May 22 Senate impeachment court record

7/31/2019 May 22 Senate impeachment court record

1/35

TUESDAY, MAY 22, 2012 1

AT 2:01 P.M., THE PRESIDING OFFICER, SENATE PRESIDENT JUAN PONCE ENRILE,

CALLED THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL OF SUPREME COURT CHIEF JUSTICE RENATO C.

CORONA TO ORDER.

The Presiding Officer. The continuation of the Impeachment Trial of the Hon. Chief Justice of

the Supreme Court Renato C. Corona is hereby called to order.

We shall be led in prayer by the distinguished Senator from Batangas, Sen. Ralph G. Recto.

Senator Recto.

We seek Your blessing, O Lord, so today we will only hear the facts not the fable, the

truth not the trickery, the authentic not the alibis.

We ask You, Heavenly Father, to enlighten those who will speak here today so they will

impress us with their honesty and not indulge us with their evasion, gain our respect with their

candor and not lose it through their excuses, clarify our doubts instead of adding to our

confusion.

We beseech You, Dear God, to guide those who sit in judgment today so we will be

curious without being caustic, be inquisitive without being insulting, be probing without being

hurtful.We plead to You, our Master, to grant the bigger jury out there the wisdom so they will

be able to witness the proceedings with kindness in their hearts and fairness on their minds,

to erase their biases and embrace a thought that judgment should be put on halt until the

accused has been heard, to know the important from the immaterial, to discern the substantial

from the subterfuge.

Guide us as we search for the truth and when with Your Grace we find it, then be assured

that the truth shall not make us mad, the truth shall not make us miserable, and that the truth

shall set us free.

Amen.

Republic of the Philippines

Senate

Record of the SenateSitting As An Impeachment Court

Tuesday, May 22, 2012

Pasay City


2/35

2 TUESDAY, MAY 22, 2012

ROLL CALL

The Presiding Officer. The Secretary now please call the roll.

The Secretary, reading:

Senator Edgardo J. Angara ............................................................... Present

Senator Joker P. Arroyo ................................................................... PresentSenator Alan Peter Compaero S. Cayetano ................................. Present

Senator Pia S. Cayetano ................................................................... Present

Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago .................................................... Present

Senator Franklin M. Drilon ................................................................ Present

Senator Jinggoy Ejercito Estrada ....................................................... Present

Senator Francis G. Escudero ............................................................. Present

Senator Teofisto L. Guingona III ....................................................... Present

Senator Gregorio B. Honasan II........................................................ Present

Senator Panfilo M. Lacson ................................................................ Present

Senator Manuel Lito M. Lapid ....................................................... PresentSenator Loren Legarda ...................................................................... Present

Senator Ferdinand Bongbong R. Marcos Jr. ................................. Present

Senator Sergio R. Osmea III ........................................................... Present

Senator Francis N. Pangilinan ............................................................ Present

Senator Aquilino L. Pimentel III ........................................................ Present

Senator Ralph G. Recto .................................................................... Present

Senator Ramon Bong Revilla Jr. ..................................................... Present

Senator Vicente C. Sotto III ............................................................. Present

Senator Antonio Sonny F. Trillanes IV ........................................... Present

Senator Manny Villar ......................................................................... Present

The President ..................................................................................... Present

The Presiding Officer. With 23 Senator-Judges present, the Presiding Officer declares the

presence of a quorum.

The Floor Leader.

Senator Sotto. Mr. President, may I ask the Sergeant-at-Arms to make the proclamation.

The Presiding Officer. The Sergeant-at-Arms is directed to make the proclamation.

The Sergeant-at-Arms. All persons are commanded to keep silent under pain of penalty while

the Senate is sitting in trial on the Articles of Impeachment against Chief Justice Renato C. Corona.

The Presiding Officer. The Floor Leader.

Senator Sotto. Mr. President, I move that we dispense with the reading of the May 16, 2012

Journal of the Senate sitting as an Impeachment Court and consider it approved.

The Presiding Officer. Is there any objection? [Silence] There being none, the May 16, 2012

Journal of the Senate sitting as an Impeachment Court is hereby approved.

The Secretary will now please call the case before the Senate sitting as an Impeachment Court.

The Clerk of Court. Case No. 002-2011, In the Matter of the Impeachment of Hon. Chief

Justice Renato C. Corona.


3/35


The Presiding Officer. The Floor Leader is recognized.

Senator Sotto. May we ask the parties and/or their respective Counsel to enter their appearances

for the Prosecution and the Defense.

Representative Tupas. Good afternoon, Mr. Senate President, and honorable Members of the

Senate. On the part of the House of Representatives, Prosecution panel, same appearance. We areready, Your Honor.

The Presiding Officer. Noted. Defense.

Mr. Cuevas. For the Defense, Your Honor, we have the same appearance, and we are ready,

Your Honor.

The Presiding Officer. Noted. The Floor Leader is recognized.

Senator Sotto. Mr. President, before we proceed to the business of the day, last week, in

connection with the testimony of Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales, some Members of the Court

have requested to subpoena the managers of the banks concerned as well as certain bank documentsmentioned by the Ombudsman in the course of her testimony. I move that the Presiding Officer rule

on the request, Mr. President.

The Presiding Officer. Thank you. The Chair is well-aware of the validity and importance of

the motions made. In that connection, however, I would like to remind all of us Members of the Senate,

sitting here to perform a function to judge the Respondent, that we are not conducting this inquiry in

aid of legislation.

We are here as hearers of facts. And in the course of our trial and judgment, we will interpret the

law according to our best light. We are receivers of the evidence from the Prosecution and the Defense.

We are not an inquisitorial court and so, therefore, with that in mind, this Court cannot issue the

subpoena suggested to make the appearance here of certain persons to act as witnesses.

The Rules of Procedure suggests that this is an adversarial proceeding although run by the

representatives of the people. And so, therefore, we must define who, for whom will the witnesses who

will appear here will stand as witnesses. Are they going to stand as witnesses for the Prosecution? Are

they going to stand as witnesses for the Defense? Are we authorized as hearers of fact and receivers

of evidence to call anyone we want to testify here to enlighten us on certain factual issues?

Having these in mind, this Chair has decided to resolve to respectfully deny the motions to call for

this Senate sitting as an Impeachment Court to call witnesses motu proprio to testify in this proceeding.

So ordered.Senator Sotto. Mr. President.

The Presiding Officer. The Floor Leader is recognized.

Senator Sotto. Mr. President, pursuant to the May 16, 2012 Order of the Court for Mr. Harvey

Keh to submit a written explanation within 48 hours why he should not be cited for contempt,

Mr. Keh filed with the Court his compliance on May 18, 2012, expressing his apology and praying

that he not be cited in contempt. I move that the Presiding Officer rule on the matter.

The Presiding Officer. Well, during our trials of this case last week, Mr. Harvey Keh appeared

here as a witness for the Defense, and this Chair, because of certain previous incident, asked him


4/35


to show cause why he should not be cited for contempt. A Member of this Court had spoken

calling the concerned witness that he committed certain improper conduct as far as this Court was

concerned. Given that and in view of the apologies given by the gentleman cited to show cause,

and in the spirit of liberality, this Court simply admonishes the person concerned never to try his

luck again, as he did.

So ordered.

The Floor Leader.

Senator Sotto. Mr. President, the Court is now ready for the continuation of the presentation of

evidence by the Defense.

The Presiding Officer. Is the Defense ready to present its last witness?

Mr. Cuevas. May we request for a one minute recess, Your Honor. We are fetching the Chief

Justice.

The Presiding Officer. Is there any objection? [Silence] There being none, the trial is suspendedfor one minute.

The trial was suspended at 2:11 p.m.

At 2:11 p.m., the trial was resumed.

The Presiding Officer. The session is resumed. While the Chief Justice is awaited to this Hall,

I would like to make some statements before we administer the oath to him as a witness for the

Defense.

As agreed upon during our caucus yesterday, the Members of the Court are respectfully requested

by this Chair to observe the two-minute rule as provided under the Rules of this Court, to limit theirinquiries to questions of facts, to avoid any manifestations or discussions of purely legal issues, and to

help in the orderly proceedings in this trial.

Should any Member of this Court require more time to propound questions later on, an extension

of not more than two (2) minutes will be allowed to him or to her. However, for an orderly proceeding,

so that there will be no interruption in the testimony of the distinguished Respondent who will

appear before us, I would suggest that we finish with the direct examination by the Defense, with

the cross-examination of the Prosecution, and then, if there is any redirect, let the redirect be done

and, if there is any re-cross, let the re-cross be completed before any Member of this Senate

sitting as an Impeachment Court will propound questions to the distinguished Respondent acting

as a witness.

Unless I am disauthorized by this Court, I would like to adopt that as the system for an orderly

proceeding in this trial today and thereafter. So ordered.

Now, is the Respondent ready?

Mr. Cuevas. We sent somebody, Your Honor, to have him fetched.

The Presiding Officer. Okay. We suspend the trial for a few moments to wait for him.



5/35



The Presiding Officer. The session is resumed.

I would like to add, before the Chief Justice is sworn in as a witness, to request the gallery to

observe strict decorum in this trial. Avoid any expression of your approval or disapproval about

anything that is happening in this court. No clapping, no shouting, no unnecessary commotions.Otherwise, this Courtand I will be frank with youwill exercise its powers to maintain order in

this trial.

This is a trial authorized by the Constitution, authorized by the Filipino people. You authorized this

trial, and it must be conducted in an orderly manner without any disruption befitting the nature of this

case and the person involved in this proceedings.

So Ordered.

Is the Defense ready?

Mr. Cuevas. He is coming, Your Honor.

Mr. Chief Justice, welcome to this Court

Mr. Corona. Good afternoonpo.

The Presiding Officer. And may I request you to take your oath before we proceed with the trial.

The Clerk of Court. Your Honor,do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but

the truth in this impeachment proceedings?

Mr. Corona. Yes.

The Clerk of Court. So help you God.

Mr. Corona. So help me God.

Representative Tupas. Mr. President.

The Presiding Officer. The Floor Leader.

Representative Tupas. Mr. President, the Prosecution.

The Presiding Officer. Yes, the gentleman from the Prosecution.

