The hearings started late again. The last, or so we thought to arrive was Senator-Judge Loren Legarda. She must totally hate going to the hearings covered in that burgundy robe. She can’t show her collection of clothes. Hahahahaha.

Does that Sergeant at Arms really have to speak everyday? Can’t they just distribute his exact speech everyday? He sounds more ominous than the Presiding Judge.

Soon after, Senator-Judge Lito Lapid arrived almost embarrassed by being the last one to arrive. In attendance in the hearings were Ernesto Maceda, Kit Tatad, Marichu Vera-Perez, Loly Mara and so many others. The tide must really be changing. You could see a lot of parties with different colors now sitting up to witness the daily offerings of Barnum and Bailey. The circus has really come to town!

Sliding into place immediately was Prosecutor Georgidi Agga-Bao immediately went into her soliloquy of what a defendant should be saying. She even prepared her Power Point presentation to back her up. In Article III of the impeachment complaint, prosecutors aim to show that Corona committed culpable violations of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust for his alleged role in the reversal by the Supreme Court of several controversial decisions.

Immediately, she was cut to pieces by the Presiding Judge, Juan Ponce Enrile. He asked as to how they court could swear in or even ask question of a power point. No way for the presentation.

She was presenting evidences to back up the charges on Article Three. The prosecution panel was very sure that this “catch-all” charge would be their strongest. No way! The Presiding Judge was not going to be easy on them.

The prosecution lawyer appeared stumped for a moment at the start of their presentation of Article III of the impeachment charges against Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona when JPE asked them to point to a provision in the Constitution that shows that the Chief Justice has control over the entire tribunal.

However, as prosecutors introduced the charges, Enrile immediately asked if the Chief Justice exercised control and supervision over all 15 Supreme Court justices.

Enrile: Does Corona have power over entire Supreme Court? …… the Chief Justice has power and control over the members of the Supreme Court?” Enrile asked prosecutors.

To this, Prosecutor Georgidi Agga-Bao said that as Chief Justice, Corona “exercised influence” over the other members of the tribunal. The issue may be critical to proving Article III in that prosecutors must prove that Corona exercised whatever powers he had as Chief Justice to make the tribunal reverse its earlier rulings.

Agga-Bao said that there were certain provisions in the administrative code that gave the Chief Justice certain powers. However, Enrile pointed out that these powers were merely administrative.

Enrile directed the prosecution panel to submit a memorandum to the court explaining the extent of the powers of the Chief Justice “to give a guide to members of the court whether indeed the Chief Justice has the power of control and supervision over the SC.”

The witness from Palea, who’s name escapes me, did nothing but verify papers exchanged between Palea (The Philippine Air Lines Employees Association) and Supreme Court decisions. His angst and frustration at the Supreme Court and hsi personal animosity to the Chief Justice was so obvious. He even failed to mention that there was never a decision from the Chief Justice on this case but an order to return the case to the Second Division of the SC for further comment.

This was just the beginning of a truly fun-filled hearing.The great promise of the Prosecution panel, Prosecutor Rudy Farinas came next. It will be recalled that he seemed to enjoy his moment of stardom the day previous in the hearings. This was not going to be a repeat!

Cong. Rodolfo Farinas dropped the biggest bombshell at the impeachment trial of Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona today when he declared that the impeachment complaint signed by most of the members of the House of Representatives was POORLY CRAFTED. (As Ingkay Garutay would say, Hihihihihi)

Farinas was in the middle of a verbal tussle with Presiding Officer Juan Ponce Enrile when Senator-Judge Jinggoy Estrada took the floor and pointedly asked Farinas if he had signed the impeachment complaint.

He admitted he had not signed the impeachment complaint.

Asked why he had not signed the complaint even though he was now prosecuting the same case, Farinas simply said: “Mabagal ako bumasa.”

“Ang mga kasama ko kasi sa kongreso, puro speed reader iyan,” Farinas said, eliciting snickers from the gallery. Farinas said that by the time he had finished reading the impeachment complaint, “sobra na (ang signatories.)”

“Hindi na kailangan ang pirma ko,” Farinas added. A hundred and eighty eight congressmen had signed the impeachment complaint, more than enough to have the complaint transmitted to the Senate. After a brief pause, he added: “At medyo masama rin ang pagkakagawa ng kaunti. Inaamin ko,” Farinas said.

The admission broke the ice and drew laughter from the gallery and from the Senator-Judges. The gallery was uncontrollable. Even the stern Presiding Judge could not help but snicker at this comment. It is not yet clear how Farinas’ colleagues in the prosecution would feel about his admission. The boy wonder was threading on dangerous grounds with the prosecution Panel itself.

Kung confession ito, acquitted na si SCCJ. Hahaha.

Noteworthy:
FARINAS: If you are accused of rape, you can be convicted of murder.
ENRILE: Hindi ko na alam anong school mo kinuha yan…

Hahahahaha, he should know what he is talking about. (If you know what I mean.)

Late in the evening, in a TV interview. Lead prosecutor Niel Tupaz was noted whining about Farinas’ comment. After all, Tupaz himself crafted the complaint himself. Hahahahahaha. Sampal na naman galing pa man din sa kakampi nya.

However, there are few points here that we may be missing. Farinas said a lot. Firstly, that the Verified Complaint was NOT good. That if the charges were thrown out, the house fully INTENDS to refile another one next year! In a round-about way is he advancing information for us. Now, was he warning us or threatening us? JPE didn’t buy his argument and banged the gavel with a big NO!

