you're reading...
Impeachment, PNoy-Corona war

Don’t repeat 2nd envelop mistake!

Suppression of the second envelop triggered Edsa 2.

Please allow evidences exposing Corona’s illegal wealth

By Emmanuel Mongaya
(Journalist & blogger)

During the Estrada impeachment trial 11 years ago, majority of the senator-jurors stopped the opening of the second envelop. This opened the floodgates of public anger and triggered Edsa 2.

No, many were not yet convinced of the guilt of former president Erap Estrada until majority of senator-jurors succeeded in junking the entry of what they believed were crucial evidence. The act, in the eyes of ordinary Filipinos, was the smoking gun proving Estrada’s guilt.

Today, the wily defense panel in the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Corona headed by former justice Serafin Corona is trying to maneuver the Impeachment Court into a similar situation. They are invoking one technicality after another against prosecution attempts to present evidence on the Chief Justice’s ill-gotten wealth.

Granting Cuevas is technically correct that Article 2 is limited to only the submission and disclosure of Corona’s Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN) as required by the Constitution and implementing laws.

Does this mean Corona, and any other government official, can submit a SALN with questionable entries?

Won’t the Impeachment Court allow the prosecution to present evidences that Corona’s SALN did not satisfy the requirements of the Constitution and implementing laws by submitting a worthless document that is peppered with lies?

Won’t the Impeachment Court allow the verification of Corona’s SALN entries by comparing these with real property documents, tax records, and bank accounts?

Is showing proof that Corona’s SALN has a lot of holes a violation of presumption of innocence and due process? Doesn’t he have the opportunity to contest the evidences that the prosecution can present? Why does Cuevas doing his best to deny the Impeachment Court and the people the opportunity of weighing evidences for and against Corona by preventing the presentation of evidences in the first place?

And would the Impeachment Court allow themselves to be trapped in this Cuevas strategy?

It is clear that Cuevas, in behalf of his client who hid his SALN  for a long time, does not want anti-Corona evidences to be formally presented. The defense camp wants the prosecution evidence out of the Impeachment Court. Indefensible, former justice Cuevas?

Would our distinguished impeachment senator-jurors allow defense panel to do just that? Would that be protecting Corona’s rights or a blatant suppression of evidence? Would the Impeachment Court allow a repeat of the second envelop?

Related articles

About anol_cebu

As chief digital officer of PRworks Inc., Emmanuel Mongaya manages the digital communications of the public relations agency. He also blogs, writes columns for Sun.Star Cebu and Superbalita, and serves as administrator for “Maghisgot Kitag Politika Bay,” Cebu’s dynamic political community in Facebook.



  1. Pingback: Impeachment evidence in journalists’ hands product of initiative « Politika 2013 - January 31, 2012

Tell us what you think?

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 4,908 other followers

Bitaw no?

From Pixel Offensive

Filipino & Pinoy Blogs

Our Regular Writers

Election 2016 Countdown

Election DayMay 9th, 2016
Vote Wisely!

Human Rights Online Philippines

%d bloggers like this: