opposition to request for subpoenae feb2 a1132

8/3/2019 Opposition to Request for Subpoenae Feb2 A1132

1/6

3L\epublic of tbe t l b i l i p p i u e ~

QC:onlJrtS'S'of tbe tlbtltppiueS'

~ e n a t e '12 FEB -2 All :32

SITTING AS THE IMPEACHMENT COURT

IN THE MATTER OF THEIMPEACHMENT OFRENATO C. CORONA ASCHIEF JUSTICE OF THESUPREME COURT OF THEPHILIPPINES.

REPRESENTATIVES NIEL

C. TUPAS, JR., JOSEPHEMILIO A. ABAYA,LORENZO R. TANADA III,REYNALDO V. UMALI,ARLENEJ. BAG-AO, et al.

Case No. 002-2011

) t t

OPPOSITION TO THE REQUESTFOR ISSUANCE OF SUBPOENAE

Chief Justice Renato C. Corona ("CJ Corona"), by counsel, to present the

bases o f his opposition to a request for subpoena by the Prosecution, without

waiving his right to file the appropriate legal remedy to question the legality o f

these proceedings, respectfully states:

Opposition to &quest or Issuance rifSubpoenaPage 1 rif6


2/6

1. In a Request for Issuance o f Subpoenae dated1 February 2012

(Request), the House o f Representatives seeks the issuance o f subpoenae duces

tecum and ad testificandum to require the Vice-President for Sales o f Philippine

Airlines (PAL), Mr. Enrique Javier, and Vice President for Product Loyalty

Marketing, Ms. Ria Carrion Domingo, to testify and bring the following: a)

Records pertaining to PAL Platinum Card No. A752, purportedly under the

name o f CJ Corona and PAL Platinum Card No. A753, purportedly under the

name o f Cristina R. Corona; b) the Policies and Rules concerning the issuance

and use o f PAL Platinum cards; c) several Passenger Names Records (PNR); and

d) several Plane Tickets under the name of CJ Corona and his wife.

2. Ostensibly, the subpoenae are requested in relation to Article II I o f

the Verified Complaint, which makes the following allegations, vii::

RESPONDENT COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATIONS OFTH E CONSTITUTION AN D BETRAYED TH E PUBLIC TRUSTBY FAILING TO MEET AND OBSERVE TH E STRINGENTSTANDARDS UNDER ART. VIII, SECTION 7 (3) OF THECONSTITUTION THAT PROVIDES THAT "[A] MEMBER OFTH E JUDICIARY MUST BE A PERSON OF PROVEN

COMPETENCE, INTEGRITY, PROBITY,AN D

INDEPENDENCE" IN ALLOWING T H E SUPREME COURT

TO ACT O N MERE LETTERS FILED BY A COUNSELWHICH CAUSED T H E ISSUANCE OF FLIP-FLOPPINGDECISIONS I N FINAL AND EXECUTORY CASES; INCREATING AN EXCESSIVE ENTANGLEMENT WITH MRS.ARROYO THROUGH HE R APPOINTMENT OF HIS WIFE TOOFFICE; AND IN DISCUSSING WITH LITIGANTS REGARDINGCASES PENDING BEFORE TH E SUPREME COURT. (Emphasissupplied)

3. Nowhere in the language o f the above-cited Article II I o f the

Impeachment Complaint makes any mention o f a PAL Platinum Card ("card")

in the name of CJ Corona or his wife, their pattonage o f Philippine Airline, any

Oppositwn to Requestfor Issuance ofSubpoenaPage2of6


3/6

act or circumstance pertaining to the procurement of the said card, or any

benefits or privileges that Chief Justice and Mrs. Corona obtained from it. The

only reference to Philippine Air Lines deals with the alleged flip-flopping

decision of the Supreme Court in the FASAP Case, allegedly on account of

letters written by Estelito Mendoza to the Supreme Court.

4. Evidendy, there are no allegations in the Complaint regarding any

benefits that C] Corona obtained from PAL in connection with the FASAP

Case. To permit or sanction the introduction of the information subject matter of

the requested subpoenae will violate the constitutional right of CJ Corona to be

informed of the accusation against him and is tantamount to requiring him to

defend himself against a new accusation altogether. Herein lies the constitutional

infirmity of the Request.

5. I t is worth noting that Article III, Section 14 of the Constitution

expressly provides for the fundamental due process rights, vii::

Section 14. (1) No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offensewithout due process of aw.