I believe that Farinas should have stuck to his guns and not involved himself with the prosecution panel. he might have gotten extra boy scout points. Points, he sorely misses now.

JPE called for a one minute break…..a long one minute. It lasted for thirty-minutes. Nakakapagtaka lang, tuwing babalik ang mga Senador, parang lahat sila ay nagaalis ng tinga nila. Bakit kaya? Wala bang toothpick ang Senado?

As the trial resumed, JPE was informed that the Defense was not ready to cross examine because of the voluminous evidences being presented and that they had to examine all of them. This was granted.

The Prosecution meanwhile threw back the onus on the Court by saying they no longer had any witnesses ready because the Court have not yet acted on their subpeoneas. The presiding Judge clarified that they were still studying this because of the ramifications these had on the separation of powers and the Bank Secrecy Law.

The session was terminated until tomorrow! Lead Prosecutor, Niel Tupaz disappeared like lightning though media people wanted to speak with him to rect to Farinas’ statement. Naglaho parang bula! hahahahaha

What a day it has been! A friend, Eggay says that he felt he was in a Comedy Bar. I totally agree. All we did was laugh at the long exchange between the Ilocos Congressman and the Ilocano Presiding Judge. Obviously, the Ilokano connection was broken at that instant.

Akbayan Party today lambasted Chief Justice Renato Corona’s filing of an urgent petition before the Supreme Court asking for certiorari and prohibition with prayer for an immediate issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) and a writ for preliminary injunction which, among other things, would prevent officers of the Bank of the Philippine Islands (BPI) and Philippine Savings Bank (PS Bank) from giving testimonies and submitting Corona’s bank documents before the Senate, sitting as the Impeachment Court.

Akbayan said Corona’s petition is virtually seeking to transform the high tribunal into a refuge for plunderers, liars, and crooks.

“Should the SC decide to tackle the petition, it would not be for the rule of law or constitutional order but to ensure honor among thieves and guarantee that Corona remains scot free and to prevent him from being removed,” Akbayan Spokesperson Risa Hontiveros said.

According to Hontiveros, “Corona is turning to the high tribunal to whitewash his crimes.”

“He will once again use what good reputation is left in the institution to provide him with the cover from the long line of evidence and witnesses which will convict him for high crimes against the people,” Hontiveros said.

Hontiveros also slammed Corona for “abandoning the impeachment trial” and resorting to tactics that seemed to be “lifted from Arroyo’s game plan to resort to shortcuts and evade prosecution”.

“Arroyo also asked for a TRO from the high court just to evade accountability. Corona is certainly mimicking the actions of his political patron on how to twist the law and use it for their own convenience,” Hontiveros said.

“Sabi dati ni Corona, dapat i-uphold ang rule of law. Sabi rin niya, handa niyang harapin ang mga paratang laban sa kaniya. Ngayon, mismong impeachment process na isang constitutional at legal na paraan para harapin ang kanyang kaso ang kaniyang tinatalikuran,” Hontiveros added.

“Corona Defense team can’t transform guilt into innocence”

Hontiveros also chided the “stonewalling” being committed by the defense lawyers of Corona to prevent the receiving of evidence pertaining to the high court’s flip-flop decision on the FASAP case and in deferring the action on the subpoena of the BPI and PS Bank bank documents and testimonies from the bank officers.

The former partylist lawmaker said that it is becoming clear that the defense is “becoming desperate in trying to stave off the barrage of evidence being presented against their client.

“They are desperate. This proves that even if you have the best legal minds such as former justices, law deans, and seasoned litigators in your defense team, you can’t transform guilt into innocence with the gravity of evidence being presented,” Hontiveros said.

“Even if Corona’s defense lawyers are perceived as gods inside the courts, they cannot acquit him. They cannot transform water into wine,” Hontiveros concluded.

Corona today filed a 39-page urgent petition for certiorari and prohibition. The urgent petition wants the High Court to issue a TRO to enjoin the following:

• proceedings before the impeachment court
• implementation of the court’s Feb 6, 2012 resolution
• officers and representatives of BPI and PSBank from testifying and submitting documents on petitioner’s or his family’s bank accounts
• the presentation, reception and admission of evidence on paragraphs 2.3 and 2.4 of the impeachment complaint

Dear Mr. Senate President:

This is to respectfully and humbly propose the procedure to be followed on the defense counsel’s pending motion for reconsideration. I refer to this Court’s resolution yesterday, which approved the prosecution’s request for subpoena to certain bank officials.

At today’s hearing, counsel from both panels should be allowed to argue the motion for reconsideration for not more than one hour for each side, unless the Senate orders otherwise. (Impeachment Rules, Rule 5.)

After this debate, the Senate President could then give time for each panel to submit its written memorandum. After both memoranda have been filed, then the Court could go into closed session (caucus) to resolve the pending motion. If necessary, I shall, despite ill health, attend this caucus, if give advance notice of at least three hours.

Yesterday, I watched the live telecast of the proceedings. I noticed that one senator stated that the Rules allow s a senator to file a motion for reconsideration. There is no such provision in our Impeachment Rules. Perhaps what he referred to were the Senate Rules, which provides that any senator who voted with the majority may move for reconsideration within the next two session days. (Rule 33). The only time that the Impeachment Rules allow the Senate Rules to apply suppletorily is under Rule 6, which does not concern a motion for reconsideration filed by counsel.

