With 19 votes cast so far, 16 members of the Senate sitting as the impeachment court have convicted Chief Justice Renato Corona for betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of the Philippine Constitution.
The following senators voted to convict Corona:
Edgardo Angara
Alan Peter Cayetano
Pia Cayetano
Franklin Drilon
Francis Escudero
Edgardo Angara
Alan Peter Cayetano
Pia Cayetano
Franklin Drilon
Francis Escudero
Jinggoy Estrada
Teofisto Guingona III
Gregorio Honasan II
Panfilo Lacson
Lito Lapid
Loren Legarda
Sergio Osmeña III
Francis Pangilinan
Aqulino "Koko" Pimentel III
Ralph Recto
Ramon Bong Revilla Jr.
Sergio Osmeña III
Francis Pangilinan
Aqulino "Koko" Pimentel III
Ralph Recto
Ramon Bong Revilla Jr.
Meanwhile, the following lawmakers voted to acquit the chief justice:
Joker Arroyo
Miriam Defensor-Santiago
Ferdinand Marcos Jr.
Ferdinand Marcos Jr.
As of posting time, other senators have yet to cast their votes: Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, Vicente Sotto III, Antonio Trillanes IV and Manuel Villar.
The verdict came at the end of a grueling five-month trial that captivated the nation, with
The verdict came at the end of a grueling five-month trial that captivated the nation, with
scenes of dramatic flare-ups and surprising revelations spicing up weekday television
viewing and Internet livestreaming for media watchers.
Corona’s conviction is likely to be seen as a triumph for President Benigno
Aquino III, who has never fully recognized his appointment as chief justice by then-
President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo a few weeks before she stepped down in 2010.
Aquino’s allies at the lower house impeached Corona in December last year by virtue
of Section 3 (1), Article XI in the 1987 Constitution, which provides that the House of
Representatives shall have the exclusive power to initiate all cases of impeachment. A
total of 188 legislators signed the articles of impeachment against Corona.
The case was immediately transmitted to the Senate, which has the sole power to try and
decide all cases of impeachment under Section 3 (6) of the Constitution. A two-thirds
vote from the Senate, in this case 16 out of its 23 members, is needed to convict any
impeachable official.
According to the charter, “judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further
than removal from office and disqualification to hold any office under the Republic of the
Philippines.”
Background on the senator-judges
The defense panel had earlier asked Drilon and Angara to inhibit from the trial, citing
bias and alleged conflict of interest, but both senators refused to heed the request.
Drilon, Pangilinan, Recto, and Guingona are members of the administration's Liberal
Party, which is headed by Aquino.
Osmeña and Escudero, although independent, are also known supporters of the
administration. On the other hand, Trillanes owes his freedom to the President for
granting him amnesty and obtained his freedom from years of detention.
The terms of Angara, Arroyo, Lacson, Pangilinan, and Villar are also expiring next year,
but they cannot seek reelection as they are already on their second terms.
Escudero, Legarda, Pimentel, Trillanes, Cayetano, and Honasan are expected to seek re-
election next year, when their terms expire.
(Click here to see the personalities involved in the impeachment trial)
The impeachment complaint
The House of Representatives impeached Corona last December 12 for alleged graft and
corruption, culpable violation of the Constitution, and betrayal of public trust.
The Articles of Impeachment were transmitted the following day to the Senate, which
convened as an impeachment court on December 14.
The impeachment trial began last January 16, when the Senate began hearing evidence on
the following Articles of Impeachment:
Article I: Partiality of Corona to Mrs. Arroyo in Supreme Court decisions
Article II: Non-disclosure of properties in Corona’s statements of assets, liabilities and
net worth or SALN
Article III: Lack of probity, integrity, and independence in the FASAP vs. PAL case
Article IV: Irregularities in the issuance of the status quo ante order on the impeachment
proceedings of former Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez
Article V: Gerrymandering in the creation of 16 new cities and the declaration of Dinagat
Island as a province)
Article VI: Improper investigation of Associate Justice Mariano del Castillo’s plagiarism
case
Article VII: Irregularities in the issuance of a temporary restraining order for Mrs. Arroyo
during her attempt to leave the country last November
Article VIII: Failure and refusal to account for the Judiciary Development Fund and
Special Allowance for the Judiciary
However, the prosecution team later decided to rest its case and drop Articles I, IV, V,
VI, and VIII.