(2) In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent untilthe contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself andcounsel, to be informed of the nature an d cause of the accusationagainst him, to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial, to meet thewitnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process to secure theattendance of witnesses and the production of evidence in his behalf.However, after arraignment, trial may proceed notwithstanding the absenceof the accused: Provided, that he has been duly notified and his failure toappear is unjustifiable. (Emphasis supplied)

Opposition to Requestfor Issuance 0/SubpoenaPage 3 0/6


4/6

6. The above-cited provision o f the Constitution guarantees the rights

o f every individual, regardless of their stature, to be informed o f the accusation

against them. This fundamental due process right applies to all cases, including

an Impeachment Trial. Any matter introduced in this trial, which falls outside

the scope the Verified Complaint is inadmissible for running afoul with the

provisions of Article II I of the Constitution.

7. The subpoena seeks to introduce testimony and documents

regarding Platinum Cards allegedly issued to Chief Justice and Mrs. Corona,

matters which have surfaced for the very first time in this case. No connection

or relation whatever has been established between these Platinum Cards and the

acts which are alleged in the Verified Complaint.

8. Even assuming that such Platinum Cards exist, there is nothing that

logically connects the same with the FASAP Case because Chief Justice Corona

has nothing to do whatever with the said case, having inhibited therefrom since

2008. To allow the Complainants to adduce evidence on this point would clearly

be a waste o f this Honorable Impeachment Coutt's time and would serve only

confound and embarrass Chief Justice Corona.

9. Th e Rules of Court ensure against the inttoduction of irrelevant or

immaterial evidence. Rule 128, Section 3 o f the Rules o f Coutt states that

"(e)vidence is admissible when it is relevant to the issue and is not excluded I?Jthe law or these

rules. "

10. Any attempt to relate the information sought by the subpoenae

with the action of the Supreme Coutt in the FASAP Case is no t only strained,

bu t inherendy unfair and illogical.

Opposition to &quest or Issuance '!!SubpoenaPage 4 ,!!6


5/6

11. The issue at hand is whether or no t the Supreme Court, under the

leadership o f CJ Corona, acted on the letters o f Estelito Mendoza resulting in

the alleged flip-flopping decision of the Supreme Court. The presentation o f the

said Platinum Card and the related documents has absolutely nothing to do with

the action o f the Supreme Court in any o f its decisions. Indeed, the

circumstances o f the said Platinum Card bear no relevance or materiality to the

F ASAP Case, and would only tend to confuse or distract the judge from a

proper appreciation o f the evidence

12. From the foregoing, it is clear that the Request is nothing bu t

another attempt to adduce irrelevant and immaterial evidence in these

proceedings in the continuing efforts o f the Complainants to fish for evidence

and in violation o f the constitutional right to due process, in a desperate

scramble to chance upon some information that may be linked to any violation

o f law or ethics. Surely, this Honorable Court will no t permit such a travesty.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, in consideration of the provisions of law, jurisprudence

and arguments adduced, it is respectfully prayed that this Impeachment Court

DENY complainants' Request for the Issuance of Subpoenae dated 1 February

2012.

Other reliefs, just or equitable under the circumstances, are likewise

prayed fOf.

Opposition to Requestfor Issuance ufSubpoenaPage 5 uf6


6/6

Makati for Pasay City, 1 February 2012.

Respectfully Submitted byCounsel for C . . e Renato C. Corona.

JOSE M. ROY IIIPT R No. 0038311; 1/09/12; Makati City

IB P LRN 02570 August 20, 2001 (Lifetime)Roll of Attorneys No. 37065

MCLE Exemption No. 1-000176

DENNIS P. MANALOPT R No. 2666920; 5 January 2011, Makati City

IBP No . 839371; 3 January 2011, Makati CityRoll No . 40950, 12 April 1996

MCLE Compliance No. III-0009471, 26 April 2010

HOUSE PROSECUTION PANEL

Copies furnished:

House of RepresentativesBatasan ComplexBatasan Hills, Quezon City

1)t..TEl i E /I: 00 ~ ; M.

Senators o f the Republic of the Philippines

GSIS BuildingMacapagal HighwayPasay City

Opposition to Requestfor Issuance uf SubpoenaPage 6 uf 6

opposition to request for subpoenae feb2 a1132

Documents