio, read.

“Thus, in several cases, where the source of the undisclosed wealth was properly accounted for, the Supreme Court deemed the same as ‘explained wealth’ which the law does not penalize,” it added.

Associate Justices Oscar Herrera Jr. and Michael Frederick Musngi concurred with the ruling.

Aside from Corona, named respondents in the case were his wife Cristina and their “dummies, trustees, assignees, transferees and successors-in-interest.”

Filed by the Office of the Ombudsman in March 2014, the forfeiture case was an offshoot of an impeachment trial against Corona over his alleged failure to declare several assets, including real estate properties, in his SALNs for 2001 to 2010.

It was earlier alleged that Corona emptied several of his bank accounts before an impeachment case was filed against him before the House of Representatives in December 2011.

In May 2012, the Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, voted 20-3 in favor of Corona’s conviction for betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution over his supposed SALN violations. His conviction caused his removal from the SC.

Corona died of cardiac arrest on April 29, 2016 after years of battling diabetes.

In its civil suit, the Ombudsman asked the Sandiganbayan to issue a writ of forfeiture on the Corona couple’s personal and real properties.

P137.94 million cash assets

The ombudsman said its investigation revealed that the Corona couple had a total P137.94 million cash assets in their peso and dollar bank accounts from 2001 to 2010, P134.44 million of which was undeclared in their SALNs .

Furthermore, the ombudsman said that the Corona couple’s cash in their bank accounts was way disproportionate to their combined lawful income for 2001 to 2011, which only amounted to P30.37 million.

Corona served as presidential adviser and chief of staff of former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo from Jan. 22, 2001 to April 8, 2002. He was appointed as SC associate justice on April 9, 2002 and as chief justice eight years later on May 12, 2010.

Cristina, meanwhile, became a member of the board of directors of the John Hay Development Corp. (JHDC) on May 19, 2001 until she became the chairperson on April 7, 2007 and concurrent president from July 28, 2007 until her resignation in July 2010.

“As shown by the voluminous bank certifications... the [bank] accounts thereon have their deposit amounts withdrawn or redeemed by the respondents after it had earned obtainable interest. Thereafter, as this Court has already found, the redeemed amounts were rolled over repeatedly in different forms of investments in various banking and financial institutions in order to earn more substantial interest income,” the Second Division said.

The court said that at most, Corona may only be held liable for simple negligence “for having failed to ascertain that his SALNs were accomplished properly, accurately and in more detail.”

However, the court said, any administrative case that could have been lodged against him, was already “preempted by his death.”

With the dismissal of the forfeiture case, the Second Division said that the Writ of Preliminary Attachment dated Jan. 21, 2015, which it earlier issued against the Corona couple’s properties is now hereby “set aside and lifted.”