In any event, if it is your judgment that only a senator can file a motion for reconsideration, then I respectfully request that this letter should be considered, ex abundanti cautela, as a motion for reconsideration from a senator-judge, on the following grounds:

1. It appears that the subpoena would violate this Court’s own ruling that evidence shall NOT be allowed on ill-gotten wealth. (Complaint, Art. 2, para. 2.4.) Since 2.4 is the only paragraph that specifically mentions “bank deposits,” any requests for subpoena concerning any bank deposits should be rejected.

2. It appears that the Court’s resolution allowing subpoena even for foreign currency deposits appears to be a direct violation of R.A. No. 6426. The Supreme Court ruled in Intengan v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 128996 (2002), that this law is violated if a foreign currency deposit is examined, except only when the depositor gives written permission. This is the only exception, and it is not present in this case.

3. Prosecution cited the 1997 case of Salvacion, 2000 case of China Banking Corp., and 2006 case of Ejercito. It appears that all three cases are off-tangent.

I cite these grounds, without prejudice to my final vote, after the motion for reconsideration has been properly debated.

Thank you.

Sincerely yours,

MIRIAM DEFENSOR SANTIAGO

The expectation was high. The air was almost too hot in the senate hall. Everyone expected fireworks on the 12th day of the hearings as the 4th week of the trials unfolded.

BIR Commissioner Kim Henares arrived at the front door of the Senate building to be met by a phalanx of media men where she coyly answered questions that showed her total disdain for the Chief Justice. It was very obvious where her bread was being buttered from Day One.

The prosecution and defense panels started entering the hall at roughly around 1:45 pm. Like the star of the day and oblivious to his own problems of being accused of owning a 45M mansion at Xavierville, Lead Prosecutor Niel Tupaz, strutted in last for the Prosecution Panel. Everyone looked at him as if to say, “Ikaw rin pala may tinatagong baho.” Not that he cared at all. He was full of smiles.

The lead Defense counsel arrived in his immaculate white suit soon after. There is really something about this man that reminds you of the old school of legal work. Low key and charming to all, he was the picture of a perfect gentleman. In my attempt to be fair and objective, I wish I could say the same for the lead prosecutor. I can’t!

The Senator-Judges came into the hall at 2:08 pm. The gavel sounded to resume the hearings at 2:10 pm. All of them tried to show the face of fairness. They did not succeed to those in the know. The hall fell silent as the prayer was led by Senator-Judge Panfilo Lacson. He promised it would be short, it was!

The lead prosecutor called in the first witness for the resumption of the trial, BIR Commissioner Kim Henares. Trying to do a fast one, Atty. Lim of the Proseuction tried to do another examination of Henares until the Presiding Judge, Juan Ponce
Enrile, promptly stopped him and clarified that it was the defense who was to question her on cross. Lim started to scream his answer but was reminded by JPE to lower his voice in so many words.

Lim argued some unintelligible answer and in his frustration JPE allowed them to go on reminding the defense that they will have their turn in any case to debunk the whole exchange. One will notice that when the presiding Judge rules on any given thing, even adversely, Cuevas immediately submits knowing full well that his day has not yet arrived. More of the gentleman in him.

The hottest exchange began when Cuevas got his turn. Asking as to the timing of the investigation of CJ’s SALN and ITR, Henares tried hard to refuse the answer by coyly saying that it was confidential since it was still under investigation. The question was really to prove whether there was a system in place to harass the CJ by initiating multiple cases against him in different venues. The question was, “Did you send an invitation to the CJ and inform him of this investigation?”

The presiding-Judge stepped in by asking direct questions addressed to her. Did you send a notice to the CJ regarding this invitation. Again, he was refused on confidentiality.

JPE demanded an answer. He got it.
Henares: “YES!”
JPE:”When did you start the investigation?”
Genaresr: “Immediately after I attended the hearing last here.”
JPE: “Why.”
Henares: “I was just doing my job.”

Such dedication to duty and with such impeccable timing, if you ask me! After a few more exchanges, she was finally released feeling happy with herself.

After Henares’ testimony a 15 minute break was called. That was the longest 15-minute break ever. It lasted for over 1 hour and half. The networks were all caught flat-footed on how to cover up the time in their coverage of the hearings. Everyone knew what was going on in what turned into a caucus for the Senator-Judges. The bank accounts of the Chief Justice was being discussed.

Meanwhile, on the various networks, more supposed learned people were filling in the time. No one, not even the Prosecution nor the Defense panel, could venture a guess as to the outcome of the caucus. The audience was quite and no complaints were heard for the length of time the Judges were absent from the hall. Only one person was strutting around like a busy-body, Niel Tupaz!

After an hour or so, Majority Floor Leader Tito Sotto stepped out alone and spoke with both the Prosecution and Defense Panel. You could see the tension in the air. This was very telling. All eyes were on them for hints of what was being discussed. The body language from both sides changed immediately. The cocky Tupaz could not control himself. The Defense were quiet and focused. It was as if Tupaz knew what the verdict would be. As soon as Sotto left the hall, Tupaz became cockier started walking the entire length of the hall and seeming to be on cloud nine talking to people who did not even want to talk to him. I noticed Kit Tatad berating him jokingly which he also took jokingly. Hahahahaha. On the
other hand, Cuevas was poker faced as usual.