Representative Tupas. The Prosecution would like to ask permission from this Honorable Courtto allow one of our private lawyers, Atty. Mario Bautista, to receive the testimony of the Chief Justice

and to conduct cross-examination.

The Presiding Officer. Granted.

Representative Tupas. Thank you. Thank you, Your Honor.

Mr. Cuevas. If Your Honor may please, before we proceed with the taking of the testimony of

the Honorable Chief Justice, may I placemay I be permitted to place on record some pertinent

matters in connection with his previous actuation in connection with his appearance before this Court,

Your Honor.


6/35


The Presiding Officer. Proceed.

Mr. Cuevas. Now, there never was a time when it was the intention of the Chief Justice not

to appear before this court, Your Honor. But an examination of the constitutional provision on the

matter, together with the rules of evidence, had in one way or another strengthened his resolve in the

first place not to appear before this Court, not in order to defy the majesty and the authority of

this Court, Your Honor, but rather to enable him to exercise his right as a citizen of the Republic ofthe Philippines pursuant to Article III, Section 17, which provides: No person may be compelled

to testify against himself.

It is his humble opinion during our discussion that this provision applies to all kinds of proceedings,

whether criminal, civil, quasi-judicial or administrative, Your Honor. And that is governed by the

various jurisprudence on the point.

Secondly, it is his contention, it is his belief that insofar as his cross-examination is concerned, the

rules of evidence say, being likened to that of an accused, he may only be cross-examined on any

matter taken up on the direct.

Thirdly, Your Honor, he had monitored all the proceedings day-by-day before this Court and hewas a little bit frightened or, shall we say, confused, because there were several occasions that there

were statements to the effect that these proceedings will be judged not only by this Impeachment Court

but, likewise, by the people in general.

I have told him that there were many instances, Your Honor, where this Impeachment Court,

through the Honorable Presiding Judge-Senator, stated that the decision in this case shall be based on

the evidence on record and there is no power nor any person who can dictate upon this Court in order

to render an impartial and correct decision.

That was too encouraging in his favor, and I told him that even the Rules of the Impeachment Court

appears to warrant this impartiality. For instance, under Rule III, paragraph 3, it says: Senators shallobserve political neutrality during the course of the impeachment trial. Political neutrality shall be

defined as the exercise of a public officials duty without unfair discrimination and regardless of party

affiliation or preference.

This is rather assuring, Your Honor, and consoling to the Chief Justice because he believes that with

the observance of this rule, there will certainly be an impartial decision that will come up after the trial

of this case.

Now, fourthly, Your Honor, we have examined the Oath of Office of the Senator-Judges which

states: I solemnly swear that in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment now pending

before this Court, I will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and to the law of thePhilippines:.

That practically negates, Your Honor, whatever misapprehension he has, that is why he has chosen

to appear brought about by the respect of this Impeachment Court and to render himself submissive

to the power and authority and jurisdiction of the honorable Impeachment Court.

Thank you, Your Honor, for the opportunity.

The Presiding Officer. Thank you for reminding the Members of this Impeachment Court about

these principles. And I would like, as Chair of this Court, to assure you that we are conscious from

the very start of this proceeding that we are performing a solemn and sacred duty, not for ourselves,


7/35


but for the Filipino people and for this country and for the world to see that this country, through its

elected senators, can render impartial justice to anyone who will appear here to answer any charge

made against him or her.

Now, we are all lawyers. The Chief Justice is the highest magistrate of the land, the highest lawyer

in the country. He is aware of the Constitution, very well-grounded on the Constitution. He knows when

to answer a question and when not to answer a question in order to protect his own personal interestand his rights under the Constitution. So, we can assure you that we will observe this.

Now, insofar as judging this case is concerned, as I have said at the start of this proceeding, in my

opening statement, we will judge this case on the basis of the evidence presented to us by the

Prosecution as well as by the Defense, and that no one of us here, including this Chair, will attempt

to influence the mind of any of these 23 souls acting as judges in this Impeachment Trial, not only

because we want to comply with our oath as judges in this case, but because of our notion that we

respect each others judgment. Each one of us is an entity unto himself in this case and he alone will

be responsible for his judgment in this case and no one else so that each of us will respect each other

by not trying to influence the judgment of each one or any one of us.

So, I can assure you, Mr. Counsel, that we are well aware of the things that you are concerned

about. And so, with that, let us proceed with the trial.

So ordered.

Mr. Cuevas. Thank you, Your Honor, for that very assuring pronouncement.

Mr. Bautista. Mr. President, from the Prosecution, please, may I be allowed to say something.

The Presiding Officer. Yes. Proceed. Granted.

Mr. Bautista. Good afternoon, Mr. President. Good afternoon, Senator-Judges. Chief Justice,

good afternoon, Sir.

I would just like to make several points on what was mentioned by Justice Cuevas. There has been

never any compulsion for the Chief Justice to testify. So, your mention of the constitutional right

against being compelled to testify is irrelevant. In fact, if you will recall, the Prosecution subpoenaed

the Chief Justice and the Honorable Court denied the subpoena.

Secondly, with due respect, Justice Cuevas, I disagree with your reading of the rules of

evidence regarding cross-examination of accused. Under Rule 115, Section 1(d), an accused

can testify voluntarily on his behalf, as the Chief Justice is doing today, but he is subject to

cross-examination.

Under the case ofPeople vs. Ayson, G.R. 85212, July 7, 1989; andLadiana vs. People, G.R.

No. 144293, December 4, 2002, an accused who testifies will be treated as an ordinary witness. He

can invoke his self-incrimination right only regarding questions that tend to incriminate him for some

crime other than that he is charged of. And with respect to the rights of the Chief Justice on self-

incrimination, we will raise our objections at the appropriate time.

Thank you, Mr. President.

The Presiding Officer. Thank you.

Are you ready to proceed with the trial?


8/35


Mr. Cuevas. Yes, Your Honor. Only one minute, Your Honor. Only one minute.

The Presiding Officer. Granted.

Mr. Cuevas. Your Honor, please. I never stated in my manifestation that the Chief Justice is

being compelled to testify against his will. What I mentioned and placed on record is the constitutional

provision on the matter, under Article III, Section 17, which provides that no person may becompelled to testify against himself. I stated that to show to the Honorable Court his vacillation during

the early stage of the proceedings. That was the only purpose.

Now, in connection with the coverage of the cross-examination, I dare to dispute the manifestation

on the matter by the learned Counsel. Insofar as cross-examination of an accused in a criminal case,

to which respondent Honorable Chief Justice is concerned, his cross-examination shall be limited only

to matters taken up in the direct. That is the intendment.

The Presiding Officer. May I suggest that we proceed with the trial and we will deal with these

problems along the way. That is why you have a Presiding Officer in this proceedings.

Mr. Cuevas. Yes, Your Honor. I am through. I only placed my reply.

The Presiding Officer. All right. Are we ready with the trial?

Mr. Cuevas. We are.

Mr. Corona. May I request, Mr. Presiding Officer, to make a statement not only to this

Honorable Tribunal, but to the Filipino people.

The Presiding Officer. Granted. Proceed, Mr. Chief Justice.

Mr. Corona. Mga minamahal kong kababayan. Ako po ay nandito sa Impeachment Courtna ito upang tumupad sa aking pangako sa sambayanan na ako ay magpapaliwanag ng lahat.

Kailangan po sigurong tanungin ng ating sambayanan kung bakit ba tayo nagkaka-

impeachment trial na ito. Hindi naman po kaila sa ating lahat na ginamit na po ng gobyerno, ng

administrasyon, ang buong makinarya ng gobyerno laban sa akin. Ibinuhos na po ang buong

pwersa ng pamahalaan para lamang sa pagtanggal ng isang tao.

Bakit po ba nangyayari ito? Huwag tayong maniwala na itong impeachment trial na ito ay

laban sa katiwalian. Dahil kung ganoon rin lamang, mayroon ba silang katiwalian na ibinintang

sa akin sa kabila ng lahat ng pagkakalkal, sa paghahanap ng mga huwad na ebidensiya, at kung

anu-ano pang ginawa sa akin at sa aking pamilya? Wala naman pong ibinibintang sa akin ng

katiwalian.

Ako po ba ay hadlang? Ako po ba ay sagabal sa kung ano o kung kanino? O dili kaya ay

tinik sa lalamunan ng ninuman? So far po, lahat ng nakita ko rito magbuhat nang umpisa itong

impeachment trial na ito ay hatred, galit sa isang tao, benggansa sa isang tao.

Kailan po ba tayo matututo sa lahat ng kabubuan ng kasaysayan ng Pilipinas? Parati na

lamang pong ganito ang nangyayari. Hindi po ba tama na sabihin ko ngayon, Tama na ang

pagkawatak-watak ng ating bayan? Hindi po ba ito ang dahilanitong mga hidwaan, itong

mga galitan na itoang dahilan kung bakit tila hirap na hirap na umusad ang ating

pamahalaan?


9/35


Ibig ko pong sabihin sa ating kasalukuyang administrasyon, hindi po lahat ng hindi kaalyado

ay kalaban. Hindi po lahat ng hindi kasama ay hindi puwedeng maging katuwang para sa

ikabubuti ng sambayanan. Porket hindi magkapareho ng kulay ay hindi na Pilipino. Bakit po

ba ganito na lamang ang galit sa akin nitong kasalukuyang administrasyon ni Pangulong

Aquino? Ano ba ang kasalanan ko sa kaniya? Ano ba ang kasalanan ko sa bayan?

Wala akong pagkakasalang alam ko. At iyan ang dahilan kung bakit ako ay buong loob natumitindig dito sa harap ninyo at sa harap ng sambayanang Pilipino nang walang takot, walang

nerbiyos, sapagkat sigurado po ako, siguradong sigurado po ako, wala akong kasalanan, wala

akong ginawang katiwalian, at ako ay hindi nagnakaw sa gobyerno.

Hindi ko po isasama, I will not drag my family dito sa impeachment na ito kung sa kaloob-

looban ko, may katiting na dahilan na ako ay nagduda sa sarili ko na ako ay may ginawang

mali o masama. Hindi ko po itataya ang buong pamilya ko, ang napakabait kong maybahay,

ang aking tatlong anak, at ang aming anim na apo, at idamay lahat ng mahal sa aking buhay

kung ako ay naniniwalang ako ay may kasalanan. Hindi na po ako makikipaglaban. Siguro po

ay nagbitiw na ako sa tungkulin sapul sa simula.

