Prosecutors fail to pin CJ on SC recall of Fasap case

The president of the Flight Attendants and Stewards Association of the Philippines (Fasap) failed to show any direct evidence linking Chief Justice Renato Corona to the Supreme Court en banc’s order recalling an earlier SC ruling on the PAL-Fasap case.

During cross examination by the defense, Fasap president Roberto Anduiza failed to show that Corona took part in an en banc resolution of the high court recalling the Second Division’s ruling denying PAL’s second motion for reconsideration which became the basis for Article 3 of the impeachment complaint.

The defense drew an admission from Anduiza that he was not privy to the Court’s internal procedures, a day after the Fasap official, under direct examination by the prosecution, alleged that Corona was behind the recall order. Anduiza earlier had accused Corona of directly meddling in the PAL-Fasap case by acting on “mere letters” by PAL counsel Estelito Mendoza.

“The way I understood it, you have no complaint about procedures adopted in the case (recall of 2nd motion for reconsideration) because you don’t know the procedure,” lead defense counsel, former Justice Serafin Cuevas, asked, to which Anduiza answered “Yes.”

“How about other members of the division who said they signed the resolution?” Cuevas asked. Anduiza answered in the negative.

Anduiza admitted that the resolution was made unanimously by the Court yet he is only singling out Corona.

This prompted Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano to ask the prosecution why only Corona is being singled out when the decision was made by the entire court.

Cuevas emphasized that what was the subject of the recall resolution is the denied second motion of reconsideration, not the merits of the case.

“It was never mentioned in the recall order that it would touch on the merits of the case. In fact, the (original) decision of the court in favor of Fasap remains untouched,” Cuevas stressed.

The defense argued that Corona did not participate in the drafting of the recall order as no magistrates signed the order since it was purely an administrative matter.

On questioning by Sen. Koko Pimentel, Anduiza admitted it is not wrong to write the SC since some Fasap members have also written the Court to seek favorable action on their pending case. Hence, Pimentel said there is, in effect, nothing wrong with the letters sent by the PAL lawyer to the Court.

Corona also was alleged during the proceedings to have total deposits of P33 million in at least five peso accounts in Philippine Savings Bank (PSBank) but PSBank president Pascual Garcia III proved defiant in complying with the Senate’s order to yield before the impeachment court alleged foreign current accounts held under a name of “Renato C. Corona.”

Initially, Garcia said the reason he did not bring with him records pertaining to the five foreign currency deposits was due to their assessment that compliance to the Senate order could “expose us to criminal liability and we therefore sought guidance from the Supreme Court to provide us guidance.”

Garcia told Sen. Sergio Osmena, who managed to get him to confessing the said five accounts as in the nature of foreign currency, the law on Foreign Currency Deposit Act requires that these accounts are to be treated with absolute confidentiality and any disclosure should have the consent of the depositor.

Garcia was later prompted to admit before an open court that they have filed a petition for temporary restraining order (TRO) with the high court to clarify the provisions of the said law, R.A. 6426.

“With much regret your honor, we cannot at this time (comply) because we have already filed before the SC a petition.

The advice of counsel is we might be breaking a law (on the confidentiality of bank deposits). There are two laws governing deposits: one for local deposits and one for foreign currency deposits,” he added.

The prosecution’s presentation of the PSBank executive was held at bay due to the objection in the form of a motion for reconsideration filed Monday by Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago.

Santiago was unable to attend yesterday’s caucus of the senator-judges where the matter was deliberated upon by them – the issuance of subpoena to the responsible officers of PSBank as well as that of Bank of Philippine Islands (BPI) but subject to specific limits.

“After deliberating on the issue, the majority resolved not to consider the motion of reconsideration,” Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III said in reading the ruling at the initial stage of Day 14 of the trial which paved for the ushering into the witness stand of Garcia.

Cuevas still tried to stop the bank records from being exposed before the impeachment court even as they had already filed an urgent petition for certiorari and prohibition for immediate issuance of TRO and writ of preliminary injunction before the SC yesterday.

Cuevas pleaded with the presiding officer, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile that allowing the bank officers to testify would nullify their urgent petition, adding that the latter himself even assured that defense lawyers were not precluded from seeking such remedy.

Enrile, however, set aside Cuevas’ argument, invoking the Senate’s constitutional mandate for the impeachment trial to “forthwith proceed” upon filing of a verified complaint by 188 congressmen.

He also noted that as the Corona trial resumed yesterday there was yet “no order from any authority that has asked us to stop. In the absence of a TRO, the chair rules we must proceed with the presentation of witnesses.”

The PSBank official said as of end 2007, Corona’s alleged account no. 089-1201-1957 had a balance of over P5 million and it was closed in 2008.

Account No. 089-1202-1681 had a balance as of Dec. 31, 2010 of P7.1 million while account No. 089-1202-0122 was opened and closed in 2009 and another account bearing the No. 089-1201-9593 had a balance as of end of 2009 a total of P8.5 million and in Dec. 31, 2010, its balanced amounted to P12.5 million.

Account No. 089-1201-7358 was opened and closed in 2009. Garcia bought with him certifications on the end-year balances of the five of the 10 accounts being inquired upon and in which were found to be all in the name of Renato C. Corona.

When pressed for information on the foreign accounts, Garcia would not budge even as Sen. Franklin Drilon echoed the call of the prosecution panel to the court to compel the witness produce the needed documents and if need be, imposed with appropriate penalty since he already did not heed the order. –Angie M. Rosales, Daily Tribune