After 30-minutes, the senators filed out and the Presiding Judge ordered the Majority leader to read in “Toto” the decision of the Judges on the Bank account. That was ominous enough!

The Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, ordered two Philippine banks to produce the alleged bank records of impeached Chief Justice Renato Corona.

The decision by the majority of the senator-judges, grants the request of the prosecution for the Court to subpeona officials and bank documents from the Bank of the Philippine Islands and the PSBank. 16 Senator-Judges voted for the opening of the bank accounts, said Senator-Judge Trillanes later in a TV interview.

Last Friday, February 3, the prosecution submitted a supplemental request to the Senate impeachment court which attached certain bank records, particularly an alleged US$700,000 account of Corona with PBBank Katipunan branch in Quezon City. (That’s equivalent to about P30 million at current exchange rates of around P43 to a dollar.)

The $700,000 deposited in account number 08919100037-3 is supposedly just one of 14 accounts that the Chief Justice and his wife Cristina individually and jointly own with daughter Carla Castillo and her husband Constantino III. The Court ordered the banks to present the documents on Wednesday, February 8.

Sotto said the Senate majority believes that while bank secrecy laws protect the individual from bank scrutiny, impeachment provides valid exemption to confidentiality even for foreign bank accounts.

The prosecution panel may have obtained subpoenas for the bank records of the impeached head magistrate, but it appears to be on shaky ground in pursuing the conviction in the of Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona even as the Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, granted the prosecution’s request for the banks to submit the bank documents, including his alleged foreign currency account.

The court’s appreciation of the said documents, alongside the testimonies of banks executives who have likewise been called by the Senate to testify, will come in as evidence only after the senator-judges have ruled its admissibility, presiding officer Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, said.

The Senate chief’s clarification came in the light of concerns raised by Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero on the public disclosure of the said documents, some of which had been attached to the prosecution’s petition to summon Corona’s bank records filed last Friday. Whoever released the said documents may have violated some laws and such frailty may only leave the efforts of the impeachment court as a futile exercise, Escudero said.

“I would like to explain that the resolution of this court was simply to authorize the issuance of a subpoena and whether those evidence subpoenaed are admissible evidence, given the fact that they apparently appear in violation of existing law is a question that must be resolved in due course. I hope that is understood. We are not prejudging the admissibility or non-admissibility of this evidence and this issue will come up at that point when the subpoenaed material and testimonies are offered in evidence,” Enrile said, after Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III read the seven-page resolution carrying the vote of the majority senator-judges on the prosecution’s motion.

“And all of these incidental issues will be opened for scrutiny at a proper time. The law, RA 6426 (Foreign Currency Deposit Act of the Philippines) is a very strict law, far stricter than RA 1405 (Anti-Money Laundering Act or AMLA). It imposes a penalty for its violation and nobody is immune from that penalty whether you’re a member of the court, whether you are a member of the legislature, Executive department, whether you are public or private person. That is the mandate of Section 10 of RA 6426, whether the appearance of this document is in violation of RA 6426 will impair its admissibility as an evidence is something that to be resolved at a later date. This court cannot at the moment resolve that issue. So ordered,” Enrile said.

The ruling stated that responsible officers of the Philippine Savings Bank (PSBank) and Bank of the Philippine Island (BPI), will be called to testify and produce before the impeachment court certain documents on alleged bank accounts of Corona.

“After an examination of the documents sought to be produced in both requests, this Court is of the strong view that the production of documents pertaining to the bank accounts of Chief Justice Corona should be closely related to the filing of his SALn inasmuch as the funds in the said bank accounts may be considered as his personal properties which are required to be properly and truthfully declared in the SALn.

“The Court has had to consider whether or not the issuance of the subpoena would violate existing laws on secrecy of bank deposits,” Sotto said in reading the said ruling. “However, it appears that for foreign currency bank accounts, the disclosure may be made only upon written permission of the depositor pursuant to Section 8, of RA 6426.

Sotto however read into the record that that the High Court had, on several instances, relaxed the rule on the absolute confidential nature of bank deposits, even foreign currency deposit accounts, adding that the majority views the impeachment proceedings a valid exception to the general rule on confidentiality of information on bank accounts even for foreign currency bank accounts.

Corona’s counsels hastily noted to the court that they will not leave the issue unopposed, given it’s apparent unlawfulness which he said are not among the provisions for exemptions under the laws cited by Enrile. Although initially, Cuevas sought a reconsideration of the ruling, he was told by the presiding officer that the defense can resort to other legal means since a modification of any decision by the tribunal, under the rules governing the impeachment proceedings, can only be raised by any of the senator-judge and not the lawyers of the parties in the case.

“I just want to emphasize the point that the nature of the proceedings is not conclusive as to bar a bank depositor from claiming the privilege under the bank (secrecy law),” he added. Enrile stated that it is the right of any person party to a case like this to explore all legal remedies.

The defense submitted.

Inquiring on the circumstances of the prosecution’s information on the said bank accounts, the attachments they included when they filed their petition, Escudero was told by Reps. Niel Tupas Jr. and Reynaldo Umali that a supposed anonymous tipster yielded the said documents to them last Thursday at the Senate.