According to the Senate impeachment rules, the senators shall vote on each of the
Articles of Impeachment. If the vote of two-thirds of all the members is sustained on any
of the articles, then the accused shall be convicted.
Corona’s properties: From 45 to 21 to five
Much of the trial revolved around Article II, which accuses Corona of failing to publicly
and properly disclose the extent of his assets in his SALN.
The prosecutors asked the Senate to subpoena members of the Corona family in
connection with 45 pieces of real estate in the cities of Makati, Parañaque, Marikina,
Taguig, and in Quezon City.
However, the prosecution team later denied claiming that Corona owned 45 properties,
saying the figure was merely based on a list provided by the Land Registration Authority.
In the formal offer of evidence, the prosecution accused Corona of owning 21 properties,
and said many of these are not declared in his SALN.
But the defense team and Corona maintained that he only owns five properties, and all
are declared in his SALN. His lawyers also presented witnesses to prove that the other 15
properties have been sold or are actually owned by other people.
The 'small lady' and Corona's bank accounts
The prosecution team also asked the Senate to subpoena documentary evidence in
connection with Corona's alleged undeclared dollar accounts.
They made the request after Mindoro Rep. Reynaldo Umali, one of the prosecutors,
claimed that a “small lady” handed over records from the Philippine Savings Bank
(PSBank) that supposedly showed Corona having $700,000 in deposits.
However, the manager of PSBank-Katipunan said the records were fake and did not
come from them. She also revealed that Quezon City Rep. Jorge Banal, a member of the
prosecution’s secretariat, had asked for her help in authenticating the same documents.
The controversy prompted PSBank to seek the help of the high court in preventing the
Senate from examining the dollar accounts, citing Republic Act 6426 or the Foreign
Currency Deposit Act. The SC issued a temporary restraining order that the Senate voted
to follow, putting a lid on Corona’s dollar records.
Ombudsman's testimony
When the trial resumed this month after the congressional recess, the issue on the dollar
accounts was revived when Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales asked the chief justice
to respond to complaints from civil society groups and explain how he managed to
accumulate millions of dollars despite his modest government salary.
Saying the move was part of a well-orchestrated plan to discredit Corona, defense
lawyers asked the Senate to summon Morales to the witness stand. The move appears
to have backfired, with Morales presenting a report from the Anti-Money Laundering
Council that showed at least $10 million in transactional balances in 82 dollar accounts of
Corona.
Last week, Corona branded the Ombudsman a liar when he finally took the witness stand,
but he did admit having four dollar accounts containing around $2.4 million. He said
the money came from dollar investments that grew over the years, and explained that he
did not declare the cash in his SALN because it is covered by the secrecy clause in the
Foreign Currency Deposit Act.
Corona also admitted that he has P80 million in three peso accounts, which he also did
not declare because they were commingled funds from his mother and his children.
Copies of Corona’s SALNs from 2003 to 2011 showed that he only declared between
P2.5 million to P3.5 million in cash assets.
(Click here for a summary of the evidence presented during the impeachment trial)
Drama in the courtroom
For most viewers, however, the trial will be remembered for its dramatic scenes. And no
doubt, many of them will feature Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago, whose tirades often
livened up the boring proceedings.
There was Harvey Keh of the Kaya Natin! Movement, whom she admonished for
giving Enrile an envelope containing Corona's alleged bank records from unverified and
anonymous sources.
Santiago also had a run-in with Vitaliano Aguirre II, a former private prosecutor, who
covered his ears in full view of the public while the senator was speaking at the trial.
And then there was the side show involving the long-running conflict between Corona's
wife Cristina and her relatives on the Basa side. The family feud came to public attention
after the chief justice declared an P11-million loan from the Basa Guidote Enterprises Inc
in his SALN.
Last week, the Corona family was seen on live television reconciling with the Basa in a
tearful display of hugs and kisses.
But the most controversial scene in the trial was the surprising sight of Corona abruptly
rising from the witness stand and walking out of the Senate session hall without the
court's permission after delivering his three-hour testimony last week.
Corona’s lawyers attributed the hasty departure to a bout of hypoglycemia, and the chief
justice was brought to the Medical City after his appearance at the Senate.
Three days later, Corona returned and apologized to the Senate, and the defense team
rested its case.
