March 13, 2012
To Take A Stand
By Oscar P. Lagman
BusinessWorld
By Oscar P. Lagman
BusinessWorld
I heard Chief Justice Renato Corona tell Arnold Clavio during the latter’s TV program Unang Hirit, early morning of Wednesday last week that he decided to close his three bank accounts in PSBank Katipunan branch when some depositors of the branch who have been his friends and neighbors for over 40 years told him that the branch manager, Annabelle Tiongson, had been discussing his accounts with some people.
“We lost trust in the bank. We believe that the leak came from there. If you were faced with that situation, I’m sure you would have done the same because you already lost trust in the bank.” I heard the Chief Justice tell Noli de Castro more or less the same thing during the latter’s “Magandang Umaga, Bayan” radio program the following day.
As usual, Corona raises a number of perplexing questions whenever he opens his loose mouth. First, if he had lost trust in the bank, why did he re-deposit in his name in the same PSBank branch still managed by the supposedly talkative Tiongson the money he withdrew from those three accounts? In a hearing in late February, I heard PSBank president Pascual Garcia III say, in answer to Senator Franklin Drilon’s question that the money Corona had withdrawn from his three accounts has been re-deposited in the same bank branch of PSBank under Corona’s name. Secondly, why did he maintain his dollar deposits, which according to Senator Jinggoy Estrada amount to $700 K, in the same bank that has betrayed his trust? PSBank’s Garcia, in answer to Presiding Officer Juan Enrile question, confirmed the existence of those dollar accounts.
His legal counsels, Tranquil Salvador and Rico Paolo Quicho, have said that the money he withdrew from this three accounts in PSBank was not his but money of Basa-Guidote Enterprises, Inc. that is why he didn’t disclose it in his SALN. If it was not his, why was it deposited in his name? If it was BGEI’s money that was talked about, why did he lose trust in PSBank? After all, corporations make public through their published statement of assets and liabilities the amount of cash they have in the bank.
If the money, in fact, was that of Corona, why did he lose his trust in the bank if an officer of the bank discussed the amount with other people? As he has said a number of times, he comes from a family of no ordinary means and that he had earned a considerable sum as a top executive in the private sector. “They are trying to picture me as if I had nothing when I entered government. That’s not true because I was a top executive in the private sector for half of my entire career. So, I was able to save. And just like my wife, I also didn’t come from an ordinary family,” he said. His huge deposit in a bank would substantiate his claim that he is a person of no ordinary means. He should be happy that people are getting to know about his financial status without his flaunting his wealth. Yet, he felt betrayed by the bank.
“Falsus in umum, falsus in omnibus” — false in one thing, false in everything. Senator Miriam Santiago cited that legal maxim when the prosecutors were suspected of presenting a falsified specimen signature card of Corona. She implied they could also be lying about the rest of their allegations against Corona. Could Corona be also lying about his assets and liabilities and his participation in the deliberations of the members of the Supreme Court as he lief ab out his loss of trust in PSBank?
Corona also claimed he was the one who blocked the P10-billion compensation which the Cojuangcos, owners of Hacienda Luisita, demand the government before the agricultural land blocked that and for them to get that amount, they would have to remove me. That’s the truth. That is the root cause of this impeachment,” he declared.
That declaration means he controls the Supreme Court. What Corona decides, at least seven associate justice abide by, or to use a word often heard in the ongoing impeachment trial, submit to. That declaration gives credence to the change that Supreme Court ruling favoring Gloria Arroyo are at his promptings, may his dictates. He rushed back from abroad to get Supreme Court to issue a temporary restraining order against Justice Secretary Leila de Lima’s hold departure order on Gloria Arroyo. “So ordered,” Corona must have told eight associate justices.
When Associate Justice Lourdes Sereno objected to the execution of the TRO because not all conditions of the TRO had been complied with, seven associate justices voted to rule it effective immediately, in effect lifting de Lima’s HDO on Gloria Arroyo, giving the latter the GO signal to leave the country. Corona must have told the seven associate justices, “So ordered.”
This is most probably the reason why lead defense counsel Serafin Cuevas does not want to place Corona on the witness stand — Corona has a tendency to put his foot in his loose mouth as demonstrated in his dialogue with TV anchormen. Cuevas said, “I believe this is not good because the members of the Impeachment Court can examine him on all angles.” That is a lame excuse. After all, the basic charge against Corona is that he is not morally fit to continue to be the chief justice of the Supreme Court.
About the fear that senators might show disrespect to Corona, there is no reason to fear that. The senators were deferential to prosecution witnesses Secretary de Lima and BIR Commissioner Kim Henares and gentle to Supreme Court Clerk of Court Enriqueta Esguerra-Vidal. Even Senator Santiago,usually hostile and arrogant towards prosecutors and their witnesses, was subdued when de Lima and Henares testified. Santiago might event outshine Cuevas in the defense of Corona as she had done in denigrating the prosecution panel.
No comments:
Post a Comment