Malinis po ang aking kunsensiya at ito po ay sinasabi ko sa sambayanang Pilipino. Uulitin

ko po, malinis po ang aking konsensiya. Malinis po ang konsensiya ng aking pamilya. Wala

kaming ginawang masama; wala kaming ginawang kawalanghiyaan tulad ng pinalalabas sa

ibat-ibang sektor ng media. Kahit sino sa atin....

The Presiding Officer. Mawalang-galang, Mr. Chief Justice. Kami po ay naghihintay na

sabihin ninyo sa amin ang inyong pakay at sana kung maaari ay i-address na lamang ninyo ang

issues dito para sa ganoon ay tapusin natin itong kasong ito.

Pero you can proceed, Mr. Chief Justice.

Mr. Corona. Maraming salamat po. Dahil ito pong aking sinasabi ngayon ay pinatutungkolko, gaya nga ng nasabi ko, hindi lamang dito sa Impeachment Court, sa kagalang-galang na

Impeachment Court na ito, kundi sa buong sambayanang Pilipino na pinangakuan ko na ako ay

magpapaliwanag. Kaya nandito po ako at nagpapaliwanag.

Siguro naman kahit sino sa atin hindi papayagang masaktan ang ating pamilya at ang ating

mga mahal sa buhay. Kung tayo ay may masamang budhi o may maitim na budhi, o may mga

nagawang kasalanan na dapat nating ipagsisi, hindi na siguro natin gagawin ito at harapin

ang kalbaryong hinaharap namin. Sapagkat iyan po ang pinagdadaanan namin ngayon

kalbaryo po.

Hindi po madali ang pinagdaanan namin nitong limang buwan na ito. Nakita naman ninyoang paninira sa pagkatao namin, sa reputasyon namin, lahat na yata ng kasinungalingan ay

sinabi at lahat ng putik ay itinapon laban sa amin. Sa kabila ng pagbabanta ng kahihiyan at

kapahamakan, lumaban po ako. Malakas po ang loob ko na lumaban sapagkat malinis po ang

aking konsensiya.

Iisa lamang po ang paliwanag diyan. Walang katotohanan at pawang kasinungalingan ang

pinaparatang sa akin. Mayroon pa hong isang nagsabi, isang senador na nagsabi, na huhubaran

daw niya ako sa publiko. Tingnan po natin.

Napakadali sanang takasan nitong problema at kalbaryong ito. Marami na nga rin ang

nagsabi sa akin, Bakit ka ba lumalaban? You cannot fight Malacaang. Magbitiw ka na lamang


10/35


sa tungkulin. Magiging tahimik na ang buhay mo, wala nang maghahabol sa iyo, ang pamilya

mo ay hindi na masasaktan, titigil na ang panggigipit, titigil na ang black propaganda laban sa

iyo at titigil na ang kasinungalingan.

Pero ano naman po ang kahulugan nito kung ako ay nagbitiw na sa tungkulin? Ang

nangangahulugan ho noon ay parang umatras ako sa laban at parang nanalo na lamang iyong

kabila na without having to prove anything. Kawawa naman po ako at ang aking pamilya. Athindi po ito ang aking kinasanayan at hindi ito ang itinuro sa amin ng aming magulangna

ipaglaban pag ikaw ay nasa tama at nasa lugar.

Maraming beses na pong pinag-uusapan sa media ang umanoy tungkol sa alleged o hindi

maipaliwanag naming yaman. At maraming beses na rin po kaming hinusgahan.

Ang tanong ko po ay ito: Bakit po ba? Pondo po ba ito ng bayan? Ito po ba ay ninakaw

sa kaban ng bayan? Ito po ba ay kinurakot ng Punong Mahistrado? Iisa po ang sa sagot diyan.

Hindi po. At uulitin ko, hindi po.

Lahat po ng aming ari-arian ay pinaghirapan sa malinis na paraan at wala naman pong

naisiwalat o naibintang sa akin na ginawa kong katiwalian. Walang-wala po. Lahat po ngaming naipundar ay nanggaling sa pagsisikap, paghihirap ng maraming taon, maraming

dekadang pagtatrabaho nang malinis at maayos.

Bago po ako nagsilbi sa gobyerno, ako po ay isang matagumpay na abogado na ng

maraming taon. Hindi naman po ako katulad ng pinalalabas ng Prosekusyon na ako ay kung

sino lamang patabi-tabi riyan na biglang yumaman nuong ako ay pumasok sa gobyerno. At ito

po ay sinasabi ko sa inyo: Nagkakamali po kayo.

Simple po ang aming naging pamumuhay. Hindi po kailanman kami namuhay nang maluho.

Lahat po ng nakakakilala sa amin, taong malalapit sa amin, taong mga lumaki kasabay ng

aking mga anak ang makakapagsabi na nakita nila kung gaano kasimple ang aming pamumuhay,

magbuhat noong araw hanggang ngayon.

Nilabag na lahat. Tila nilabag na po ang lahat ng batas para hanapan ako ng kasalanan.

Bakit nga ba? Pumunta sila sa Hukumang ito na walang ebidensya, walang maiakusang

katiwalian laban sa akin. Kaya sa pamamagitan ng paglilitis na ito, naghanap sila, binaluktot

ang mga batas na dapat ay nagbibigay ng proteksiyon at siguridad sa mamamayan para lamang

ako ay madiin. They broke all laws to fish evidence against me. They attempted to pin me down via

means that undermined our laws and our Constitution.

Bilang Punong Mahistrado ng bayan, bilang tagapagtanggol ng batas, hindi po ako

makapapayag dito at ito ay hindi katanggap-tanggap sa akin. Binaboy nila ang proseso ng

Saligang Batas para yurakan ang aking mga karapatanmga batas ng foreign currency deposit,ng AMLA, and due process sa ilalim ng Constitution at iba pa. Nakababahala po ito, bayan. Hindi

lamang dahil sa aking sarili, kundi na rin sa ating demokrasya at sa ating mamamayan. Kung

kaya nilang gawin ito sa pinakamataas na Mahistrado ng ating gobyerno, hindi ba nila ito

magawa sa ordinaryong mamamayan? Hindi ba nila magawa sa inyo, mga Ginoong Senador at

Ginang Senador? Hindi ba nila magawa ito kahit na kaninong opisyal ng gobyerno?

Ang mga akusasyon nila sa akin ay pawang kathang-isip lamang. Mga ebidensya na

minaniobra, pineke.

The Presiding Officer. Mawalang-galang, Mr. Chief Justice, how much more time do

you need?


11/35


Mr. Corona. Sandali na lamang po kasi po kung mamarapatin po ninyo, mawalang-galang

po sa inyo.


Mr. Corona. At higit sa lahat, ginamit po ang puwersa at makinarya ng gobyerno laban

sa isang taong walang kalaban-laban sa kanila. Bilang Punong Mahistrado ng Korte Supremaat pinuno ng Hudikatura, labis kong dinaramdam at kinukondena ang pagyurak sa aking

karapatan, sa ating mga batas, at ang masamang epekto nito sa ating demokrasya.

Kaisa ako sa pananagutin ang may kasalanan. Kaisa ako sa hangaring pairalin ang batas,

ngunit ako ang unang-unang lalaban kapag ito ay ginawa ng walang basehan at hindi naaayon

sa ating mga batas, lalaban sa anumang paglalapastangan sa ating Saligang Batas, sa

karapatan ng ating mamamayan. Ito lamang po ang tanong ko sa bayan at ito rin po ang

tanong ko sa Prosecution. Ladies and gentlemen of the Prosecution, ito lamang po ang tanong ko

sa inyo. Kung talagang malakas ang inyong kaso na isinampa sa akin, bakit kayo kailangang

mag-imbento ng ebidensya? Sagutin po ninyo iyan sa taong-bayan.

Bakit kailangang mag-blackpropaganda, mag-imbento, magsinungaling, at maghukay ngwalang hanggan? Bakit kailangang humantong sa madumi, sa masama at sa mapanakit na

paraan? Nawa ay huwag na sana pong maulit ang nangyari, ang malungkot na kabanatang ito

sa ating kasaysayan, at sana ay huwag na muling mangyari sa kaninuman ang pang-aapi na

methodical na pagwasak sa mga institusyon: sa simbahan, sa military, sa bureaucracy.

Sa aking pananaw po, tatlo pong dahilan kung bakit ako ay sinampahan nitong impeachment

complaint na ito. Ang una po, ang matinding galit ng hacienderong Pangulo sa pagkakatalo niya

tungkol sa Hacienda Luisita. Ano po ba ang karapatan ng Pangulong Aquino na ikagalit sa

pamamahagi ng Hacienda Luisita sa magsasaka? Ang lupaing ito ay ipinahiram lamang sa

kanila. Inagaw lamang itong lupang ito sa mga ninuno ng mga kasalukuyang magsasaka.

Halos animnapung taon na pinakinabangan at pinagkakitaan nila ang Hacienda Luisita, at

pagkatapos ngayon, ayaw na nilang isoli?

Mr. Bautista. Mr. President, for the Prosecution please. May I say something?

The Presiding Officer. What is the pleasure of the Prosecution?

Mr. Bautista. This is highly irregular. The Chief Justice is taking advantage of this platform, and

he is being allowed to speak without the benefit of direct examination. All the issues he has mentioned

are irrelevant here.

The Presiding Officer. Anyway, Counsel, my understanding is that the Chief Justice is making

an opening statement that will be a part of his testimony. You can exercise your right of cross-examination at the proper time. So, let us allow the Chief Justice to finish.

Mr. Bautista. Just for the record, Mr. President.

The Presiding Officer. Yes.

Mr. Bautista. There are parties here who are being accused, maligned....

The Presiding Officer. I said let the Chief Justice proceed.

Mr. Bautista. Yes, Your Honor.


12/35


Mr. Corona. Ginoong Prosecutor, kausap ko po ang taong-bayan. Hayaan naman po ninyo

akong kausapin ang taong-bayan.

