THE 11-man House prosecution panel yesterday branded as baseless and unfounded the defense team’s call for the inhibition of some senator-judges because of the perceived bias for the prosecutors, saying they should not be punished for only trying to ferret out the truth.

“Why would the senators be punished for bringing out the truth that the defense has sought to conceal? Even a four-year old knows that honesty is the best policy,” Marikina City Rep. Miro Quimbo, spokesman for the prosecution panel, said in an interview.

He was reacting to the statement of retired Justice Serafin Cuevas, Corona’s lead counsel, that members of the defense team may call for the inhibition of some senator-judges should they continue to display bias and partiality in their lines of questioning during trials.

Quimbo said it should be Chief Justice Renato Corona who should take a leave of absence out of delicadeza. “If there is any inhibition that defense lawyers should be asking, it is the Chief Justice from the Supreme Court. He should take a leave of absence, especially considering that more evidence on his alleged undeclared ill-gotten wealth has come out.”

“If defense counsels want their client to display delicadeza, he must go on leave until his trial is over otherwise all his actions now will be highly suspect,” said Quimbo.

“No basis at all. The senators have the right to ask clarificatory questions of the witnesses,” Iloilo Rep. Niel Tupas, lead public prosecutor.

Earlier, Sen. Franklin Drilon denied being partial to the prosecution following his questions which purportedly benefited the prosecution.

Citizens Battle Against Corruption Rep. Sherwin Tugna, a public prosecutor, agreed with Tupas citing Senate Rules of Impeachment which allows senator judges to ask questions from witnesses, defense and prosecution lawyers. “As judges, this is their right and duty to ferret the truth. The defense should not use technicalities to hide the truth about the Chief Justice.”

Aurora Rep. Juan Edgardo “Sonny” Angara, another spokesman for the prosecution team, expressed hopes that the latest defense’s statement is not part of another purported dilatory tactic.

“I hope this is not another delaying tactic from the defense’s seemingly bottomless bag of legal trickery and technicalities. Note also that a vote to inhibit or abstain operates like a vote of acquittal so it’s no surprise they are moving for it, we will definitely oppose such moves,” said Angara.