Reply to Opposition to Request Subpoena Feb2 P250

8/3/2019 Reply to Opposition to Request Subpoena Feb2 P250

1/6

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINESCONGRESS OF THE PHILIPPINES

SENATE

SIDING AS THE IMPEACHMENT COURT

IN THE MADER OF THE

IMPEACHMENT OF RENATO C.

CORONA AS CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE

SUPREME COURT OF THEPHILIPPINES,

, ~

i:i, , ' ',:, ' ( , ~ i ; , n : " l

(:jfflfB of t h c , , ! ~ ' ~ n f ' t ~ r ~

'12 FEB -2 P 2 :sO

CASE NO. 002-2011

REPRESENTATIVES N IH C. TUPAS,JR., JOSEPH EMILIO A. ABAYA,LORENZO R. TANADA, III,REYNALDO V. UMAlI, ARLENE J.BAG-AO (other complainantscomprising one third (1/3) of the

total Members of the House of

Representatives as are indicatedbelow.)

x -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- x

REPLY(To The Opposition to th e Request for Issuance of Subpoenae)

The HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, through its PROSECUTORS, respectfully

submits the instant Comment on the Opposition to the Request fo r Issuance of

Subpoenae and respectfully states:


2/6

1. On 31 January 2012, the Prosecutors filed a Request fo r Subpoenae to the

Bank of the Philippine Islands (BPI) requesting the said bank to produce documents

relating to the bank accounts of Renato C. Corona. However, due to inadvertence, the

account number was indicated as 1443-8030-61 instead of 1445-8030-61. Thus, on 01

February 2012, the Prosecutors filed a Manifestation correcting the said error and

attaching Bank of the Philippine Islands Check Nos. 0179713 and 0179712 issued to Fort

Bonifacio Development Corporation as payment fo r the acquired property of

respondent in Bonifacio Ridge which he failed to truthfully and honestly declare in his

Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN).l

2. Likewise, on 31 January 2012, the Prosecutors filed a Request fo r

Subpoena to the PS Bank requesting the said bank to produce documents relating to the

bank accounts of Renato C. Corona. He won Php 1 Million in the PSBank Monthly

Millions Raffle Promo as listed in the Official List of Winners as of March 13, 2008.2

3. On 1 February 2012, the Defense filed an Opposition to the Request fo r

Subpoenae to the BPI alleging that the bank account number did no t correspond to

Exhibit VVV and VVV_1.3 Further, the Opposition stated that the testimony of the

person named in the request and the documents relating to the bank accounts were

1 Bank of the Philippine Islands Check Nos. 0179713 and 0179712 issued to Fort Bonifacio DevelopmentCorporation were also previously marked as Exhibits VVVand VVV-l.

2 The Official List of Winners as of March 3, 2008 was attached to th e 31 January 2012 Request for Subpoena and is

available at http:((psbank.com.ph(psbank(globaI!UserFiles(File(MM%20Mar%20Raffle%20Winners CORP.pdf(last accessed 31 January 2012).

3 This was already corrected by the Manifestation filed by the Prosecutors on 01 February 2012 indicating thecorrect bank account number as 1445-8030-61 attaching therewith Marked Exhibits VVV and VVV-1 which werealready part of the records of the case.


3/6

being introduced to prove the allegations in paragraph 2.4 of the Impeachment

Complaint and as such, were irrelevant and immaterial.

4. On 1 February 2012, the Defense also filed an Opposition to the Request

for Subpoenae to the PSBank stating that the requested documents were not pre-

marked and have not been mentioned in the proceeding, that the request was a fishing

expedition fo r evidence that is obviously irrelevant and immaterial and raising the same

argument that the testimony and documents requested were being introduced to prove

the allegations in paragraph 2.4 of the Impeachment Complaint and as such, were

irrelevant and immaterial.

5. Respondent's argument that the bank accounts were irrelevant,

immaterial and are being intended by the Prosecutors to prove the allegations

contained in paragraph 2.4 has no basis.

6. It bears emphasis that paragraph 2.2 of the Impeachment Complaint

charges respondent with failure to disclose to the public his SALN. Further, paragraph

2.3 of the Impeachment Complaint charges the respondent with failure to include some

properties in his declaration of assets, liabilities, and net worth in violation of the anti-

graft and corrupt practices act.

7. The gravamen of the charges in paragraphs 2.2 and 2.3 goes far beyond a

mere failure on the part of Corona to mechanically file or disclose his SALN. His duty to

disclose his SALN to the public necessarily implies a duty to be truthful. honest. and

accurate in the sworn contents thereof (this is why the law requires the SALN to be


4/6

under oath). Corona's disclosure of a false. dishonest. and incomplete SALN is as much

a betrayal of public trust as his failure to disclose his SALN. Simply put, the "disclosure"

contemplated by la w is disclosure of a SALN that is true. honest and accurate.

Anything less would be a useless. futile exercise; make a mockery of the SALN

requirement; and be tantamount to a culpable violation of the constitution and betrayal

of the public trust.

8. The bank accounts of the respondent are considered as personal

properties which are required to be properly and truthfully declared in the SALN. To be

more specific, his SALN fo r the years 2002 to 2010 show that he declared as personal

properties in the form of cash and investments the following amounts:

Php2,700,000.00,

Php2,500,000.00,

Php3,300,000.00,

Php2,500,000.00,

Php3,300,000.00,

Php2,500,000.00,

Php3,300,000.00,

Php2,500,000.00,

Php3,500,000.00, respectively. As Chief Magistrate, his bank accounts, including his

accounts in BPI and PSBank which the Prosecutors have requested to be issued

5ubpoenae, must be shown to have been correctly reflected in his SALN and are

therefore relevant and material to Article II.

9. There is likewise no basis to state that the Requests were fishing

expeditions. Both requests fo r subpoenae pertain to specific bank accounts. To

emphasize, Bank Account Number 1445-8030-61 was made known to the Prosecutors

by virtue of Exhibits VVV and VVV-1 which were already part of the records of the case.

As regards the PSBank account, the same appears in the website of PSBank itself

indicating that respondent indeed has an account with the said bank.


5/6

9.11n fact, it was already on record that tw o BPI checks which were issued to pay

installments on the Bellagio unit (Exhibits CCCC and CCCC-1) were in the amounts

of P- 5,000,000.00 each, or ach check being double the amount of respondent's

disclosed cash in his SALN fo r 2009. It is bu t proper to verify this discrepancy and

find ou t whether that account had even more than the P- 10,000,000.00 in cash

used to pay fo r the said unit.

10. In fine, the inquiry in these bank accounts will bolster the allegation that

respondent failed to truthfully and honestly declare his properties in his SALN which is

the core allegation in Article II. It will show that respondent has violated the very spirit

and the letter of the SALN requirement. Such proof is, therefore, very material and

relevant.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed that this Honorable

Court GRANTthe request for subpoenae to Bank of the Philippine Islands and PS Bank.

Other just and equitable reliefs are likewise prayed for.

Pasay City, Manila. 02 February 2012.


6/6

By:

THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESRepublic of the Philippines

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESPROSECUTORS

/}7

Copy Furnished (By Personal Service):

Justice Serafin R. Cuevas (Ret.) et al.Counsel for Respondent Chief Justice Renato CoronaSuite 1902 Security Bank Centre6776 Ayala AvenueMakati City, Philippines 1226

Reply to Opposition to Request Subpoena Feb2 P250

Documents

Transcript of Reply to Opposition to Request Subpoena Feb2 P250