Mr. Bautista. Sige po.

Mr. Corona. Halos 60 taon na pinakinabangan at pinagkakitaan ang Hacienda Luisita, at

pagkatapos ngayon ay gusto pa silang bayaran ng bilyon-bilyong piso na kapalit.Pangalawang dahilan: Ang kagustuhan ng Pangulong Aquino na kontrolin ang tatlong

sangay ng gobyerno at sirain ang pagkapantay-pantay ng Executive, ng Legislative, at ng

Judiciary; paggamit ng lakas at kapangyarihan para makuha lamang itong layuning ito.

Pangatlong dahilan: Ang unti-unting pagmamaniobra at pagsakop ng kaliwa sa pamamahala

ng gobyerno at ang kanilang napipintong take-over ng ating bansa. Tila hawak na hawak ni

Ronald Llamas at ang kaniyang mga kakosa sa leeg ang Pangulong Aquino.

Gusto ko pong sabihin ngayong nandito na po ako sa puntong sino po ba si Renato Corona.

Si Renato Corona po ay isang simpleng tao na nanggaling sa mahusay na pamilya, simpleng

pamilya naman po. Kami po ay naturuan ng family values, disiplina, maging madasalin, tahimikna pamumuhay, pagmamahal sa bayan, mahusay na pagkatao....

The Presiding Officer. Mr. Chief Justice, under the rules of evidence, good character is not

admissible unless impugned. But in the interest of liberality, we will allow you to finish your statements.

Mr. Corona. Preliminary lamang po. Thank you, Your Honor.

Ako po ay naturuan ng magandang pagkatao ng aking magulang, nakapag-aral sa Ateneo,

sa Harvard Law School at sa UST. Hindi naman po kami nanggaling ng aking maybahay sa

maralitang pamilya at hindi naman po ako maralita nung ako ay pumasok sa gobyerno. Ang

akin pong asawa at ang aking pamilya, tatlong anak at anim na apo, ay nanggaling naman po

sa mahusay na pamilya rin. Iyong kaniyang great grandfather po, si Jose Maria Basa Sr., aynaging pangalawang pangulo ng Katipunan, iyong una po ay si Deodato Arellano at si Jose Maria

BasaSr. ang pangalawang pangulo, at ang pangatlo po ay pinalitan na nila ang pangalan, si

Andres Bonifacio ang tinawag na nilang supremo.

The Presiding Officer. Mr. Chief Justice, may I plead with you to wind up so that we can

proceed with the trial. I will give you, how many minutes more do you need, Mr. Chief Justice?

Mr. Corona. Sandali na lamang po. Importante kasing makita ito ng sambayanan natin

sapagkat limang buwan na po akong araw-araw 24/7 na siniraan nang siniraan doon sa media

sa labas.

The Presiding Officer. Mr. Chief Justice, you have the floor unless I am disauthorized by the

Members of this Court. You may proceed and finish your statements.

Mr. Corona. Kailangan pong malaman ng sambayanan natin kung sino ako. Kasi dahil

doon sa media campaign na naganap ng Prosecution doon sa labas nitong Impeachment Court na

ito, napakasama po ng tingin sa akin bilang tao ng maraming tao. At siguro, ito na lamang po

ang kahuli-hulihang pagkakataon na maitama ko ang impression ng tao tungkol sa akin.

Ano po ba ang lifestyle naming pamilya? Ang lifestyle po namin ay napakasimple, napakatipid

at hindi mapag-aksaya. Hindi po kami mahilig sa sosyalan, nakatutok sa pamilya. For 40 years

po, kami ay nakatira sa parehong bahay na minana ko sa aking magulang. Kailanman, the past


13/35


40 years, hindi kami nakapagbayad ng upa or amortization sa housing loan. Simpleng buhay at

tahanan lamanghindi man kami gumagamit ng aircon sapagkat napakadali po naming

magkasakit sa lamig. Simpleng pagkain lamang ang kinakain namin sa bahay, at sa maniwala

po kayo at sa hindi, kami po ay walang katulong sa bahay.

At, iyan ang sinasabi kong katotohan sa inyo. Ganoon kasimple po ang aming pamumuhay

na paminsan-minsan lamang na may dumadating na naglilinis ng aming bahay o nagplaplantsang aming damit. Halos dalawa lang po ang pinagkakagastahan namin ng aking maybahay

iyong aming pagkain po at iyong ginagastos namin para ipagpaaral dahil marami po kaming

pinag-aaral na mga kabataan.

Masuwerte po ako. Maayos naman po ang lagay ng aming mga anak kaya hindi rin

nakakabigat sa amin. Masuwerte po ako na ang napangasawa ko 42 years ago ay isang babae

na napakasimple at napakatipid din. These past, more than 40 years na kaming mag-asawa, wala

po kaming nabiling mamahaling property sa buong buhay namin. Tulad ng magagarang bahay

sa exclusive subdivision o hindi kaya ay mamahaling kotse o painting. At ito ay hindi ho

exaggeration. Sa aking tanda po, the past 45 years since I started working, wala pong lumipas na

kahit na isang buwan na hindi po ako nakapag-save ng bahagi ng aking kinita noong buwan naiyon. Kaya hindi naman po nakakapagtaka na marami po kaming naipon. Kaya nakakasakit

po ng kalooban, totoong nakaka-insulto na matapos kaming magtipid at mag-ipon for almost 45

years, kami po ay tatanungin ngayon at sasabihin sa amin, Bakit ka maraming cash? Siguro

magnanakaw ka.

The Presiding Officer. Mr. Chief Justice, are you through?

Mr. Cuevas. The Witness, Your Honor, is appearing to be very emotional. He is on the verge

of tears. I wonder whether the Court will be magnanimous enough to grant us even a two-minute recess

only in order to enable him to gain his composure, Your Honor, and we will wind up within that period,

I assure the Court.The Presiding Officer. The trial is suspended for two minutes.



The Presiding Officer. Session resumed.

Mr. Cuevas. Your Honor, please, may we ask permission that the Chief Justice proceed

with his

The Presiding Officer. Yes. The Chief Justice may proceed. And may we respectfullyrequest the Chief Justice to wind up so that we can proceed with the direct examination.

We will allow you, Mr. Chief Justice, to finish your statement.

Mr. Cuevas. Thank you, Your Honor.

Mr. Corona. Marami pong salamat.

Papasok na po ako doon sa mga bagay at mga issue na alam kong hinihintay nitong

Impeachment Court na ito. But just a few preliminary statements before that, but I will be going into

that shortly.


14/35


Bago po tayo nag-break, gusto ko po sanang itanong, ihayag sa publiko kung bakit kami ay

hindi namili ng magagarang property these past 45 years, at bakit nasa cash ang aming mga

investments. Mahirap pong intindihin ito kung hindi ko ibabahagi sa inyo at ikukuwento sa inyo

ang masaklap na nangyari sa pamilya ng aking asawa.

During several sessions ago, several trial dates ago, mayroon pong mga testigong tumestify

(testify) dito at nagsiwalat ng mga bagay-bagay na tungkol halimbawa doon sa Basa-GuidoteEnterprises. At ito nga pong eksperyensa nitong pamilya ng Misis ko ang dahilan kung bakit

wala kaming masyadong hilig mag-invest sa property, at in-invest namin instead iyong aming

resources sa foreign exchange.

May isang hearing date po tayo na kung anu-ano na yatang masamang adjective ang naipukol

sa aking maybahay tungkol doon sa auction nung shares ng Basa-Guidote. Hindi po ninyo

maiintindihan iyan kung hindi ko ibibigay sa inyo ang background ng problema at ng hidwaan

sa loob ng pamilya nila. Malungkot nga ho at kailangan kong ikuwento dito sa harap ng

publiko.

Pero siguro oras na nga rin siguro na malaman ng ating taumbayan kung ano nga ba ang

nangyari sa loob nitong pamilyang ito kung bakit ganoon katindi at ganoon kalalim ang

hidwaan at alitan doon sa pamilyang iyon. Marami pong dahilan. Pero isa po sa pinakamalaking

dahilan sa hidwaan diyan sa pamilyang iyan ay iyong two-hectareBasaCompound doon sa Libis,

malapit po sa Eastwood, malapit doon sa property ni nasirang Col. Rolando Abadilla at kung anu-

ano pa iyong ibang property. Noong araw po, iyong titulo ng praperting (property) iyan, ng Libis

property, two (2) hectares po iyan na sa kasalukuyang mga presyo ay conservatively P2.5 billion

worth. Billion po, hindi po million.

Noong araw po, ang titulopo niyang two-hectare Basa Property na iyan, Basa Compound sa

Libis ay nasa pangalan ni Jose Basa III at ng aking mother-in-law, Asuncion Basa Roco. Hindi

po namin malaman at walang makapagsabi kung papaano nakapagpa-issue si Mr. Jose Basa ng

titulo doon sa Basa Compound na iyon na ngayon ay nagkakahalaga ng P2.5 billion conservatively

at nakapagpa-issue siya ng titulo at nawala iyong pangalan ng aking mother-in-law at nakapagpa-

issue siya ng titulo sa pangalan lamang niya. Iyan po ang isang napakalaking dahilan diyan sa

hidwaan ng pamilyang iyan. Kaya kung makikita po ninyo, bakit may mga kasong mahigit na

30 years na pong pending diyan sa RTC ng Manila? Dahil nga po diyan sa matinding samaan

ng loob dahil diyan sa Basa Compound na iyan sa Libis. Nawala na lang po ang kalahating share

ng mother-in-law ko.

At hindi lang po iyan. Ang problema po kasi sa pamilya nila ay napakayamang pamilya pero

iyong mga kanilang ari-arian ay nakatali sa property.Alam naman po nating mga abogado, from

our experience, pag kayo ang nagpamana ng property, sigurado maraming beses away. Kasi

sasabihin noong isa, O bakit iyan yung napunta sa kanya, iyon ang gusto ko? Bakit ito lang

ang binigay sa akin, eh ayaw ko nito? Sasabihin noong isa, Eh kasi naman, mas marami ka

nangnakuha kaysa sa akin, kung anu-anong dahilan.At madalas po nasa ating ekspiryensang

mga abogado, iyan ay pinagsisimulan ng mga kaso-kaso at iyan din po ang istorya nitong Basa

Guidote na ito.

