Supreme Court acts on petitions seeking to stop Corona impeachment

MANILA, Philippines - The Supreme Court (SC) is set to discuss in full court session on Jan. 17 all four petitions seeking to stop the impeachment proceedings against Chief Justice Renato Corona.

SC spokesman Midas Marquez said yesterday the petitions, filed by lawyer Vladimir Cabigao, tax informer Danilo Lihaylihay, former Integrated Bar of the Philippines president Vicente Millora and lawyer Oliver Lozano, had been raffled off to different magistrates.

“All justices have been given copies of the petitions already, and they are now studying them. Let’s see how the court will act when they resume session next month,” Marquez said.

The SC official declined to give further details, but said that among the possible actions of the high court would be to consolidate the petitions, require respondents to answer the petition or to issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) on the Senate impeachment trial.

Some lawmakers, including Cavite Rep. Joseph Abaya, have urged the High Court not to interfere in the impeachment proceedings against Corona.

Abaya had even urged senators to “assert their constitutional mandate” and ignore any TRO from the SC or “be subservient and desert their constitutional obligation.”

Petitioners are questioning what they consider rushed proceedings to impeach Corona in the House. They said it anomalously took the House only five hours to get 188 congressmen to sign the eight Articles of Impeachment.

They also alleged that the lawmakers who voted to impeach Corona were coerced into signing the document that they had not even read.

In a related development, Marquez also refused to comment on the reported plan of the House prosecution team to compel Associate Justice Presbitero Velasco Jr. and SC Clerk of Court Enriquetta Vidal to testify in the impeachment trial.

“Let’s wait for the summons. Let’s see how the court will answer,” he told reporters in a press conference.

On Monday, Bayan Muna party-list Rep. Neri Colmenares said he would push for the issuance of subpoena on Velasco and Vidal so they could “shed light on the irregularities detailed in Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno’s dissent regarding the promulgation of a resolution Velasco issued on Nov. 28 explaining the Court decision on the temporary restraining order allowing President Gloria Arroyo to travel abroad.”

Sereno, in a dissenting opinion, had said the resolution on the issuance of a TRO on the watchlist order against Pampanga Rep. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo was not “a fully accurate reflection of what took place” during the deliberation. She said Corona “corrected” the draft of the Nov. 18 resolution written by Velasco.

Sereno, President Aquino’s first appointee to the high court, further claimed that on Nov. 23, Vidal informed Associate Justice Antonio Carpio of Corona’s handwritten corrections on the typewritten draft of Velasco’s resolution with the instruction that it be promulgated immediately. Carpio responded through a letter that the promulgation of Corona’s version of the resolution be stopped and that it should first be deliberated upon by the justices.

Corona’s version reportedly stipulated that the Arroyo couple had complied with the conditions set by the SC for the issuance of the TRO and that the TRO on the watchlist order should take effect immediately.

Velasco accused Sereno of breaking the high court’s confidentiality rule.

The High Court had clarified that there had been two deliberations on the issue. The first one was when they voted 7-6 to issue the TRO, and the second one was when they again voted 7-6 to declare that the TRO was in full effect even pending Arroyo’s compliance with the conditions.

Easy job

A lawyer for Corona said he expects an easy job defending the Chief Justice, judging from the “weak” Articles of Impeachment submitted to the Senate.

“If you examine the Articles of Impeachment, they are based on Supreme Court decisions. There’s not much evidence to prove these charges,” lawyer Ernesto Francisco Jr. said in an interview over ABS-CBN News Channel.

Francisco expressed belief the senator-judges would be able to issue a decision very soon, especially after considering answer to the charges submitted by Corona last Monday.

“Based on these pleadings, the court will now be able to see the merits of the case. They will know some of the charges do not need presentation of evidence,” he pointed out.

He said the trial might be over in less than six months or sooner than senators had projected.

Francisco said he and other lawyers have volunteered their services to the Chief Justice for free.

“I heard Chief Justice Corona’s speech. As a lawyer, it’s my duty to protect the institution. It’s not just about the Chief Justice. We can’t have a very powerful president, but also he might be able to control the SC,” he said.

He said it would be interesting to look into why 188 lawmakers signed the impeachment complaint in less than six hours, especially after reports that the Palace reportedly pressured the congressmen into signing the complaint even without reading and understanding its contents as required in the Constitution.

“Let’s find out what really happened. In the meantime, let us preserve the institution,” he said.

In his answer, Chief Justice Corona asked the Senate to dismiss outright the complaint for “failing to meet the requirements of the Constitution.” He called the impeachment complaint insufficient in substance and form.

“The impeachment court may not proceed to trial on the basis of this complaint because it is constitutionally infirm and defective, for failure to comply with the requirement of verification,” he said.

“They also declared that the majority of signatories signed without reading the complaint, but reputably in exchange for material considerations. It stands to reason that the House of Representatives had no authority under the Constitution to transmit the Articles of Impeachment for trial before the Senate,” his lawyers argued.

Francisco, a known “public interest lawyer,” had represented the Magdalo soldiers in the coup d’etat charges in connection with the siege of Oakwood Premiere (now Ascott Makati) in Makati City in July 2003.

He had also filed graft charges before the Ombudsman against former first gentleman Jose Miguel Arroyo. He was earlier nominated for Ombudsman after the resignation of Merceditas Gutierrez, who had also been impeached by Congress.

Retired Supreme Court justice and former justice secretary Serafin Cuevas will lead Corona’s defense lawyers.

Cuevas had served as defense lawyer of deposed President Joseph Estrada in his plunder trial.