IMPEACHED Chief Justice Renato Corona has appealed to the Senate, sitting as impeachment court, to recall its recent order allowing the House prosecution panel to scrutinize his bank records in at least two banks where he allegedly keeps huge peso and dollar accounts.

The senator-judges Monday granted the twin requests of the House prosecution panel to summon the managers of Philippine Savings Bank and Bank of Philippine Islands so they can bring Corona’s bank documents.

The senator-judges ordered the manager of PSBank to testify and produce today the bank record of Corona relative to his winning P1 million during the bank’s March 2008 monthly raffle promotion as well as the chief magistrate’s monthly bank statements covering his peso or dollar accounts, including that of his wife, Cristina. The prosecutors alleged that Corona has $700,000 deposit with PSBank since 2008 which he failed to include in his statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN).

In a seven-page motion, Corona, through his lead counsel, retired Justice Serafin Cuevas, asked the impeachment court to “quash” the subpoena addressed to the manager of BPI, Ayala branch and the manager of Philippine Savings Bank.

He said that the subpoena will allow the prosecutors to support their allegations under paragraph 2.4 of the Article 2 in the grounds for impeachment filed against Corona which accused the chief magistrate “of having accumulated ill-gotten wealth, acquiring assets of high values and keeping bank accounts with huge deposits.”

“The record of this case will show that this Honorable Court, through its resolution dated Jan. 27, 2012, prohibited any introduction of evidence pertaining to paragraph 2.4 of the verified complaint, which includes evidence to prove CJ (Chief Justice) Corona’s supposed bank accounts with huge deposits, for being violative of CJ Corona’s fundamental constitutional right to due process,” Cuevas said.

“In fact, this Honorable Court ruled that paragraph 2.4 should be considered unwritten. Hence, any evidence relating thereto should be deemed inadmissible and irrelevant to these proceedings. The introduction of the subpoenaed documents relating to CJ Corona’s bank deposits should therefore not be allowed, lest his constitutional right to due process be trampled upon,” he said.

Cuevas said that with regard to the supposed dollar account of Corona in PSBank, “it should be emphasized that any information or documents pertaining thereto are absolutely confidential” under Section 8 of Republic Act 6426 or the Foreign Currency Deposits Act. “It is clear therefore that no FCD shall be examined upon – even in cases of impeachment – except upon written permission of the depositor,” he said.

The defense panel also deplored the attachment of Corona’s bank records in their motion pertaining to the latter’s foreign currency deposits with PS Bank without the chief magistrate’s consent. 

“Any information or subpoena issued pursuant to such an illegal act cannot be condoned. From the foregoing, it is clear that the presentation of CJ Corona’s bank accounts should not be allowed,” Cuevas said.

“We are in close consultation with the Chief Justice on the matter. The order (of the impeachment court) though, as worded, is very stringent,” said Ramon Esguerra, one of Corona’s lawyers.

The defense panel said the House prosecution team must “show relevancy” of seeking the bank records of Corona to the issue of his alleged non-disclosure of his SALNs. “The subpoenae are likewise restricted to ending balances as of Dec.31 2005 up to 2010 in BPI and PS Bank 2007 to 2010 and opening bank documents,” said Rico Quicho, defense panel spokesman.

“More importantly, the bank records are not admissible per se in the light of the illegal and criminal nature of the source of documents attached by the prosecution to its request for subpoenae – an anonymous ‘short lady’ – as formally claimed by Congressman Rey Umali,” added Quicho. 

Rep.Niel Tupas, Jr., the lead prosecutor said that the documents came from Rep. Reynaldo Umali, who then said that these were given by an unidentified “small lady” last Thursday. But Umali can no longer remember the exact place where he encountered the woman. It was either at the Senate or at the Department of Public Works and Highways. What was certain was that he got the documents after the Senate impeachment trial last Thursday, Umali said.

Esguerra said that the prosecutors have been warned that violation of the Bank Secrecy Act and Foreign Currency Deposits Act provide for criminal penalties. “The doctrine of fruit of the poisonous tree applies here. If the source of the evidence (the “tree”) is tainted, then anything gained from it (the “fruit”) is tainted as well,” Esguerra said.