Download - Justice Corona Position Paper
-
7/28/2019 Justice Corona Position Paper
1/4
Tapalla, Gian Carlo C.
L- 110522
The basic idea of government of the Philippine[s] xxx [is] xxx a
representative government, the office being mere agents and not rulers of the peoplexxx where every officer accepts office pursuant to the provisions of law and holds the
office as a trust for the people whom he represents - Justice George Malcolm,
Cornejo v. Gabriel, 41 Phil. 188, 194 (1920). These words are cited in numerous
cases and it reminds us how our public officers should always be guided of truth and
justice. The Constitution guides public officer through Section 1, Article XI of the
1987 Constitution Public office is a public trust. Public officers and employees
must, at all times, be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility,
integrity, loyalty, and efficiency; act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest
lives. In the same way, the Filipinos are emphasized and reminded on Section 1,
Article II of the same Constitution Sovereignty resides in the people and all
government authority emanates from them. These articles work hand in hand to keeppublic officers wary of their actions and to make the people vigilant to any public
officers who are attempting or are already in the process of tainting the prestige and
dignity of their offices. The words of the Constitution are clear as to how the
disqualification and removal of the President, Vice President, Members of the
Constitutional Commission, Ombudsman, and Members of the Supreme Court. These
Sections of Article XI have already proven its power among the line of public officers
who went through impeachment, vis--vis; the words have already protected the
people from public officers who had took advantage of their position.
Several public officers were once at the verge of impeachment but never
pushed through except for Former President Joseph Estrada. In this line of public
officers who were once subject to impeachment proceedings, the countrys very first
Supreme Court Justice to be impeached by the House of Representatives.
Recently, Chief Justice Renato C. Corona is now facing the trials of
impeachment. Filed by representatives Niel C. Tupas Jr., Joseph Emilio A. Abaya,
Lorenzo R. Tanada III, Reynaldo V. Umali, Arlene J Bag-ao a and signed by One
hundred eighty eight (188) house representatives, the articles of impeachment were
submitted to the Senate on December 13, 2011 and the trial has commenced on
January 16, 2012. Corona was accused of betrayal of public trust, culpable violation
of the Constitution, and graft and corruption. The following are the Eight Articles ofImpeachment submitted by the prosecutiont:
1. Betrayal of public trust: Coronas track record was marked by partiality and
subservience in cases involving the Arroyo administration from the time of his
appointment as Supreme Court justice which continued to his dubious appointment as
a midnight chief justice and up to the present.
2. Culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust: Corona
failed to disclose to the public his Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth as
required under Section 17, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution.
-
7/28/2019 Justice Corona Position Paper
2/4
3. Culpable violations of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust: Corona
failed to meet and observe the stringent standards under Art. VIII, Section 7 (3) of the
Constitution that provides that [a] member of the judiciary must be a person of
proven competence, integrity, probity, and independence in allowing the Supreme
Court to act on mere letters filed by a counsel which caused the issuance of flip-
flopping decisions in final and executory cases; in creating an excessive entanglementwith Mrs. Arroyo through her appointment of his wife to office; and in discussing
with litigants cases pending before the Supreme Court.
4. Betrayal of public trust and/or culpable violation of the Constitution: The
Supreme Court blatantly disregarded the principle of separation of powers by issuing
a status quo ante order against the House of Representatives in the case concerning
the impeachment of then Ombudsman Merceditas Navarro-Gutierrez.
5. Culpable violations of the Constitution: Through wanton arbitrariness and
partiality in consistently disregarding the principle of res judicata and in deciding in
favor of gerrymandering in the cases involving the 16 newly created cities and thepromotion of Dinagat Island into a province.
6. Betrayal of public trust: Corona arrogated unto himself, and to a committee
he created, the authority and jurisdiction to improperly investigate an alleged erring
member of the Supreme Court for the purpose of exculpating him. Such authority and
jurisdiction is properly reposed by the Constitution in the House of Representatives
via impeachment.
7. Betrayal of public trust: Through partiality in granting a temporary
restraining order (TRO) in favour of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and
her husband Jose Miguel Arroyo in order to give them an opportunity to escape
prosecution and to frustrate the ends of justice, and in distorting the Supreme Court
decision on the effectivity of the TRO in view of a clear failure to comply with the
conditions of the Supreme Courts own TRO.
8. Betrayal of public trust and/or graft and corruption: Corona failed and
refused to account for the Judiciary Development Fund (JDF) and Special Allowance
for the Judiciary (SAJ) collections.
