From his own mouth: CJ Corona’s guidelines in the use of SALNs & ITRs to prove ill-gotten wealth

 

Read his formula for computing corruption

My exclusive

By Raïssa Robles

Prosecutors in the impeachment trial might not know they have a document they can refer to when they present ITRs and SALNs  as evidence. It’s a document written by someone who happens to be named Renato C. Corona.

The document is Chief Justice Corona’s landmark decision on  July 15, 2003 turning over the Marcoses’ loot stashed in Swiss banks to the Philippine government.

In that document, CJ Corona made some interesting points:

  • He said the burden of proof lies with the person being accused of having amassed such wealth.
  • He also said the court should disregard technicalities thrown by the defendant’s side.
  • And he said it was enough to compare a respondent’s SALNs  (Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth) and ITRs  (Income Tax Return) with the wealth in question to determine the latter’s illegal origin. If disclosed income and assets were far less than the questioned wealth, then the latter is ill-gotten.

CJ Corona showed how to connect the dots using the SALN  and the ITR in his ruling entitled Republic of the Philippines vs. the Sandiganbayan and Ferdinand Marcos, as represented by his heirs: his wife Imelda and their children Senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos, Jr., Governor Imee Marcos, and Irene Marcos-Araneta.

Corona-and-Bongbong-Marcos-

Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona wrote how to compute for corruption in his landmark decision on the Marcoses' ill gotten wealth case. In this 2011 photo, CJ Corona sits beside Senator Bongbong Marcos

In his very exhaustive ruling on this civil forfeiture case, CJ Corona concretely showed:

  • How to use SALNs  and ITRs  to compute for the total assets of the respondent
  • Then how to determine the amount of alleged ill-gotten wealth in comparison to the defendant’s total assets

About the three things that struck me about CJ Corona’s ruling that could prove relevant to his ongoing impeachment trial:

First, CJ Corona had this to say about technicalities that simply delayed the trial. He wrote:

A litigation is not a game of technicalities in which one, more deeply schooled and skilled in the subtle art of movement and position, entraps and destroys the other. It is rather a contest in which each contending party fully and fairly lays before the court the facts in issue and then, brushing aside as wholly trivial and indecisive all imperfections of form and technicalities of procedure, asks that justice be done upon the merits. Lawsuits, unlike duels, are not to be won by a rapier’s thrust.

Second, CJ Corona laid down the law insofar as proving what constitutes ill-gotten wealth. He wrote:

Section 2 of RA 1379 explicitly states that “whenever any public officer or employee has acquired during his incumbency an amount of property which is manifestly out of proportion to his salary as such public officer or employee and to his other lawful income and the income from legitimately acquired property, said property shall be presumed prima facie to have been unlawfully acquired. x x x”

The elements which must concur for this prima facie presumption to apply are:
(1) the offender is a public officer or employee;
(2)he must have acquired a considerable amount of money or property during his incumbency; and
(3)said amount is manifestly out of proportion to his salary as such public officer or employee and to his other lawful income and the income from legitimately acquired property.

And third, while adhering to the constitutional right of any accused to be presumed innocent, CJ  Corona placed the burden of proof, not on the prosecution but on the accused.  In other words, it is the person being accused who has to prove he or she has no ill-gotten wealth.

Thus, CJ Corona wrote that the defendant must deny each allegation:

In their answer, respondents failed to specifically deny each and every allegation contained in the petition for forfeiture in the manner required by the rules.  All they gave were stock answers like “they have no sufficient knowledge” or “they could not recall because it happened a long time ago,” and, as to Mrs. Marcos, “the funds were lawfully acquired,” without stating the basis of such assertions.

Section 10, Rule 8 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, provides:

A defendant must specify each material allegation of fact the truth of which he does not admit and, whenever practicable, shall set forth the substance of the matters upon which he relies to support his denial. Where a defendant desires to deny only a part of an averment, he shall specify so much of it as is true and material and shall deny the remainder. Where a defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of a material averment made in the complaint, he shall so state, and this shall have the effect of a denial.[28]

The purpose of requiring respondents to make a specific denial is to make them disclose facts which will disprove the allegations of petitioner at the trial, together with the matters they rely upon in support of such denial. Our jurisdiction adheres to this rule to avoid and prevent unnecessary expenses and waste of time by compelling both parties to lay their cards on the table, thus reducing the controversy to its true terms.  As explained in Alonso vs. Villamor,[29]

CJ Corona also wrote that a defendant should be required to state the ultimate facts surrounding the law, manner or mode of acquisition of the subject funds:

On the part of Mrs. Marcos, she claimed that the funds were lawfully acquired. However, she failed to particularly state the ultimate facts surrounding the lawful manner or mode of acquisition of the subject funds. Simply put, she merely stated in her answer with the other respondents that the funds were “lawfully acquired” without detailing how exactly these funds were supposedly acquired legally by them. Even in this case before us, her assertion that the funds were lawfully acquired remains bare and unaccompanied by any factual support which can prove, by the presentation of evidence at a hearing, that indeed the funds were acquired legitimately by the Marcos family.