Tupas said Umali handed over to him the documents, around 7:30 p.m. last Thursday in a meeting in one of the hotels located along Roxas Blvd. Umali, when sought for further explanation, claimed that a “short lady” allegedly approached him while he was on his way out of the Senate that same day, around 2:30 p.m. and gave him an envelope that turned out to have contained the said documents.

Asked by Enrile, Umali said he could no longer recall the situation then as to the exact circumstances. “Where was the envelope given?” Enrile inquired.

“I can’t exactly recall because there were several documents handed to me,” he said, adding that the source could have been one of the “concerned citizens.”

“Where did you see that short lady?” the presiding officer asked in pursuing the matter.

“It could have been your honor in the secretariat or on the way out before I rode my vehicle going to the DPWH,” Umali said, then in an apparent slip of the tongue, mentioned that the source whom he identified as a “he” just passed on the envelope
to him.

“You did not know this lady?” asked Enrile.
“Not at all your honor,” said Umali.

Wow! The tale of the envelope rises again. Everyone was laughing in disbelief.

Even Senator-Judge Panfulo Lacson was grinning as if to say, “You sly devil, you think you got us huh? I’m better at lying than you will ever be!” hahahahahaha.

The submission of the checks and the appearances of the bank managers were scheduled for this coming Wednesday. As the Court adjourned, no one was really sure if there was going to be a trial today! Hahahahahaha.

Meanwhile, in their Press Conference after, the defense scoffed at the explanation of prosecutor Rep Reynaldo Umali on how his panel received a copy of Corona’s bank records. The prosecution said they were handed to them by an “anonymous source,” whom Umali described as a “small lady.” The tip led them to ask the court to subpoena the original bank accounts.

Corona’s lawyers are still unsure as to what their next move will be. They have yet to discuss what to do with the resolution, and what to do with the mysterious woman if she is ever identified.

Salvador said Corona has the right to know why his records were released.

“May karapatan rin naman siguro ang Chief Justice na malaman bakit nagkaganoon,” said Salvador. “Kasi po siya ay nagtiwala sa isang institution.” (The Chief Justice has the right to know why things turned out that way. It’s because he trusted an institution.) In a fit of obvious frustration, Roy likened the hearing to a fairy tale. “Last week we saw Pinocchio lying on the stand. This week we have Snow White where the little old lady gave an apple, and now we have Shrek telling us the story on the stand.”

To the defense, it is clear that the prosecution is again trying to discuss Article 2.4 which delves on Corona’s alleged ill-gotten wealth. This has been taken out by the court, after the defense argued it is completely irrelevant to the case and is not specified in the impleachment complaint.

“Sabi nga ng Senado, hindi ito dapat inquisitorial,” said defense spokesperson Tranquil Salvador III. “Kailangan patotohan. Kailangan patunayan ninyo bakit inisyu iyon?” (As the Senate said, this should not be inquisitorial. They should prove it. They should be able to prove why a subpoena should be issued.) Salvador said they are also concerned about propaganda and are “unhappy” that a motion for reconsideration will not be entertained.

Nakakapagtaka lang, alam naman natin na ang PSBank ay isang subsidiary ng Metrobank. BUT with very strict conditions. The thing is, prior to the subpoena, may naglabas na “maliit na babae” ng bank records ni CJ at binigay sa prosec. Eh last week palang, the prosec was already leaking out to media about PSBank.

As the hearing was drawing to a close, laughter broke out again in the Senate Hall. Tupaz asked for additional private prosecutors again. Hahahahaha. This drew an immediate reaction from Cuevas!

CUEVAS: “An avalanche of prosecutors may need an additional 10M in appropriation to take care of them ” More laughter.
JPE: “The defense must be flattered. A phalanx of prosecutors is a raid against the defense!” Even more laughter.

Pushing each other right at the podium to reply, Prosecutor Farinas won out against Tupaz. This was the moment he was waiting for since day one of the hearings. He later quipped in a TV interview that he was now happy and didn’t have to speak ever again in the trial.

He said: “Under the law, public officials and employees shall not solicit or accept, directly or indirectly, any gift, gratuity, favor, entertainment, loan or anything of monetary value from any person in the course of their official duties or in connection with any operation being regulated by, or any transaction which may be affected by the functions of their office.”

Farinas claimed he had been telling Corona that it was inappropriate for him to accept the services of top lawyers from big law firms for free, especially firms which have pending cases before the Supreme Court and all other courts.

JPE replied that “Everyone has a right to be defended in any court.”

One thing is very obvious in all of these. Day 12 proved it! The inept Prosecution is busier thinking of dirty tactics and publicity than anything legal to stand on to support their Impeachment Verified Complaint! In the end, it showed that the complaint was truly UNVERIFIED!

reposted with permission.

I miss our daily banter and am desperately trying to get well. I also miss the impeachment trial punctuated by certain personalities who have all the charm of show window mannequins. But my health is not cooperating. However, I shall be happy to hear from you for phone interviews, if the questions are not about the merits of the case.

Over the weekend, I was normal at 120/80. This morning Monday, my blood pressure was galactic at 140/100. At that rate, if I attend the impeachment hearings, I will soon be pushing daisies at a memorial park near you.

Ironically, I have accepted a speaking engagement on Wednesday before the Philippine Society of Hypertension, and the Philippine Lipid and Atherosclerosis Society. They are holding their joint annual convention. If I can attend, I shall speak, not as an authority on medicine, but as a victim of old age. Call me the walking wounded. I would really like to go because I’m already prepared with my pick-up lines!