Considering these facts presented, it is ridiculous for me to conclude on
something that is still on going. Personally discussing the impeachment proceedingsof Chief Justice Corona is just like playing my fingers on murky water. I might just
confuse myself more about the issues. It is critical as far as my knowledge and
competencies as of this moment. However, as a graduate of Broadcast
Communication as my pre law, I have what vantage point for me to take.
Section 4 of the 1987 constitution states that No law shall be passed
abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the
people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.
This section is not just a guide but an attribute to the Filipinos of what can they
express. In this country, where Media is considered as a fourth estate, airing or
publishing an impeachment case is like serving caviar instead of tuyo. You dont getthis scenario everyday. Its a feast of cameras and a parade of media men all focused
-
7/28/2019 Justice Corona Position Paper
3/4
in this Topsy - Turvy situation. What do these media networks do is provide what the
people want to see. Yes, it is convenient to watch the impeachment in the comfort of
your home, but are we really getting what we want to know or are we getting what the
media would want us to know? Is the media really biased in presenting the corona
impeachment?
On February 1, 2012, Iloilo representative and lead prosecutor Representative
Niel Tupas appeared in Hot Copy, a morning show hosted by Karen Davila in ANC
Channel, a subsidiary network of ABS CBN. This prosecuting lawyer made gave brief
discussions about the impeachment and at the same time discussed some points and
his views about the case. There was also one time when Karen Davila said that she is
somehow close with Tupas wife and that they were even classmates. The Code of
Professional Responsibility under Rule 13.02 states that a lawyer shall not make
public statements in the media regarding a pending case tending to arouse public
opinion for or a against a party. What just Tupas did is a total violation of the said
rule. Somehow his words during the interview may prevent or obstruct the
impeachment proceeding, Though the following day the defense was asked to give anopinion, I still find it unethical in a sense that, those who have first watched Tupas
interview could have accepted it as true. It would be fair if both of them were invited
on the same date so that whenever there will be a question, either side can answer
right away. However, words are spreading that the reason why ABS CBN somehow
favors the prosecution is because of one of their talents is the sister of the President -
Kris Aquino. Though these are merely allegations but we cannot deny the fact that
what just happened in Hot Copy was a total favour to give more highlight to the
prosecution.
For the print media, what I liked reading is the Inquirer. Reading an inquirer
newspaper is totally different from what you watch from ABS CBN. Its style is strong
to the point that it is somehow against to almost anything. However, during this
impeachment, most of the articles were written somehow with a slant on Corona. On
January 17, 2012, an article written by Marlon Ramos, goes with the title: Defense to
block attempts to compel Corona kin to appear on witness stand. This title has a
positive effect on readers and probably for those people who are Coronas side, this is
a good news to them. This story was reported on screen by Henry Omaga Diaz and
was published by ABS CBN in their website. However, what the website said about
what happened was, Corona relatives eyed as prosecution witnesses. For this title, a
person who is in favor of Coronas removal from office will find this as a good news.
The social network, a growing industry for media consumers, is a source of all
information about the case. Unfortunately, people post blogs, statuses, tweets, and we
are not sure how the truthfulness of their claim. We can never be sure about the
source of their emotions for the impeachment case and I find it really dangerous is
that, an emotion of one can be passed along to his or her friends. Its a network. It will
reach massively.
The media has its own biases. It cannot deny that fact. It is a rule among these
media groups to determine what they want their consumers to absorb. The media
consumers are just like sponges that siphon anything that comes. The best thing to do
is to have an image without any bias. We are all human, and we do have our own
-
7/28/2019 Justice Corona Position Paper
4/4
biases but for the case of people who work in media what is required for them is to
present themselves as neutral.
The impeachment case is something that should be presented to people as
somehow will educate them about the government and about their rights. Its is not
for entertainment because if thats what they really wanted, they could have justplayed all Manny Pacquiao matches.
As for us people, we need to be critical with what we see. We cannot always
rely with what we see on TV alone. We have to check all other sources. We have to
educate ourselves and shape opinions based on what we learned and not of what we
heard. We do not have to be that intelligent for us to understand that we are being
abused.
Its media versus free trials. A study conducted by Charles Montado of
California State University shows that a televised trial has a higher percentage of
conviction as compare to those who have none. This just means that Media can stir uppeoples emotions and in the country, most of the time it works.
Lastly, it is ideal that the government is considering the right for a speedy and
impartial trial. However, even if I havent learned the rules yet, all activities done in
the court should always comply with existing laws. The prosecution cannot be
desperate enough to the point that they present things which are not required from
them.
All I fear as of this moment, as the trial continues, is probably a walkout from the
prosecution and through media, they will encourage viewers or listener to gather and
make protest. I believe that it defeats the propose of the law which we, ourselves,
created. What the men cannot punish here will still be punished elsewhere.