A PROJECT

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements in Philosophy 101

Submitted by:

Jinen Marie Chavez

Submitted to:

Mr. Eric Vista

January 30, 2012

1. "If there is a doubt, admit the evidence," she said.<miriam santiago> "No accusation there - the allegations are conjectural and speculative. They do not amount to a concrete statement of fact that may require a denial," he said.<defense lawyer sefarin cuevas> 2. He was infuriated after the SC issued the TRO. He called me up and told me how he felt bad that the SC was intervening in behalf of Arroyo. He felt that this should stop, Belmonte said in an interview. This is our own game plan, we just had his support. He gave the general direction, we followed because we believe this is the right thing, Abaya said. 3. Coronas lawyer, Tranquil Salvador III, said, In my personal opinion, the judiciary just wants to show courtesy. Since the process is already in the Senate, maybe the court deemed it better to let the Senate proceed Maybe the court thinks its not appropriate to issue a TRO at this time. Said presidential spokesperson Edwin Lacierda: We welcome the decision of the Supreme Court not to issue a TRO It is a recognition of the unique nature of the impeachment court as the Constitution established it. 4. Lawyer Karen Jimeno said the defense team is wary of a flexible application of the rules in impeachment trial because the prosecutors gave no proposition on how this would be done."Ang problema dito, ang gusto nilang mangyari ay trial ng mob rule. Parang isang paglilitis na walang sinusunod na patakaran o rule of law," she said."If there's flexibility, we should know the standards," she added. Tranquil Salvador, another lawyer for Corona's defense, also pointed out that even the law does not provide for a liberal application of the rules at all times. He said it is only stated that "justice must prevail over the technical rules."

5. Tupas said that last week's proceedings saw at least 30 objections from the defense and 20 instances where the prosecution was asked to reform their questions.Moreover, he said time was wasted on the debate on whether or not ill-gotten wealth was properly alleged in the impeachment complaint. But Corona's lead counsel, Serafin Cuevas, said: "We have posed those objections, not to delay and with no intention to lengthen time. We were merely exercising the right of the respondent, pursuant to law, in accordance to law and the rules of evidence." "We have been continuously objecting on a charge not incorporated in the impeachment complaint," he added.

6. Last week, Sen. Francis Escudero pointed out that each article of the complaint "must accuse the respondent of a singular, separate act." "There's no mention whatsoever of illegally acquired wealth. What have been referred to are allegations embodied in paragraphs 2.3 and 2.4 (of Article 2). These fall under discussion and arguments, not allegations," Cuevas said. Cuevas also noted that the paragraphs 2.3 and 2.4 raised points that were merely based on suspicion, not facts, thus the use of words such as "reported" and "suspected.

7. "It is our humble submission that this allegation does not suffice for serving as basis for a cause of action on the part of the honorable impeachment officials." But Tupas argued that paragraphs under Article 2 were sufficient in alleging that Corona acquired ill-gotten wealth. "The allegation in the complaint is sufficient if it informs the respondent of the accusation against him. Kung naiintindihan ng respondent na ina-akusa s'ya, kung naintindihan n'ya 'yon, it will be sufficient." 8. Quoting Corona's reply, Tupas said the chief justice "flatly" denied the allegation and said he acquired his assets from "legitimate sources of income, mostly from his professional toils." Cuevas rebutted. Also reading a portion of Corona's reply to the complaint, he said: "We mentioned here that the allegations (paragraphs 2.3 and 2.4) are conjectural and speculative. They do not amount to a concrete statement of fact that will require a denial." "Accusations of general terms have no place in pleadings. Hindi pinaguusapan dito kung naiintindihan. Ang tanong kung sinunod n'yo ba ang requirement ng pleadings. Kapag di sinunod, kahit naiintindihan, nilalabag nyo ang karapatan ni chief justice sa due process," he added.

9. "My task is to communicate what is happening dahil baka hindi maintindihan ng mamamayan ano nangyayari," Taada said. "It's important to show this is not a rivalry of best lawyers in town but that the impeachment trial is every Filipino's concern," Quimbo said. 10. A spokesperson of the defense panel, Atty. Tranquil Salvador III, echoed Taada's statement regarding their roles in the impeachment trial. "My role is to inform, educate Filipinos, maipaliwanag ang [impeachment trial] not just based on parts of what they hear," Salvador said. "One concern was how will ordinary people understand me.(Nagta-Tagalog ako) para

magpaliwanag," he added. Atty. Karen Jimeno, another defense panel spokesperson, said their roles can enhance public participation. "They have to understand procedures, what laws apply and to be watchdogs." "The message here is someone inexperienced as me can be part of the impeachment trial, that you don't have to be that good to participate," Jimeno said. Quimbo said he personally knows Corona and his wife "but when it comes to accountability, we cast aside all personal ties."

11. Maceda said, however, In every decision made [by the impeachment court], we are going to see more and more confrontation. May natatalo e. And again and again, the question will crop up, what is the recourse left? He noted that this will be a difficult issue that all parties in the case will have to face sooner or later. Angeles said the issue of the nature of the article of impeachment is paramount, and not a mere technicality. It does not become a technicality when issues have already affected vested rights, if the issue puts to question the validity of the complaint and of the entire trial.