I refuse to succumb to illness, because I don’t want to give my political enemies the pleasure of dancing on my grave, chortling like contented snakes. However, I shall be happy to hear from you for phone interviews, if the questions are not about the merits of the case.

Sincerely yours,
MIRIAM DEFENSOR SANTIAGO

Tsunami alert cancelled by PHIVOLCS as of 230pm. |via @zenhernandez

Earlier, Cebu residents were in panic as false news was running around that water crept inside a mall. @JimboySalomon showed photos of the traffic and commotion in Urgello St. in Cebu. Below are videos shared by tweeps in Cebu.

Updated from NDRRMC 1:40 PM

NDRRMC Advisory re Tsunami Bulletin No. 1 06 Feb 2012 12:05 PM

Hawaii-based Pacific Tsunami Warning Center ” said there was no danger of a widespread destructive tsunami.
But Phivolcs raised its tsunami warning to the second of a three-stop alert level for coastal areas in Negros, meaning the public is asked to stay away from beaches and “be watchful” for any signs of rising tides.”

“However, level two does not warrant any evacuation. Ramos said the chances of a tsunami or a tidal wave were very slim because the quake’s epicenter was located on a narrow strait between two islands.”

Lowered magnitude

Lowered to Magnitude 6.7 – NEGROS – CEBU REGION, PHILIPPINES as of 2012 February 06 03:49:16 UTC

Updated Tsunami warning

Based from Pacific Tsunami Warning – TSUNAMI BULLETIN NUMBER 001
PACIFIC TSUNAMI WARNING CENTER/NOAA/NWS
ISSUED AT 0355Z 06 FEB 2012

NO DESTRUCTIVE WIDESPREAD TSUNAMI THREAT EXISTS BASED ON
HISTORICAL EARTHQUAKE AND TSUNAMI DATA.

HOWEVER – EARTHQUAKES OF THIS SIZE SOMETIMES GENERATE LOCAL
TSUNAMIS THAT CAN BE DESTRUCTIVE ALONG COASTS LOCATED WITHIN
A HUNDRED KILOMETERS OF THE EARTHQUAKE EPICENTER. AUTHORITIES
IN THE REGION OF THE EPICENTER SHOULD BE AWARE OF THIS
POSSIBILITY AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

However Phivolcs sounds tsunami alert 2 as Magnitude 6.8 quake strikes off Negros

This is a report from U.S. Geological Survey, National Earthquake Information Center:Magnitude 6.8 – NEGROS – CEBU REGION, PHILIPPINES
2012 February 06 03:49:16 UTC

70 km (44 miles) N (355°) from Dumaguete, Negros, Philippines
79 km (49 miles) WNW (298°) from Tagbilaran, Bohol, Philippines
80 km (50 miles) SSE (158°) from Bacolod, Negros, Philippines
574 km (356 miles) SSE (154°) from MANILA, Philippines

Here is the intensity map of the Negros-Cebu region

Video from a student in Cebu. It appears to be from STC College of Cebu

Tweets from Cebu, Cagayan de Oro and Silay City reported the strong earthquake. Aftershocks were felt 30 minutes after.

Here are their tweets

There is so much that has already been written and discussed regarding the impeachment trial. Commentary and opinions for and against the impeachment trial are all over the place. There is also a wealth of these discussions and reporting that are either objective or partisan in nature. Attack on the judiciary; necessity to remove a roadblock to progress; accountability; personal interests; good vs. evil; creeping dictatorship; rule of law; constitutional issues; constitutional crisis; etc…you name it, there is an available angle to this political and quasi-judicial exercise that has been effectively fueling debate on the impeachment trial of the Chief Justice.

Quite a smorgasbord of topics to choose from, so I figured I’d go zero in on a particular topic, one that concerns the effort of the team of Congressmen tasked to prosecute the Chief Justice. However, before I go further on that, let me state that I take no sides on this matter. My philosophy here is to let justice and the process takes it course. I’ve worked in government for more than a decade and a half, and what I learned from my stint in government is that institutions and ideals should prevail over personalities. It is in this context by which I view this whole exercise.

As such, the prosecution’s misadventures (bungling seems quite harsh a word to me) and travails have raised several disturbing thoughts in my mind. What concerns me with the prosecution’s woes is not so much the way they seem to be trying to mess up their case, but rather how it reflects on the attitude and character of people that have been elected to do something about the problems of our country.

The impeachment trial of the Chief Justice is being claimed to be a very important and momentous event, it is a centerpiece of the government’s reform agenda. According to its proponents, the death of corruption and the progress of our country depend on the successful outcome of this impeachment. A stumbling block to reform, good governance, justice and transparency has been identified (Chief Justice Renato Corona) and it is imperative that he must be removed from office. I mean, this is the impression I get when I read about the arguments advocating for the removal of the Chief Justice from the Supreme Court. So how come when I watch the prosecution team in action I can’t just see them taking this event as seriously as they claim it to be.

I mean it is one thing to mouth off sound bytes and posture about the seriousness and importance of the task at hand, but the way they have been conducting their prosecution of the Chief Justice betrays their lack of preparation. All of us who have had to struggle to earn a living know that if we got an important task to accomplish we work damn hard to get it done. How much work have these prosecutors invested in making an airtight case against the Chief Justice? They’ve been admonished by Senator Judges for being vague and not doing their homework. They have raised perceptions that they are simply fishing for evidence, meaning they trotted out charges against the Chief Justice without having any evidence to back up their accusations. They appear to be conducting their effort on the fly, improvising as they go along.