Respondents’ denials in their answer at the Sandiganbayan were based on their alleged lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of the petition.

It is true that one of the modes of specific denial under the rules is a denial through a statement that the defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the material averment in the complaint.  The question, however, is whether the kind of denial in respondents’ answer qualifies as the specific denial called for by the rules.  We do not think so.  In Morales vs. Court of Appeals,[30] this Court ruled that if an allegation directly and specifically charges a party with having done, performed or committed a particular act which the latter did not in fact do, perform or commit, a categorical and express denial must be made.

Here, despite the serious and specific allegations against them, the Marcoses responded by simply saying that they had no knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of such allegations.  Such a general, self-serving claim of ignorance of the facts alleged in the petition for forfeiture was insufficient to raise an issue. Respondent Marcoses should have positively stated how it was that they were supposedly ignorant of the facts alleged.[31]

In addition, CJ Corona wrote that pleading memory lapse is not an adequate defense for respondents:

Since 1991, when the petition for forfeiture was first filed, up to the present, all respondents (Cong. Imelda, Gov. Imee and Sen. Bongbong) have offered are foxy responses like “lack of sufficient knowledge or lack of privity” or “they cannot recall because it happened a long time ago” or, as to Mrs. Marcos, “the funds were lawfully acquired.”  But, whenever it suits them, they also claim ownership of 90% of the funds and allege that only 10% belongs to the Marcos estate.  It has been an incredible charade from beginning to end.

CJ Corona’s  formula for computing corruption

As I said at the beginning, CJ Corona – in this ruling – gave the formula for proving ill-gotten wealth.

Here’s how he arrived at his conclusion  that the Marcoses amassed loot, without the court having to determine how they did it.

CJ Corona wrote:

That spouses Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos were public officials during the time material to the instant case was never in dispute. Paragraph 4 of respondent Marcoses’ answer categorically admitted the allegations in paragraph 4 of the petition for forfeiture as to the personal circumstances of Ferdinand E. Marcos as a public official who served without interruption as Congressman, Senator, Senate President and President of the Republic of the Philippines from December 1, 1965 to February 25, 1986.[77] Likewise, respondents admitted in their answer the contents of paragraph 5 of the petition as to the personal circumstances of Imelda R. Marcos who once served as a member of the Interim Batasang Pambansa from 1978 to 1984 and as Metro Manila Governor, concurrently Minister of Human Settlements, from June 1976 to February 1986.[78]

Respondent Mrs. Marcos also admitted in paragraph 10 of her answer the allegations of paragraph 11 of the petition for forfeiture which referred to the accumulated salaries of respondents Ferdinand E. Marcos and Imelda R. Marcos.[79] The combined accumulated salaries of the Marcos couple were reflected in the Certification dated May 27, 1986 issued by then Minister of Budget and Management Alberto Romulo.[80] The Certification showed that, from 1966 to 1985, Ferdinand E. Marcos and Imelda R. Marcos had accumulated salaries in the amount of P1,570,000 and P718,750, respectively, or a total of P2,288,750:

Ferdinand E. Marcos, as President

1966-1976 at P60,000/year P660,000
1977-1984 at P100,000/year P800,000
1985 at P110,000/year 110,000

                                                                     P1,570,000

Imelda R. Marcos, as Minister

June 1976-1985 at P75,000/year – P718,000

In addition to their accumulated salaries from 1966 to 1985 are the Marcos couple’s combined salaries from January to February 1986 in the amount of P30,833.33.  Hence, their total accumulated salaries amounted to P2,319,583.33. Converted to U.S. dollars on the basis of the corresponding peso-dollar exchange rates prevailing during the applicable period when said salaries were received, the total amount had an equivalent value of $304,372.43.

The dollar equivalent was arrived at by using the official annual rates of exchange of the Philippine peso and the US dollar from 1965 to 1985 as well as the official monthly rates of exchange in January and February 1986 issued by the Center for Statistical Information of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas.