Sino po ba? Five months na po kaming ininsulto ng ininsulto ng walang tigil sa isang

pahayagan kung bakit ganoon kasuwapang daw iyong aking maybahay, tuso daw, walanghiya

at kung anu-anong adjective ang ginamit sa kanya. Hindi pohindi po, wala pong katotohanan

iyan. Hindi po si Mr. Jose Basa ang inapi. Siya po ang nang-api sa aking mother-in-law at sa

pamilya ng aking mother-in-law.


15/35


Ayaw ko na po sanalimang buwan na po kaming binabatikos ng walang katigil-tigil diyan.

Kami po ay tumahimik lamang. Wala po kaming sinasabi. At bakit po kami walang imik?

Sapagkat iyong tao ay patay na kaya ayaw na namin sabihin sana kung ano iyong mga nagawa

niya. Pero ngayon po mapipilitan po akong isiwalat sa buong bayan ang katotohanan po, hindi

lang po iyong side nila ang nadidinig, na parang kami ang napakawalanghiya at kami ang

napakasalbaheng tao.

Maliban po sa pagkawala ng pangalan nuongpagkaka-issue ng bagong titulo noong Basa

Compound na nawala iyong pangalan iyong kalahating share nuong aking mother-in-law.

Si Mr. Basapo, I am sorry to say this again, I am sorry and I really apologize to have to say it

nowpero kailangan po sigurongmalaman ng bayan. Wala naman po siyang trabaho eh. Buong

buhay naman niya spoiled bratpo, anak mayaman. Tuwing may kailangan po, takbo kay Mama,

kay Lola Charing, hingi ng pera. Pag walang pera yung matanda, sige benta, benta kaliwat

kanan, benta kaliwat kanan. Ilan po ba ang anak niyang pinaaaral? Siyam po ang anak ni

Mr. Jose Basa. Wala naman po siyang trabaho. At yung kaisa-isang property na pong natira

doon sa matanda, yun na nga po yung Basa-Guidote property dun sa Sampaloc na kinuha at binili

ng City of Manila. Pati yun po gusto pong ibenta ni Mr. Basa.

Ang sabi ng mother-in-law ko, Enough is enough. Tama na naman. Tama na naman, nakuha

mo na yung share ko dun sa Libis, nawala na yung pangalan ko, tumahimik ako. Ang dami mo

nang kinuhang property sa Mama, hindi ako umimik. Pati ba naman itong kaisa-isang ito

kukunin mo pa at gusto mo na namang ibenta?

Nadinig ko po kayo, Mr. Senate President, nung dini-discuss po yung auction nung shares ng

Basa-Guidote. Nadinig ko po angmagwalang-galang na po, medyo

The Presiding Officer. Go ahead, Mr. Chief Justice, I remember what I said.

Mr. Corona. Opo. Magwalang-galang na po, parang mga tanong po ninyo ay parang, bakitparang napaka-tuso at napakawalanghiya nung aking asawa na binid(bid) po forP28,000 yung

shares ni Mr. Basa na meron namang P34.7 million, nandun sa ilalim.

Ito nga po ang nangyari dito. Dahil nga kinuha na niya ang kalahati ng Libis na hindi

umimik yung mother-in-law ko. Kakapiranggot lang po ito doon sa nakuha niya roon sa Libis

na binura yung pangalan ng aking mother-in-law at napa-issue niya ng titulo na pangalan na

lamang niya ang natira. Ngayon po, tinanong po, nadinig ko po nung dini-discuss itong Basa-

Guidoteng ito, parang nadinig ko sa inyo na gusto niyong malaman, ano ba ang nangyari dito

sa mga shares na ito? Bakit ganun ang nangyari? Hindi ko po alam kung ano ang nangyari

sapagkat wala po ako roon at ang Misis ko po ay may sariling abogado niya. Kaya ang ginawa

ko po ay ipinasalaysay ko sa aking anak, yung si Carla po, kung ano ang nangyari.

Ang sabi ko, Ilagay mo in writing yung recollection mo nung nangyari at ito ay babasahin

ko sa Impeachment Court dahil, I think, this is relevant to the discussion of the issue at hand. Kaya

ito po, babasahin ko po yung sulat sa akin nung aking anak na dinedetalye kung ano ang

nangyari doon sa auction ng shares.

Mommyand I am now quoting from the report of my daughter to meThe auction

sale complied with the process and requirements of the law. Mommy went to the Quezon City

RTC in the morning of September 30, 2003, with her lawyer to get paid for the damages

brought on by the libel suit against the Basas.


16/35


Ano po ba itong libel suit na ito? Ito po yung nagpa-publish po sa diaryo si Mr. Basa. Almost

one pageyung advertisementon a Saturday and a Sunday ofPhilippine Starand Philippine Daily

Inquirer, obviously for maximum damage to the reputation of my wife at nilagay na kung anu-anong

masasama ang nilagay doon. Siya ay dinemanda ng libel ng aking maybahay at nanalo naman

sa lahat ng libel cases.

So ipagpapatuloy ko po: To get paid for the damages brought on by the libel suit against theBasas. She mentioned, my wife, mentioned, this auction to me, to my daughter, in passing a few

days prior and told me it had been published for several weeks.Iyung notice of auction,pinablis

(published) for several weeks.

I have been looking for something to invest my savings in so I entertained the possibility. I have

serious reservations about it though because I didnt really want to get involved in that family squabble.

The greed and cunning of those people were enough to make anyone sick.

After selling away the properties of my Moms grandmother, and not giving my grandmother her

share of the proceeds repeatedly, they still wanted all the remaining properties for themselves always

with the end in view of selling them kasi wala naman po siyang trabaho and not giving my

grandmother her share. Their rationale: they are the Basas and my grandmother, iyung grandmother,iyung mother-in-law ko po has become a Roco and is well-provided for by my grandfathers income

as a respected lawyer and business executive.

The risk of buying, eto po importante, the risk of buying shares of Basa-Guidote Enterprises

were explained to me. The festering family feud was obviously a big risk. Cases are pending to this

day, more than 30 years na pong pending sa RTC of Manila: one in the Court of Appeals for a

convenyance of title, for a property that belongs to Basa-Guidote but got registered fraudulently under

the name of Jose Maria Basa III. This case was resolved by the RTC of Manila in 2001, after a 16-

year litigation period in favor of the corporation. Jose Maria Basa III, appealed to the Court of

Appeals.

Another case is pending in the RTC of Manila for the probate of the will ofLola Charing, iyung

ina po noong aking mother-in-law. Two other cases are pending in the RTC of Manila for

determination of ownership of shares. When these cases are decided with finality, only can the

corporation be liquidated and dissolved. Shareholders can thereafter sell one other remaining property

and get their portions of the proceeds of the sales of corporate property.

My mother, my wifepo, referring to my wife, has to observe due process and wait for these

cases to be resolved in accordance with the law. These cases started in 1989, more than 30 years

na po when my father, ako po raw, was still a private citizen and had no influence on the courts.

Now, that he is in the judicial system, my mother has been very careful, meaning my wife, has been

very careful not to be perceived as using my Dads influence over the magistrates. She has left it to

her lawyers to file the proper motions and he is careful to the extent of not attending the hearings.

If what my Dads accusers, iyung mga accusers ko pa daw po, are saying is true about using

his influence, iyung influence ko daw po, would these cases still be pending in 2012 after more than

30 years? At iyan po ang katotohanan talaga. Kung ginamit ko po ang aking impluwensiya

tapos na po itong mga kasong ito at nanalo po kaming lahat.

Ipagpatuloy ko lang po.

It is the Basas who are prolonging the cases. For instance, after litigating their claim over a title

for 16 years, after the judge decided the case in favor of Basa-Guidote Enterprises based on the

evidence and the law, they still appealed it to the Court of Appeals.


17/35


We also have the libel cases which started in 1996 for four cases, one per publication. Jose Maria

Basa III and his wife, Raymunda Basaiyongpinalalabas po sa mga dyaryo at sa media na naaapi

dawwere convicted in all four cases of libel against my wife in various years.

In the RTC of Quezon City, they were convicted and sentenced in 2001. They opposed the writ

of execution to further delay the payment of damages.

Finally, partial damages were paid on September 30, 2003, through the auction of their BGEI

shares. Two other sentences in RTC of Manila were appealed to the Court of Appeals thus prolonging

further the payment of damages.

Now, who is oppressing whom? My mother, iyong wife ko daw po, was the victim of a very

grievous crime against her honor and reputation. Jose and Raymunda Basa fled the country, tumakbo

po sila, eh. Nang sila aynasentensiyahan, tumakas po sila. They fled the country and refused to

pay damages and serve their prison term.

Jose Maria Basa III and Raymunda had their day in court. They were arraigned. They were

allowed by the court to defend themselves on the witness stand. They were convicted and sentenced

in 2001. Jose Maria Basa III was very much alive when he committed the crime, when he wasarraigned and while the proceedings were going on. He was found guilty. He must pay the damages

that he is being ordered to pay by the court. His death did not extinguish his debts.

I know about these cases, I, meaning my daughter. I know about these cases involving the shares

of stock and they could go whichever way. Ito po ang importante. The risk of buying into a very

messy corporation like this was so grave that I was willing to bid only as high as P50,000. Yes, there

are proceeds from the sale of corporate property. But the ownership of the shares is being disputed

and is still under litigation. Per the BGEI Articles of Incorporation, Jose Basa III owned only 110

shares and his wife Raymunda owned another 110 shares.

Since these shares were valued at P100 per share, the total value, therefore, of their combined

shares was only P22,000.

Jose Basa III was claiming that he owned 4,860 shares because he claimed to have bought and

paid for the shares of the other stockholders, namely; Mario Basa, the late Sister Concepcion Basa and

Sister Flor Basa who is always appearing on TV.

After weighing the pros and cons, I, meaning my daughter, decided to invest my savings in the

said shares. I remembered telling Mommy, iyong wife ko po, that I, my daughter, was willing to

go as high as P50,000. But if there were others who were willing to bid higher than I would, then I

would forego participating in the auction. It was better for her to get paid for the damages. But there

was nobody else who showed up at the auction.

