BALER, Aurora – Sen. Edgardo J. Angara yesterday explained why he voted in favor of the Impeachment Court ruling against summoning the Corona family to the trial of Chief Justice Renato C. Corona.

It was the first decision in the trial that was put to a vote, in a session that was abruptly adjourned before any evidence was presented before the Court.

“I believe the Chair’s ruling was correct,” said Angara, a veteran lawyer and lawmaker.

“One of the cardinal rules of trial is that a witness cannot testify against himself,” explained Angara. “This is not only applicable to the accused, but also to his immediate family. They should not be summoned by the court and expected to disclose information against their own interests.”

“Constitutionalists and historians consider it one of the great advances of modern civilization—that no one can be compelled to testify against himself. The history of human rights violation is littered with incidents of men and women being compelled to disclose incriminating information through torture. This legal doctrine is a saving grace and the mark of a civilized judicial proceeding, Angara added.

He called for the prosecution to present their revised calendar for the presentation of evidence.

“I understand that many of the prosecutors are quite new to the whole process, and they were not very well prepared, but they will learn from their mistakes as we go along,” said Angara.

First-day jitters

Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. and other administration lawmakers attribute the blunders committed by the members of the prosecution panel on the 2nd day of the impeachment trial to first-day jitters.

Belmonte and Majority Leader Neptali Gonzales II yesterday led other solons in expressing support for the prosecution panel.

On Tuesday’s hearing, the prosecution group drew criticisms after one of the prosecutors,  Cavite Rep. Elpidio Barzaga, admitted that they are not prepared for the trial due to the absence of witnesses.

The defense panel likewise questioned the prosecution on why it was not following the chronological order of the articles of impeachment, as the prosecution was discussing first the Article 2 instead of Article 1.

Article 2 contained the failure of Chief Justice Renato Corona to file his Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net worth (SALN) since he was appointed as Associate Justice in 2002.

Because of this, the Senate impeachment court ordered the prosecution panel to submit the sequence of the Articles of Impeachment by which they will present its evidence during the trial.

According to Belmonte, what happened was due to first-day jitters.

“We had few minutes of coffee with the prosecutors as a show of support,” Belmonte said in an interview after a luncheon meeting yesterday with the prosecutors.

He said the team was prepared for the trial, but added that “not every single day you’re on top of your performance, this is just okay.”

Quezon Rep. Lorenzo Tañada III and Marikina Rep. Romero Federico Quimbo, spokespersons of the prosecution team, said that prosecutors during the Estrada trial had the same first-day jitters.     

Grandstanding

Stop grandstanding.

Zambales Rep. Mitos Magsaysay made this call to the prosecution team in the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona, in order to expedite the proceeding.

Magsaysay reminded the lawmakers that the proper venue to discuss the case is the impeachment court and not the media.

The lady solon criticized the prosecution panel for being unprepared for the impeachment trial. One of the prosecutors,  Cavite Rep. Elpidio Barzaga,  admitted during the trial that they had no witnesses yet to be presented.

“There is still a long way to go, but based on Day 2 of the impeachment trial, it would seem that despite their trumpeting of their strong evidence against the Chief Justice, the prosecution team seemed ill prepared for the actual trial,” she said.

Magsaysay said that she is not belittling the efforts of her colleagues who are part of the prosecution team because she also understands the weight of the responsibility involved in forming part of the team.

However, she believes that the prosecution’s predicament is a consequence of railroading the impeachment complaint without studying its full merits before it was approved.

“It would seem that even some members of the prosecution are unfamiliar with the actual contents of their complaint,” Magsaysay said.

“They signed this complaint without looking over all of the evidence they claim to have. With the way they are going about it before the trial, one would think that they would have their act together but apparently, it is better for them to present their case to the media rather than have it scrutinized in the proper court,” she added.

Witness

A Malacañang employee was to testify at the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona on the statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN) the chief magistrate submitted when he was still a Palace official.

Presidential Spokesman Edwin Lacierda told Palace reporters  Marianito Dimaandal of the Malacañang Records Office would testify   on the veracity of Corona's SALN while Corona was still with the Office of the President.

Corona previously served as acting executive secretary, presidential spokesman and Presidential Chief of Staff during the presidency of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.     With Jester P. Manalastas, EMontano