Use of Statement of Assets and Liabilities

CJ Corona wrote:

The sum of $304,372.43 should be held as the only known lawful income of respondents since they did not file any Statement of Assets and Liabilities (SAL), as required by law, from which their net worth could be determined.  Besides, under the 1935 Constitution, Ferdinand E. Marcos as President could not receive “any other emolument from the Government or any of its subdivisions and instrumentalities”.[84] Likewise, under the 1973 Constitution, Ferdinand E. Marcos as President could “not receive during his tenure any other emolument from the Government or any other source.”[85]  In fact, his management of businesses, like the administration of foundations to accumulate funds, was expressly prohibited under the 1973 Constitution:

CJ Corona demonstrated a mastery of financial analysis

[NOTE: those in boldface are mine]:

To back up his conclusion that the Marcoses accumulated assets worth $304,372.43, CJ Corona dissected President Ferdinand Marcos’ financial status.

He wrote:

11.  At the outset, however, it must be pointed out that based on the Official Report of the Minister of Budget, the total salaries of former President Marcos as President form 1966 to 1976 was P60,000 a year and from 1977 to 1985, P100,000 a year; while that  of the former First Lady, Imelda R. Marcos, as Minister of Human Settlements from June 1976 to February 22-25, 1986 was P75,000 a year xxx.

ANALYSIS OF RESPONDENTS LEGITIMATE INCOME
x x x
12.  Based on available documents, the ITRs of the Marcoses for the years 1965-1975 were filed under Tax Identification No. 1365-055-1. For the years 1976 until 1984, the returns were filed under Tax Identification No. M 6221-J 1117-A-9.

13.  The data contained in the ITRs and Balance Sheet filed by the “Marcoses are summarized and attached to the reports in the following schedules:

Schedule A:
Schedule of Income (Annex “T” hereof);
Schedule B:
Schedule of Income Tax Paid (Annex “T-1” hereof);
Schedule C:
Schedule of Net Disposable Income (Annex “T-2” hereof);
Schedule D:
Schedule of Networth Analysis (Annex “T-3” hereof).

14.  As summarized in Schedule A (Annex “T” hereof), the Marcoses reported P16,408,442.00 or US$2,414,484.91 in total income over a period of 20 years from 1965 to 1984. The sources of income are as follows:

Official Salaries –       P2,627,581.00 – 16.01%
Legal Practice –          11,109,836.00 – 67.71%
Farm Income –       149,700.00 – .91%
Others –                         2,521,325.00 -15.37%
Total                         P16,408,442.00 -100.00%

15.  FM’s official salary pertains to his compensation as Senate President in 1965 in the amount of P15,935.00 and P1,420,000.00 as President of the Philippines during the period 1966 until 1984. On the other hand, Imelda reported salaries and allowances only for the years 1979 to 1984 in the amount of P1,191,646.00.  The records indicate that the reported income came from her salary from the Ministry of Human Settlements and allowances from Food Terminal, Inc., National Home Mortgage Finance Corporation, National Food Authority Council, Light Rail Transit Authority and Home Development Mutual Fund.

16.  Of the P11,109,836.00 in reported income from legal practice, the amount of P10,649,836.00 or 96% represents “receivables from prior years” during the period 1967 up to  1984.

17.  In the guise of reporting income using the cash method under Section 38 of the National Internal Revenue Code, FM made it appear that he had an extremely profitable legal practice before he became a President (FM being barred by law from practicing his law profession during his entire presidency) and that, incredibly, he was still receiving payments almost 20 years after. The only problem is that in his Balance Sheet attached to his 1965 ITR immediately preceeding his ascendancy to the presidency he did not show any Receivables from client at all, much less the P10,65-M that he decided to later recognize as income.  There are no documents showing any withholding tax certificates. Likewise, there is nothing on record that will show any known Marcos client as he has no known law office.  As previously stated, his networth was a mere P120,000.00 in December, 1965. The joint income tax returns of FM and Imelda cannot, therefore, conceal the skeletons of their kleptocracy.

18.  FM reported a total of P2,521,325.00 as Other Income for the years 1972 up to 1976 which he referred to in his return as “Miscellaneous Items” and “Various Corporations.”  There is no indication of any payor of the dividends or earnings.

19.  Spouses Ferdinand and Imelda did not declare any income from any deposits and placements which are subject to a 5% withholding tax. The Bureau of Internal Revenue attested that after a diligent search of pertinent records on file with the Records Division, they did not find any records involving the tax transactions of spouses Ferdinand and Imelda in Revenue Region No. 1, Baguio City, Revenue Region No.4A, Manila, Revenue Region No. 4B1, Quezon City and Revenue No. 8, Tacloban, Leyte.  Likewise, the Office of the Revenue Collector of Batac. Further, BIR attested that no records were found on any filing of capital gains tax return involving spouses FM and Imelda covering the years 1960 to 1965.

