Rule of law, not Corona is on trial

‘So what about the oftrepeated statements of the Chief Justice that he will explain his case “in due time”?’

THE defense in the impeachment trial says that the Chief Justice will testify "if necessary." That means he may not if the lawyers believe that he can only sink himself deeper in trouble if he takes the witness stand.

Instead the lawyers will present Mrs. Cristina Roco Corona, the Chief Magistrate’s wife, to try and get her husband off the hook.

So what about the oft-repeated statements of the Chief Justice that he will explain his case "in due time"?

This does not sit with the petition of the lawyers to stop the Senate from accepting as evidence the documents on the dollar deposits of the respondent.

The senator-judges have accepted the documents as evidence. However, the defense lawyers have a mind to go to the Supreme Court where Corona continues to sit as Chief Justice although the honorable thing to do is file a leave of absence while the case is pending resolution.

In the event that a TRO is issued and the Senate does not defy it, there is absolutely nothing for Mr. Corona to explain. There would be no need for him to testify. His wife will defend him on other issues, principally those related to assets not listed in the joint statement of assets, liabilities and net worth.

However, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, presiding officer of the trial urged the Chief Justice to testify on his dollar deposits. Again, the defense may go to the Supreme Court to stop Corona from testifying.

We do not suspect the Court will issue a TRO. Here is where the tragedy begins.

Mr. Corona cannot invoke the sanctity of deposits in the Foreign Currency Deposit Unit (FCDU) as his defense.

If he does, he will practically admit that he has used the FCDU as a safe haven for laundered money. The proof of this is his refusal to include the dollars in his SALN. The "crime" is made more serious by the fact that Mr. Corona is a Chief Justice whose Court can hear money laundering cases.

If he had not been impeached, he would have preside over the resolution of a case where he himself knows that he could be a respondent, but not so because he wrongly believes that the FCDU deposits are beyond anybody’s prying eyes.

He forgets that he concurred in a ruling that money - dollars at that - in the FCDU are for foreigners. The source or sources of the dollars are not as important as the fact that he should not have them. Or if he has them, they should be included in his SALN.

He could freeze stiff if he is asked why he did not declare the dollars. He could not have done so because his salary and the money that came from the business of his wife could not justify the dollar deposits.

The peso assets are in the bank with the dollars.

The case becomes more sticky if the Bangko Sentral and the Anti- Money Laundering Council are ordered to submit the documents to the Ombudsman as evidence of the complaint for graft and corruption filed by Akbayan.

Or as a matter of duty the BSP and the AMLA submits them as they were earlier reported they would do.

Mr. Corona may have to face charges of plunder after the impeachment trial is terminated. If he is convicted he loses his job and is forever banned from holding public office.

But if he is found guilty on plunder charges he can go to jail, maybe for life.

The Chief Justice is a mere incident in the impeachment. It could have been any of the 38 officials of the state removable from office only by impeachment.

What we are trying to show the world is at long last, we have summoned the courage to try and punish a state official suspected of having done wrong. Unlike other countries where state officials including prime ministers (equivalent to President of a republic like the Philippines) resign on mere suspicions of guilt as a way of preserving the democratic system and self-respect, or the citizens mount a revolution to oust an erring leader, we have become so callous to abusive officials who, by their oath, have the duty to serve the people, not themselves.

Mr. Corona’s impeachment is nothing so shameful as Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak being brought to trial in a caged sick bed.

We must prove to ourselves that in a democracy power resides in the people not in the officials. We have the duty to boot them out of office, not in a revolution but through a process allowed by the Constitution.

We must live by the Charter. We cannot show the world that a former member of the US Supreme Court was right when he said that Americans live by the Constitution but sometimes the justices are the Constitution.

Our Supreme Court did so when it allowed Gloria Arroyo to make an appointment to the judiciary during a period clearly prohibited by the Charter. We have to punish this act by trying in the impeachment process Chief Justice Renato Corona who was the lone beneficiary of this violation of the Charter.

If we do not, Gloria Arroyo will similarly walk from charges of plunder which was the only purpose of appointing Renato Corona as Chief Justice.