So, I paid the P28,000 in cash, and that was it. I cannot stress enough that there was a great

risk in acquiring them, so I do not see how anyone can say I did not pay enough. No one else wanted

to sink in their money in such an uncertain corporation with so much infighting among the heirs. I was

also told, iyong daughter ko, was also told that the lower, ito po importante po ito sa

understandingpo ng mga Senador at ng ating taong bayan. I was also told that the lower my bid,

the easier it would have been for Jose III and Raymunda Basa to redeem the shares. Jose III and

Raymunda could redeem their shares within one year. They would only have to pay me back my bid

price of P28,000. Thereafter, they could regain ownership of the shares. But they did not.

Jose III and Raymunda Basa were convicted of libel against Mommy, my wife po, and since

they fled to the U.S. to evade arrest, Mommy had no choice but to garnish their shares. They were


18/35


very unfair to Mommy. Instead of paying for the damages, they fled to escape accountability and

serving out their prison term. It was only fair that Mommy would be paid damages. The court of law

convicted Jose III and Raymunda Basa, issued multiple warrants of arrest, and ordered them to pay

damages. They were guilty of destroying Mommys reputation and making her suffer the pain, the

anguish, the sleepless nights, the emotional turmoil, the damaged reputation and endless adverse effects

of such crimes. No compensation, in fact, is sufficient to pay for their crime.

Iyan po ang nangyari at sana naman po ay huwag ninyong tawagan ng kung anu-anong

masamang adjective iyong aking asawa knowing what happened dito sa pamilyang ito kung bakit

napakalalim po ng hidwaan at alitan nito. At mabalik naman po ako sa

The Presiding Officer. By the way, Mr. Chief Justice, just to clarify. What adjective was used?

Mr. Corona. Parang nadinig ko pa yata, if my memory serves me right,parang may nadinig

ako na nakaisa, nakagulang, nakapangtuso. Iyon po ang nadidinig ko.

The Presiding Officer. Was that

Mr. Corona. Hindi po kayo, hindi po kayo.The Presiding Officer. Ah, hindi po ako.

Mr. Corona. Hindi po kayo, hindi po kayo.

The Presiding Officer. Tinanong ko lang po iyong sa sheriffkung um-object si Mrs. Corona

doon sa bid price of P28,000 because of the fact that at that point, the corporation had a cash asset

of P34.7 million. And the judgment to be satisfied was P500,000. And I was wondering as a lawyer,

and I am sure if you were in my place, you will probably wonder since the judgment is P500,000, half-

a-million, then at least the bid price ought to have been pegged at not less than half-a-million considering

the asset of the corporation.

But I understand from theI am sorry to clarify this, in order to be fair to everybody, the sheriff

said that the valuation of the shares that he exposed to bidding was provided by Mrs. Corona. I just

want to put this on the record. What I said is, Did Mrs. Corona raise any objection or a whimper

I remember I used the word whimperto object to the sale at auction of the shares of stock

controlling almost 91 percent of Basa-Guidote Corporation? And the sheriff said, No. Only the two

of them, the mother and the daughter talked to each other.

I just want to put that into the record because I do not remember having used any adjective

Mr. Corona. No, hindi po kayo.

The Presiding Officer. that would extend or in any way imply any unwelcome or unpleasantconduct of Mrs. Corona.

So, you may proceed, Mr. Chief Justice.

Mr. Corona. Iyon nga po, pinaliwanag ko po iyong dahilan noong hidwaan nila at alitan

na napakalalim na hidwaan na ako po mismo ay nahihirapan na rin noon kasi gusto ko nga

sanang magkaayus-ayos na sila pero hindi ko po nakayang pagkasunduin sila.

Ngayon po, mabalik po ng kaunti lang kung bakit nga po iyong pasya namin nung aking

maybahay na hindi kami namimili ng mamahalin at magagarang property magbuhat noong araw

pa po. Kasi nga po nakita namin itong problema sa pamilya nila. Kaya po ang pasya namin


19/35


ay i-invest na lang namin sa cash, sa foreign exchangepo, para hindi po mawala iyong halaga at

para madali pong paghati-hatian kungsaka-sakaling may mangyayari sa amin, idi-divide lang

po by three, madali, walangproblema at walang inggitan kung ano ang makukuha ng sino.

May isa pong dahilan before I go into the othermore substantial thingsmay isa pong dahilan

pa kung bakit nagpasya na kami na i-invest po sa cash o manatili sa cash iyong aming mga

savings. Ako po ay isang diabetiko, matagal na po itong sakit kong ito, 1986 pa po.

The Presiding Officer. Mr. Chief Justice, I would like to caution you. We, at the behest and

motion of your lawyers, when we were considering the evidence being presented by the Prosecution,

we did not authorize the introduction of evidence to establish ill-gotten wealth and there is no allegation

as of today that will support the presentation of evidence regarding ill-gotten wealth. If at all, the

reentrant of this issue of ill-gotten wealth was not provided by the Prosecution, to be fair to them. It

was provided by your own lawyers who presented a witness here to testify on the totality of the income

of your family to justify the purchases of certain concrete assets, condominium and land and so forth

and so on.

And so I am saying this that there is no issue of ill-gotten wealth here.Mr. Corona. Correct po, malinaw po iyon.

The Presiding Officer. Correct. The simple issue is simply inclusion and exclusion of property

in your SALN. That is covered by Paragraphs 2.2 and 2.3 of Article of Impeachment No. II.

So, for the introduction of evidence regarding wealth that it is honestly done or dishonestly acquired,

will really bring back into the picture paragraph 2.4 of Article II, of the Articles of Impeachment which

we already granted to be suppressed as far as introduction of evidence is concerned. So if you are

going to revive this with your testimony, then it will become open to a cross-examination by the

Prosecution and maybe by the Members of this Court.

Mr. Corona.Hindi ko po reni-revive ito. Binabanggit ko lang po ito sapagkat malinaw po

na nalason po ang pag-iisip ng publiko sa mga atake sa amin sa labas.

The Presiding Officer. I will allow you to proceed, Mr. Chief Justice, kaya lang po, I am

cautioning you because this is, as you know, an adversarial trial that you will be opening yourself to

cross-examination in this area. But anyway, it is your responsibility and I will allow you to continue

with your statement.

Mr. Corona.Opo. Ayun, ako po ay magpapatuloy na doon sa aming properties.

Ako po ay pinaratangan na may 45 ari-arian daw at ito ay sapul sa simula ay sinabi kong

malaking kasinungalingan. Alam naman po ni Eulalio Diaz III, Administrador ng LRA atpamangkin ni Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales at ni Justice Antonio Carpio at matalik na

kaibigan ni Pangulong Aquino, na wala naman akong 45 properties eh. Alam naman niya iyon

eh. At iyong listahan na taglay-taglay niya dito sa hearing na ito ay exaggerated, huwad, at hindi

totoo. Ngunit linabas pa rin niya sa mediapo. Ang tingin po tuloy ng mga tao doon sa labas

kunganong....Sino ba itong taong ito, may 45 properties? Pati poako nagulat, pamilya ko

nagulat, 45 properties, wala pa akong nakikilala pong tao dito sa Pilipinas na may 45 properties.

Ang sinasabi ko po sa bayan ngayon at ako ay nagbubukas ng kalooban sa inyo at sa ating

bayan, wala po akong 45 properties. Lilima lang po ang akin diyan at iyan ay pinatunayan na

namin at lahat ay nakadeklara po sa aking SALN. Wala po akong tinago na ari-arian na hindi


20/35


ko linagay sa aking SALN. Kahit na ang binabatikos sa akin dito sa Impeachment Court na ito

na bakit ko raw hindi inilagay ang acquisition cost? Ang sagot ko po ay nakadeklara naman po

iyong asset sa aking SALN. At iyong mga asset na iyan ay nakarehistro sa Register of Deeds na

kung saan nakarehistro din iyong mga public documents covering that asset. It is something that

I am not hiding because it is a public document that can be checked anytime.

Ngayon nadinig ko po rito sa Impeachment Court na ito,Bakit ginamit mo iyong fair marketvalue ng tax declaration at hindi mo linagay iyong fair market value ng kasalukuyan?

Unang-una po, hindi ko naman po alam iyong fair market value ng kasalukuyan dahil kung

ganoon po ang ating pagbabatayan, di lahat po ng nanunungkulan sa gobyerno na may ari-

arian, every year, kailangan pong tumawag ng appraiserpara ma-revise iyong fair market value ng

kanyang ari-arian.Hindi naman siguro iyon ang intensiyon noong SALN Law.Ngunit nakalagay

po at nakasaad doon sa tax declaration ng fair market value ay periodically ina-adjustpo ng assessor

in accordance with present realities. Maaaring hindi tumugma sa actual selling price na gusto ninyo

pero still, it is being updated periodically by the assessor. Between the assessors fair market value

determination and the actual selling price if you were to sell it at present-day prices, as far as the SALN

is concerned, mas reliablepo ang values na nakalagay sa tax declaration because primarily iyon poay ginamit ko on a very consistent basis. Magbuhat noong araw hanggang ngayon, iyon na

lamang po ang aking inilalagay doon.

Kung gagamitin naman natin ay acquisition cost, iyong property na halimbawa ay binili ko

noon 1992 for P3 million, kung iyon ang gagamitin kong value sa aking SALN, ngayong 2012 na

nagkakahalaga ng sampung milyon halimbawa, example lamang po, ay P3 million pa rin ang

ilalagay ko. Kaya hindi rin po updated at hindi rin po accurate. Kaya in good faithpo, inilagay

po iyong fair market value na nakalagay sa tax declaration dahil iyon ay mas reliable kaysa sa

actual price na hindi ko naman alam kung magkano ko ibebenta dahil hindi ko naman ibinibenta.

The only way na malalaman ko po iyon ay tatawag ako ng appraiser every year at ipapa-appraise

ko iyong property.

Pinatunayan din po namin na iyong acquisition cost, at ito po iyong sinasabi ninyo kani-

kanina ay nakapasok naman doon sa abot-kaya naman ng aking kinita at kung may kulang man

ay may pondong pribado naman pong pinagkunan na wala naman po sa pananaw ko,

mawalang-galang na po, walang koneksyon po dito sa impeachment trial na ito.