So how important is this impeachment trial to them anyway? One explanation for this is that they are either really stupid and don’t know what they are doing. I won’t buy that, they are experienced politicians with legal backgrounds, so they are competent enough. Besides, notable private lawyers are backing them up so it cannot be for lack of expertise and knowledge.

Perhaps one could say that the Chief Justice has a formidable defense team. If you’ve got the goods on the accused, I don’t think that would matter. If you’ve got a solid case, your efforts would be quite convincing and it will be difficult for the defense to counter that. I thought at first that was the case, they had the goods on the Chief Justice and their case was airtight. Yet we get instances where their very own witnesses made testimonies favorable to the defense and they have found themselves in a bind due to some vague aspects in the impeachment complaint that were not crafted properly or at the very least, confused the Senator Judges.

The more I dwell on the matter, the more I get the impression that the prosecution team has been very sloppy and complacent about their vital task. I can’t find any other reasonable explanation for the difficulties they are encountering and this brings me to the crux of the issue: a snapshot of what’s wrong with our politicians.

More than the bungling of their case, the attitude of hubris and complacency one gets from observing the prosecutors is a cause for concern. If this is how they approach a very important and vital task, how much more regular and mundane tasks in the legislature? No wonder then that despite the many laws we have, we hardly have made any progress.

Another worrying issue for me is the proclivity of the prosecution to conduct a campaign of trial by publicity. Why resort to this means? Make your case and use the process to get rid of the Chief Justice. Not only do you achieve your objective, you also reinforce and strengthen our democratic institutions. If you are convinced about the strength of your case, why resort to underhanded tactics aimed at forcing the Chief Justice to resign instead of convicting him in the impeachment court? As I said earlier, institutions should prevail over personalities; this is how we can move forward as a country. Taking shortcuts and making short shrift of our democratic institutions will only serve to keep us stuck in our current mess. This attitude from our lawmakers is a reflection of laziness and their disregard for our democratic institutions.

To be fair, there are many legislators out there who do honest work and put in great effort to get things done properly and for the good of our country. Unfortunately, they are either far outnumbered by those who aren’t or don’t merit attention from the powers that be who prefer more compliant allies to further their agenda. In which case, this is just too bad. Time to call out the prosecution on their shortcomings and failings; they better start taking things seriously not just on this impeachment trial but in all aspects of their work as elected representatives of the people. For the sake of our country, we cannot have this sort of attitude prevail amongst our political leadership.

Just imagine this, laws that will provide the regulatory and implementation framework for policies that will impact and affect sectors of our economy and our well-being being crafted in a manner similar to the conduct of the prosecution trying to make its case against the Chief Justice. The thought makes me shudder. For my peace of mind, perhaps I’d better just imagine the impeachment prosecution team as a bunch of clowns.

Moira G Gallaga©

I am basically a nobody. I am just a relatively newly-hired call center agent with enough salary to keep me going. All I wanted– although I knew it is a luxury to have such– is to have a fancy phone as a pat on my back after working so hard every night, staying over the phone and listening to at least 2 Westerners curse at me. The previous sentences are out of the question but then again, I can’t help but feel disappointed when I started to apply for a postpaid plan. I felt disappointed that I can’t get myself into Globe Telecom’s policies.

Actually, not only am I disappointed. I felt discriminated and insulted.

As a Globe Telecom Prepaid user for years, I have been so satisfied with the services they offer. Even though I was with Sun Cellular for a brief period, I still went back with Globe because for me, nothing beats it. So when I set my goal to have myself enrolled in plan for a smartphone, I chose Globe already without any apprehension.

So there I was few hours ago: It was payday and I have the money for the deposit they required. I spent the past two months earning my keep just to have the money for deposit. Also, I already have all the requirements set up. I went to the store and presented all the documents they needed and lo and behold, I was asked if I have a credit card with me. I asked why and double checked the list of requirements they gave me. Credit card was never a requirement according to that list but when I asked, they said that for BPO employees applying for a postpaid account, a credit card IS a requirement. When I asked why this requirement apply specifically to BPO employees, they are so quick to reply to say it is the company’s policy.

I felt that I was discriminated and being looked down upon right then and there. Why isolate BPO employees? Why is the credit card requirement for BPO not listed on the requirement list? The only reason I can think of behind this policy is that they profiled BPO employees as “bad-payers” and by requiring us with a credit card would mean assurance that they will get paid. Obviously, such equivocation is a quick generalization and a head-to-toe insult to the whole BPO industry.

