Drilon: CJ guilty

Rappler.com

This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.

'Guilty of article 2' is Sen. Drilon's verdict on the impeachment case against CJ Renato Corona

MANILA, Philippines – Sen Franklin Drilon, a stalward of President Aquino’s Liberal Party, voted on Tuesday, May 29, to convict Chief Justice Renato Corona.

Corona’s staunchest critic in the Senate impeachment court, he is the 4th senator to vote for a conviction as of posting time on Article 2.

The question about declaring one’s SALN goes into the heart of moral fitness to hold public office, Drilon said, but Corona concealed luxurious condominiums, reported values at less than 50% of their acquisition cost, and did not declare US$2.4M and P80-M in his SALN. His yearly income of P27-M is grossly disproportionate to his assets.

This “establishes prima facie case of ill gotten wealth…the thing speaks for itself,” Drilon said.

The defense of good faith cannot be invoked, he said, using the defense of commingled funds with Corona’s relatives and BGEI. The funds should have been reported as assets, but he did not. Yet he was the manager of SGV’s tax department, Drilon pointed out.

Corona filed innacurrate and false SALNs to conceal his enormous wealth; he chose the path of concealment. “He has lost the moral fitness to serve the people. He cannot be chief jsutice a minute longer,” Drilon declared.

“I find the respondent guilty of article 2,” he said.

In the past

Even before Corona was impeached, he asked him to inhibit from Arroyo-related cases in the Supreme Court.

Under Drilon’s questioning, he was able to ask Supreme Court Clerk of Court Enriqueta Vidal to submit the SALNs of Corona. The defense asked him to inhibit, saying he was aiding the prosecution. Corona singled him out in asking him and the 188 complainants to sign a waiver on their bank accounts.

Drilon said Corona’s interpretation of the Foreign Currency Deposits Act is wrong. “To interpret a law in that manner is absurd! Why? A corrupt official will commit corruption, the fruits of corruption will be converted into foreign exchange and the foreign exchange will be deposited in a foreign currency deposit unit.”

Drilon added, “The Supreme Court in one case said that you cannot use the [FCDA] as a haven for the corrupt and the criminals. To interpret it in the manner that the Chief Justice would want to justify his non-disclosure is to say that the FCDA could be used as a haven to hide proceeds of criminal acts.”

Drilon said dollar accounts are an asset and must have been reported by Corona. “If you have a dollar account, you either report in foreign currency or in peso equivalent but what is required is the reporting of the asset.” – Rappler.com

(Below is the full text of Drilon’s explanation of his vote during the trial’s judgment day on May 29)

The Constitution commands the Respondent Chief Justice to file an accurate and complete SALN. This requirement is not a mere formality, as it goes into the heart of Respondent’s moral fitness to hold public office.

Respondent concealed his luxurious condominiums for 5 years after they were fully paid. Worse, Respondent reported the values of these condominiums at less than 50% of their acquisition cost.

Respondent admits he did not declare 2.4 Million U.S. dollars, and 80 Million pesos, in his SALN. The enormity of Respondent’s hidden assets – over 180 Million pesos, or 50 times more than his declared cash assets – is scandalous. It is grossly disproportionate to his total income for 10 years of about 27 Million pesos. It  establishes a prima facie case of ill-gotten wealth under the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

180 million pesos. Res Ipsa Loquitor. The thing speaks for itself.

Respondent justifies his concealment of his dollar accounts because of the alleged confidentiality in R.A. 6426. This kind of interpretation will encourage aspiring thieves in government to simply hide all their loot in FCDU accounts.  The law does not prohibit Respondent from disclosing his foreign currency deposits. It bars the bank from disclosing them without his consent. In fact, he authorized this court to inquire into them.

How can Respondent, the Chief Justice no less, claim good faith in asserting such a twisted interpretation of the law? Besides, the defense of good faith cannot be invoked. The punishable act of non-reporting of assets in one’s SALN is mala prohibita, where good faith is immaterial.

Respondent concealed his 80 Million peso deposits because allegedly they are “commingled funds” of BGEI and that of his relatives.

Respondent presented n o evidence to substantiate his claims. If BGEI funds are held in trust, respondent must report such funds as assets, and enter the corresponding liabilities, in his SALN. He did not. He cannot claim good faith. He was the manager of SGV’s Tax Department.

The Supreme Court dismissed Delsa Flores, a lowly court interpreter, for not reporting in her SALN her stall in a public market.

The Chief Justice must be held to a much higher standard.

Those who dispense justice must conform to the highest standards of professional integrity, and personal honesty. Chief Justice Corona knowingly, deliberately, and with malice aforethought, filed inaccurate and false SALNs to conceal his enormous wealth. Where our Constitution and our laws require disclosure, he chose the path of concealment. He has lost his moral fitness to serve the people. He has betrayed the public trust. He cannot be Chief Justice a minute longer.

I found the Respondent guilty.

Click on the links below for more Rappler stories on the senator-judges’ verdict. 

Add a comment

Sort by

There are no comments yet. Add your comment to start the conversation.

Summarize this article with AI

How does this make you feel?

Loading
Download the Rappler App!