May inilabas din po sa media na marami raw kaming ari-arian sa Amerika. Kahit na isa

wala naman pong napatunayan. Kasi wala naman po kaming ari-arian sa Amerika. Iyong

sinabi nila na ari-arian namin sa Amerika, iyong listahan po kasing peke nung LRA list ng 45

properties. Nanggaling po sa isang pekeng manunulat na isang nagpapanggap na journalist daw

siya. Malinaw na malinaw po na iyon ay inilabas lamang para makasira ng reputasyon.

Ito na po, siguro ito na ang inyong pinakahihintay na topic. Iyong aming cash. Noong

pinatawag po namin si Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales, hati po iyong mga nagmamagandang-

loob sa amin. Mayroon pong nagsabi tila nagkamali yata kayo sa pagpatawag sa kaniya.

Mayroon namang nagsasabi na hindi tama na ipatawag ninyo si Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-

Morales. Ako po, sa kaibuturan ng aking puso, naniniwala po ako na tama ang pagpapatawag

namin at pagsu-subpoena kay Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales.

Sabi ni Ombudsman Carpio-Morales, ako raw po ay may US$10million hanggang US$12

millionposa 82 bank accounts. Wala po akong kilalang tao na may 82 bank accounts. Ewan ko

lang po kay Ombudsman Morales, baka siya mayroon kaya nakatanim sa isip niya iyong 82 bank

accounts.


21/35


Ang katotohanan po, ako ay nagulat sa sinabi ni Ombudsman Morales lalung-lalo na noong

siya ay nag-PowerPoint presentation, na klineym (claimed)poniya na ako daw ay may 82 dollar

accounts.

She misleadingly alleged that such information was based on the report provided her by AMLC.

Ito pong AMLC Report na ginamit ni Ombudsman Morales dito sa Impeachment Court na ito, na

ginamit dito sa Impeachment Court na ito, ay hindi po authenticated. Walang predicate crime,walang imbestigasyon, walang court order, walang notice sa depositor. Clearly, it came from a

polluted source.

Ang ginawa ko po ay tumawag po ako ng isang team ng accountants. Napag-aralan yong

listahan na winawagayway dito ni Ombudsman Morales at malinaw na malinaw po na ang

kaniyang testimony was one of deception, exaggeration, and misrepresentation.

Gusto ko po sanang humingi ng pahintulot sa Honorable Impeachment Court kung puwede rin

po ako gumamit ng PowerPoint presentation.

The Presiding Officer. You are granted, Mr. Chief Justice.

Trial is suspended for one minute for the Chief Justice to prepare his PowerPoint presentation.



The Presiding Officer. The trial is resumed.

Mr. Chief Justice, are you ready with your PowerPoint presentation?

Mr. Corona. Yes, Mr. Senate President, I am ready.

The Presiding Officer. Well, you may proceed.

Mr. Cuevas. May we request, Your Honor, that Attorney Sta. Ana, who prepared this

PowerPoint presentation, be allowed to assist the Chief Justice.

The Presiding Officer. Just a minute. Will you repeat your request?

Mr. Cuevas. May we request, Your Honor, that Attorney Sta. Ana who principally prepared this

PowerPoint presentation, Your Honor....

The Presiding Officer. What is the nature of the assistance that will be extended?

Mr. Cuevas. Computer technical matters, Your Honor.

The Presiding Officer. Then place the one assisting the Chief Justice under oath because he is

going to be, in effect, participating in the....

Mr. Cuevas. We agree, Your Honor. We will comply very religiously. Attorney Sta. Ana, will

you come over? You swear under oath.

The Presiding Officer. The gentleman from Iloilo is recognized.

Senator Drilon. Mr. President, I think the lawyer will only operate the machine, if I got it

correctly, and will not testify. So, maybe we do not need to have him placed under oath because he

will not testify. He will just operate the machine.


22/35


The Presiding Officer. He will not assist in explaining the information that will be shown to the

Court?

Senator Drilon. No.

Mr. Sta. Ana. Mr. President, I will just be assisting in the operation of the laptop computer and

I will not testify on that.

The Presiding Officer. All right. Then you do not have to take the oath.

Mr. Cuevas. Thank you, Your Honor.

Mr. Sta. Ana. Thank you, Your Honor.

The Presiding Officer. All right. So ordered. Proceed.

Mr. Corona. With the permission of the Honorable Court.

The Presiding Officer. Proceed, Mr. Chief Justice.

Mr. Corona. Kagaya po ng nasabi ko kanina bago tayo nag-break, narito ako parapabulaanan ang sinabi ni Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales na ako raw ay may US$10 million

to US$12 million sa 82 bank accounts. Wala pong katotohanan iyong sinasabi ni Ombudsman

Morales.

Noong siya ay mag-testify po dito, nag-assemblepo ako ng team of accountants to analyze her

presentation at gagamitin ko po ang sariling diagram ni Ombdudsman Moralespara i-expose ang

napakatinding pagsisinungaling niya para siraan o sirain ang aking reputasyon. Ito po ang

report ng aking mga accountant, iyong kanilang analysis noong explanation ni Ombudsman Morales.

The Presiding Officer. The Prosecution, since the Honorable Chief Justice is actually testifying

now under oath and he has been doing this. If there is any objectionable portion of the testimony ofthe Chief Justice, you may raise your objection and the Court will consider the objection.

Mr. Cuevas. Your Honor please, in consonance with the pronouncement made by the Honorable

Presiding Justice, may we now move that all the statements of the Witness in his opening statement be

considered as part of his testimony on direct examination, Your Honor. Anyway, that is under oath.

The Presiding Officer. Yes. Actually, the Chief Justice was placed on the witness stand, took

his oath

Mr. Cuevas. Yes, Your Honor.

The Presiding Officer. to testify and he testified in a narrative way.

Mr. Cuevas. Yes, Your Honor.

The Presiding Officer. And that is why earlier I said, with the objection or opposition being

raised, that the statements of the Chief Justice, his opening statements, is a part of his testimony already

and that it is open to cross-examination.

Mr. Cuevas. Thank you then, Your Honor.

The Presiding Officer. All right.

Mr. Cuevas. Very clearly...


23/35


The Presiding Officer. You may make your motion so that it will be officially recorded.

Mr. Cuevas. Yes, Your Honor. That is why I was making my motion that all the statements

or testimony made by the Chief Justice in connection with the opening statement be considered

as part of his direct examination, subject, of course, to the cross-examination required or prescribed

by law on the matter.

The Presiding Officer. What is the position of the Prosecution? Because there were hearsay

portions of the narration of the Chief Justice.

Mr. Bautista. If Your Honor will recall, I earlier tried to raise objections to the manner by which

the testimony of the Chief Justice is being presented.

The Presiding Officer. So, you will agree that we will consider the testimony of the Chief Justice

as his actual evidence in chief?

Mr. Bautista. Yes, but we would like to raise our objections, Your Honor, please.

The Presiding Officer. You will raise your...Mr. Bautista. Our continuing objection to the testimony of the Chief Justice. And if I may

discuss.

The Presiding Officer. Go ahead.

Mr. Bautista. First of all, as the Chair has noted, the testimony of the Chief constitutes hearsay.

It likewise constitutes irrelevant testimony. And he is incompetent to testify on some of the

subject matter.

What I would like to stress here, Your Honor please, is that the Chief has been hurling accusations,

charges against individuals who are not even parties to this complaint and who are not here to defendthemselves. And I think that is a gross violation of their rights.

The Presiding Officer. But anyway....

Mr. Bautista. I would just like to put that on record because it might be said that we just sat

down and did nothing. I would also like to put on record in the strongest, most vehement terms the

charges of the Chief that the Prosecutors have resorted to trickery, shenanigans or presenting evidence

that is fake.

Under the guidance and stewardship of our very competent, firm, and wise Presiding Judge,

with the support of the other Senator-Judges, how can we possibly do that? In fact, when

we filed our formal offer, our formal offer was admitted in evidence by the Senator-Judges.So, may I....

Mr. Cuevas. May we know the....

Mr. Bautista. Excuse me, I am not yet done. It is not fair.

The Presiding Officer. Let the Prosecution finish.

Mr. Bautista. Mr. Chief, we are lawyers here. We are under oath to push our cases

as hard as we can as your Defense Counsel has admirably done.

But to just cast aspersions on my team without any basis is unfair. And I object to it.


24/35


Mr. Cuevas. Are you through? May we....

The Presiding Officer. All right, we take note of your objection. But, anyway, this Court will

focus on the testimony of the Chief Justice and we will consider what is relevant and what is irrevelant;

what is material and what is immaterial.

Mr. Cuevas. Thank you, Your Honor.The Presiding Officer. So ordered.

Counsel for the Defense.

Mr. Cuevas. May we now....


Mr. Cuevas. May we now request permission for the Chief Justice to continue with his

presentation.

The Presiding Officer. Yes. The Chief Justice may now continue.

Mr. Corona. As I was saying earlier, Ombudsman Morales accused me of having US$10 to

US$12 million in 82 bank accounts. That is a malicious lie.

And I will be using the Ombudsmans own diagram which you will see on the screen to expose

the malicious lie she unleashed which was intended for no other reason but to destroy my reputation.

A careful analysis of the AMLC Report would show that many of these accounts were already

closed and the funds thereof transferred to settlement accounts. These bank accounts represent time

deposits or investments. Each time a time deposit would mature and be rolled over, a new account

would be created or consolidated to make a new placement to earn higher interest. These funds would

then be transferred from one account to another in order to earn more interest.

I repeat. Ladies and gentlemen of this Honorable Tribunal, inuulit ko po sa taumbayan, wala po

akong 82 bank dollar accounts. I do not have 82 dollar accounts as charged by the Ombudsman.

The alleged AMLC Report itself, contrary to the Ombudsmans misleading representations, will show

that there are only four (4) dollar accounts by December of 2012, four (4) not 82.