It was unfortunate that a telecom company who advertises it self with the slogan “Abot mo” (Within your reach) seem to have itself difficult “to be reached” for call center agents. I know they are up for business and want to secure their revenues, but having a special-case system with BPO employees is way out of line. Are they trying to impute that the BPO industry is so volatile that its workers can’t pay their monthly dues? Are they insinuating that call center agents are irresponsible when it comes to paying bills? Worse comes to worst, do they think that BPO call center agents are too poor to afford their plan? I would understand it better if they do this with all of their applicant, but no, call center agents are singled-out of the group. Had they backed this out with a plausible explanation, it would be more understandable but no, we can only hear them saying, “It’s company’s policy. The End. Goodbye”

Yes, the “protecting the business” part is quite understandable, but putting down a discriminating policy is what irks me the most. It is sad that even though one has already complied with the necessary documents, the application is being denied just because he is working in a very volatile industry. They may argue that call center agents may have their jobs unstable because they keep on shopping from one company to the other and not staying in one company for quite some time, but that is out of the question. They may also argue that US is passing anti-outsourcing law and endangers the entire industry as a whole, but that also is out of the question. One thing is obvious though, they don’t want– or at least it seems to be– call center agents as their customer mainly because they are JUST call center agents. Adding “uneducated” and “inexperienced” may be too harsh and exaggerating but that is how their message came to me.

If I were to give them the benefit of the doubt, the only question in my mind is so simple: Why this policy?

Updated 8:00 PM

Attached is page 1 of 4 of the Globe Price Bulletin as of January 20, 2012. As you may notice, credit card is given only as an option but not as a requirement. Also, there is no special note there saying that BPO companies should have a credit card and enroll in an auto-debit system.

President Aquino announced a proposed Freedom of Information bill on February 3. The draft was transmitted “by the Secretary of Budget and Management to administration coalition allies in the House of Representatives. This FOI bill is an integral element of the Aquino Good Governance and Anti-Corruption Plan of 2012-2016, which the President has recently approved subject to further refinements. This plan contains reforms and initiatives that pursue greater transparency, accountability, and citizen participation in governance.”

“This draft bill is a result of a consultative process after careful study of similar legislation by an administration study group in order to ensure that it serves public interest without compromising government’s legitimate rights—in other words, balance legitimate needs for secrecy with the public’s right to know

The administration study group is composed of Communications Usec. Manuel L. Quezon III (lead), Sec. Ramon A. Carandang, Presidential Spokesperson Edwin Lacierda, Sec. Florencio B. Abad, and Deputy Presidential Spokesperson Abigail Valte, in coordination with the stakeholders.”. Its basis and framework was the consolidated version based, in turn, largely on the FOI bill sponsored by Rep. Erin Tañada. Extensive consultations were conducted with civil society and media proponents of FOI, as well as various agencies of the government. We believe that the draft we have submitted addresses the various concerns raised by different sectors, and will result in legislation that will strengthen the public’s access to information.

Read more about the Proposed substitute Freedom of Information bill of 2012

Proposed Substitute Freedom of Information Bill of 2012

Pamphlet Briefier Proposed FOI BIll 2012 from the administration

The Department of Tourism, through its Davao Regional Office (DOT Region XI) and the municipal government of Sta. Cruz, Davao del Sur recently launched the 2nd International Mount Apo Boulder Face Challenge slated this April 28-29, 2012.

“Davao boasts of fun ‘Islands to Highlands’ Adventures that will take you from the white sand beaches, breathtaking island destinations, scenic mountain ranges, to plunging waterfalls and more,” said Tourism Secretary Ramon Jimenez in a statement. “Mt. Apo, the highest peak in the country, is one of them,” he added.

Dubbed as one of the toughest adventure races of the Philippines, the competition is a 24-hour extreme challenge for up to 35 participating teams. It will start from the beach lines of Sta. Cruz, Davao del Sur, as participants navigate themselves through the town’s tough trails and raging rivers, scale the boulder face of Mt. Apo, and culminate in the skyline of the country’s highest mountain.

For four consecutive years, the conduct of the Mt. Apo Boulder Face Challenge has made the Davao Region the leading destination for eco-adventure tourism. It will be running on its fifth year as a local competition, and second year as an international race.

“We certainly welcome both our international and local tourists, who will come over and experience this exhilarating extreme sports challenge. As they race their way to complete this journey, they will surely have fun seeing all the sights in Davao and in Mt. Apo, at the same time experience the warmth of the Filipino people,” added Secretary Jimenez.

This extreme sports adventure will entail four disciplines: mountain biking, trekking, white water tubing, and road running. The race is open to teams with three members (2 racers and 1 logistics crew) each.

The Mt. Apo Boulder Face Challenge aims to create awareness among outdoor and sports enthusiasts and the people on the importance of conserving the environment, cultivating the value of sportsmanship and the spirit of camaraderie, and developing a lasting peace and order situation in Mindanao through sports.

Winning the challenge

Team Carmen composed of Jonathan Pido, Angelito Sibayan and Edwin Bueno won last year’s challenged. Their team clocked in 22 hours, 51 minutes and 42 seconds for the 24-hour ex- treme challenge and won $3,500 plus a trophy, and serious bragging rights. Team Carmen members are all local policemen who have joined trekking races in the past, but this race is their first as a team.

According to Jonathan who is also a triathlon advice is to climb Mt. Apo to be familiar with the terrain. He prepared eight days for the challenge, biking, running and swimming to keep fit. For food, he packed adobo with rice to build up on calories. He was unprepared for the chilly temperature when he reached the peak but he was bale to grab a plastic bag which he wrapped around his torso.

Jonathan Pido explains in this video how he prepared for the challenge last year.

Major supporters include event coordinator ROX (Recreational Outdoor eXchange) Philippines, Aboitiz Power Corporation, San Miguel Corporation, Hi Primer Group of Companies, Zest Air and Columbia Sportswear.

To participate, one may register online at http://www.boulderface.com.