For example, in BPI-Acropolis branch, which only had seven (7) and not eight (8) bank accounts,

all these bank accounts in BPI-Acropolis were closed as early as 2004 to 2005 and transferred to

BPI-Tandang Sora and PSBank-Cainta. Thus, there were no longer any bank accounts in

BPI-Acropolis. For BPI-Tandang Sora branch, the Ombudsman said that I allegedly had 18 accounts

in said branch. But the alleged AMLC report will also show that all these accounts were closed duringthe period 2004 to 2007 and transferred to BPI-San Francisco Del Monte and PSBank-Cainta.

Makikita po ninyo doon sa screen,paliit nang paliit iyong pie na sinabi ni Ombudsman Morales

na mayroon daw ako.

The same goes for the 34 accounts in BPI-San Francisco Del Monte. The accounts in this branch

were closed beginning 2007 to December 2011.Iyon po, makikita ninyo, kakapiranggot na lamang

po ang natitira. The last account to be closed was the main account, Account No. 3244108104.

BPI-MIC, the BPI Investment Management Incorporated account was sourced from the BPI-San

Francisco Del Monte main Account No. 3244108104. This was closed on December 19, 2011 and

the funds therein transferred to main Account No. 3244108104.


25/35


For Allied bank, these placements include the Citibank and two (2) Deutsche Bank accounts. The

main account for Allied Bank is Account No. 1582002676. The alleged AMLC records show that

most of the Allied Bank accounts, including those accounts representing the placements made by Allied

Bank in Citibank and Deutsche Bank were closed, and the funds thereof transferred to the main

account, and this main account was closed in December of 2011.

For PSBank, all the bank accounts in PSBank-Cainta were closed between August and Octoberof 2008, and the funds in these accounts were transferred to PSBank-Katipunan. In PSBank-

Katipunan, the alleged AMLC report shows only the last two (2) PSB-Katipunan accounts: Account

Nos. 0141024292 and 0131002826. Iyan po, payat na payat na po ang natitira.

Hence, contrary to the Ombudsmans testimony, the alleged AMLC report shows that there were

only four (4) dollar accounts as of December of 2011, namely: BPI-San Francisco Del Monte, Account

No. 3244108104; Allied Bank Account No. 1582002676; PSBank Account Nos. 0141024292 and

0131002826. Iyan po ang natira sa sinasabing one big pie ni Ombudsman Morales.

Mayroon po akong tanong kay Ombudsman Carpio-Morales. Ginang Ombudsman, kayo po

ba ay pinapatulog pa ng konsensiya ninyo, kung mayroon po kayo niyon? Alam mo namangwala akong US$10 million to US$12 million deposits at wala akong 82 bank accounts. Bakit mo

naman pinangangalandakan sa publiko ang kasinungalingang ito?

Mr. Bautista. Your Honor, please, may I move to strike out those statements? They have no

place in a trial.

Mr. Cuevas. Your Honor, please, may I know the legal basis? Because that is a conclusion on

the part of counsel.

The Presiding Officer. What is the objection?

Mr. Bautista. The objection, Your Honor, it is a personal aspersion on the character of peoplewho are not here to defend themselves. Why do you not just testify on the facts and leave any

conclusions as to the motives of a person to the Judge?

The Presiding Officer. Anyway, the Chief Justice is the highest magistrate of the land, and he

knows the law, he knows the Rules of Evidence. And I will give him the leeway to answer the question

or to state his position. You can exhaust all your skills to cross-examine him after he finishes his

narration. I think it is about to end, anyway.

Mr. Bautista. I will do that, Your Honor.


Mr. Corona. Ombudsman Morales, nung ikaw ay tumestigo, tinanong ka kung magkano ang

balanse ng mga accounts ko. Ang sabi mo, hindi mo alam. Alam kong alam mo. Ayaw mo

lamang sabihin sapagkat mapapabulaanan ang sinabi mong mayroon akong US$10 to US$12

million. Base na rin sa mga dokumento na sinabi ni Ombudsman Carpio-Morales, na galing daw

sa AMLC, ang suma-total ng aking deposits ay malayung-malayo sa sinasabi niyang US$10 to

US$12 million na nasa apat (4) na accounts lamang, hindi 82.

Ang exchange rate po nung nag-umpisa kaming mag-ipon nitong mga foreign exchange na ito

nung late 60s, ay nasa 2:1 pa lamang.

The Presiding Officer. How much?


26/35


Mr. Corona. 2:1 po nung nag-umpisa kaming mag-ipon ng mga dollar namin, 2:1 pa lamang

po ang exchange rate.

The Presiding Officer. When was that, Mr. Chief Justice?

Mr. Corona. Mga late 60s po. Dahil ako po ay nagsimulang magtrabaho 1968. Ngayon

po ay halos 45:1 na ang exchange rate. Kung matatandaan po ninyo,....The Presiding Officer. Are you sure that late 60s or early 60s?

Mr. Corona. Late 60s.

The Presiding Officer. That is after 1965.

Mr. Corona. Opo.


Mr. Corona. Kung natatandaan po ninyo, nang matapos ang 1969 presidential elections,

hanggang noong November or December of 1969, nung naganap iyong 1969 presidential elections,ang exchange rate po ay 2:1. At nag-devalue tayo sa floating rate nung January of 1970, from 2:1,

naging 6:1. Maayos at maalwan naman po ang kita ko nung mga panahong iyon lalo na noong

ako ay naging abogado na. Lahat po ng savings namin pinalitan namin nang pinalitan

sa U.S. dollar.

Ang tanong naman po, bakit naman sa U.S. dollar? Sapagkat wala po kayong lugi sa U.S.

dollar. Dahil ito ay napaka-stable kung ikukumpara ninyo sa Philippine pesos. Ikaw ay liquid at

ito ay madaling palitan kung kailangan at mabilis umakyat ang halaga. At hindi naman po kami

nagkamali sa pagkaka-invest namin po sa foreign currency sapagkat ang exchange ratepo ay

tumalon na to almost seven times ang valor doon sa pagkabili namin halos 40 years ago.

At dahil halos hindi namin nagagalawang interest, dahil mayroon naman po akong kita sa

aking trabaho at sa practice, lumago po nang lumago ang halaga noong mga investment namin

sa foreign exchange.

Isa pa po, mahaba po ang history nitong mga pondong ito. Nag-umpisa po ito na matagal

na matagal na, dekada na po ang binibilang noong ako ay may mga account pa po sa Far East

Bankat isa pa o dalawa pang bangko.

Inuulit ko po sa inyo, mga Ginoong Hukom, wala po akong US$10 to US$12 million katulad

ng sinabi ni Ombudsman Carpio-Morales. Wala din po akong 82bank accounts. Ang lahat ng

nasa amin ay nanggaling sa mabuting paraan, sa sariling sikap at wala po akong ninakaw sa

gobyerno kahit na isang kusing; wala po akong ninakaw sa gobyerno kahit na isang pera.

The Presiding Officer. Are you through, Mr. Chief Justice?

Mr. Corona. Malapit na po.

Kinita po nang malinis ang lahat ng aming pinag-ipunan noong ako ay nasa pribadong

sektor pa. Nagbayad po ng tamang buwis at mahaba ang fund history ng mga pondong ito. At

bakit naman wala sa SALN ko? Sapagkat may batas po, Republic Act No. 6426 na

naggagarantiya ng confidentiality ng dollar deposits. Ang pagkakaintindi po sa pagbasa ng batas

ay hindi kailangan ideklara ang U.S. dollar deposits sa SALN dahil sa confidentiality provision ng

batas. This is an absolute rule. Mismong si dating Director Estrella Martinez ang nagsabi na sa


27/35


loob ng tatlumput dalawang taon niya sa pagsusuri ng mga SALN, noong siya ay naninilbihan

pa sa Bureau of Internal Revenue, wala pa siyang nakitang nag-deklara ng dollar deposits sa

SALN.

Ako po ba ay may itinatago? Sinasabi ko po sa inyo at tumitingin ako ng diretso sa mga

mata ninyo, wala po akong itinago sapagkat kung ako ay may itinago, hindi ko po ilalagay sa

pangalan ko ang kuwarta kong ito. Kung ako ay may itinago, hindi ko ilalagay sa pangalanko ang mga perang ito. Dekada na po ang binibilang buhat noong kami ay nag-invest sa foreign

exchange. Ako naman po ba ay may peso deposits?

The Presiding Officer. Mr. Chief Justice, I just want to clarify. I hope you do not mind.

Mr. Corona. Opo.

The Presiding Officer. Your dollar deposits were only earning interests, or are you engaged in

buying and selling foreign currencies?

Mr. Corona. Compoundedpo. Compounded annually, interestpo.

The Presiding Officer. Interest lang.

Mr. Corona. Opo.

The Presiding Officer. Okay.

Mr. Corona. May mga peso deposits ba na nasa pangalan ko? Opo. Pero, taliwas sa mga

sinabi ni Ombudsman Carpio-Morales na may 31peso deposit accounts daw ako, ito po ay hindi

po totoo sapagkat tatatlo lang po ang aking peso deposit accounts. Nakakapagtaka nga po, LRA

list, 45 properties daw, iyon palay lilima (5) lang. Dollar accounts, 82 daw pong dollar accounts,

iyon palay apat (4) lamang.At ngayon naman, 31 peso accounts daw po, iyon palay tatatlo (3)

lamang. Ang hilig naman pong mag-imbento.

At bakit ko naman hindi idineklara ang pesos ko na ito sa SALN ko? Sapagkat ito ay

commingled funds na hindi naman namin pag-aari. Sino po ang nagma-may-ari nitong mga

pondong ito? Ito po ay binubuo ng expropriation proceeds ng pag-benta ng Basa-Guidote property

sa City of Manila noong 2001. At sa nakaraang 11 yearspo, ito naman po ay kumita ng interest,

nandiyan din po iyan.

Noong taong mga 1990, noong ang aking ina po ay na-diagnose na may colon cancer,

inihabilin po niya kung anuman iyong natitirang pera niya sa bangko sa akin. Sabi niya, Ikaw

na ang mangasiwa niyang pundong iyan, ikaw na ang bahala sa pagbayad ng mga doktor ko,

pag-oospital ko, at lahat ngsorry to say itiyong funeral expenses ko.Nandiyan din po ang utos ng aking ina na kung may matitira, pagkatapos mabayaran ang

kanyang

Documents

May 22 Senate impeachment court record