20.  In Schedule B, the taxable reported income over the twenty-year period was P14,463,595.00 which represents 88% of the gross income.  The Marcoses paid income taxes totaling P8,233,296.00 or US$1,220,667.59.  The business expenses in the amount of P861,748.00 represent expenses incurred for subscription, postage, stationeries and contributions while the other deductions in the amount of P567,097.00 represents interest charges, medicare fees, taxes and licenses. The total deductions in the amount of P1,994,845.00 represents 12% of the total gross income.

21.  In Schedule C, the net cumulative disposable income amounts to P6,756,301.00 or US$980,709.77.  This is the amount that represents that portion of the Marcoses income that is free for consumption, savings and investments.  The amount is arrived at by adding back to the net income after tax the personal and additional exemptions for the years 1965-1984, as well as the tax-exempt salary of the President for the years 1966 until 1972.

22.  Finally, the networth analysis in Schedule D, represents the total accumulated networth of spouses, Ferdinand and Imelda.  Respondent’s Balance Sheet attached to their 1965 ITR, covering the year immediately preceding their ascendancy to the presidency, indicates an ending networth of P120,000.00 which FM declared as Library and Miscellaneous assets.  In computing for the networth, the income approach was utilized.  Under this approach, the beginning capital is increased or decreased, as the case may be, depending upon the income earned or loss incurred.  Computations establish the total networth of spouses Ferdinand and Imelda, for the years 1965 until 1984 in the total amount of US$957,487.75, assuming the income from legal practice is real and valid x x x.

Thus, CJ Corona concluded that the Marcoses’ Net Worth was US$957,487.75 or under ONE MILLION DOLLARS. He then compared this amount to the US$356 million secreted by the Marcoses in five foundations which maintained various Swiss accounts.

CJ Corona wrote:

53.  All the five (5) group accounts (maintained by  Marcos foundations)  in the over-all flow chart have a total balance of about Three Hundred Fifty Six Million Dollars ($356,000,000.00) as shown by Annex “R-5” hereto attached as integral part hereof.

Otherwise stated, petitioner presented enough evidence to convince us that the Marcoses had dollar deposits amounting to US $356 million representing the balance of the Swiss accounts of the five foundations, an amount way, way beyond their aggregate legitimate income of only US$304,372.43 during their incumbency as government officials.

Because of all these, CJ Corona ruled that -

In the face of undeniable circumstances and the avalanche of documentary evidence against them, respondent Marcoses failed to justify the lawful nature of their acquisition of the said assets.  Hence, the Swiss deposits should be considered ill-gotten wealth and forfeited in favor of the State in accordance with Section 6 of RA 1379

You can read CJ Corona’s entire landmark ruling by clicking here.

___________________________

Related Stories

CJ Corona’s P11M ‘cash advance’

CJ Corona’s SALNs only declared his wife was in government post in 2007

Cash gifts & car plans – COA report shows what Corona’s wife did as a GMA appointee

Chief Justice Corona personally met with World Bank officials, bank documents show

Realty broker: Corona’s posh condo “a steal” at P14 million 

CJ Corona’s condo is fully paid up, tax official confirms

BIR official: More taxes can be slapped on CJ Corona’s luxury condo if selling price was ‘underdeclared’

 



322 Responses to “From his own mouth: CJ Corona’s guidelines in the use of SALNs & ITRs to prove ill-gotten wealth”

Read below or add a comment...

  1. 99
    EH BIAS C. BN says:

    Prosecution TALO sa presentation of evidence pero PANALO pa rin sa pag-render ng verdict? ONLY IN THE PHILIPPINES!!!

    1. Evidences based on news reports ng ABS-CBN at Inquirer,
    2. downloaded evidences from the internet courtesy of Rissa Hontiveros,
    3. illegally acquired bank documents coming fron dubious persons like Mr.Anonymous and Small Lady,
    4. hearsay testimony form Leila Delima,
    5. unverified and not authenticated AMLC reports from Ombudsman Morales
    6. 45 properties na naging 5,
    7. 82 bogus dollar bank accounts.

    Hindi pinairal ang rule of evidence at rule of law. Ang Verdict based on opinion?! WAH?! Nag-abogado pa Kayo?! Tapos BABOY DRILLON for Chief Justice? Magsama-sama na lang kayo sa matuwid na daan patungo ng IMPIYERNO!!!

    • 99.1
      Alan says:

      And you’re the only genius in the entire universe who can put this together eh? Time for your medication

  2. 98
    Mel says:

    re SALN 2011, Deadline: 30 April 2012

    Corona, justices file SALN; SC still bars disclosure

    MANILA, Philippines—All the 15 justices of the Supreme Court have submitted their Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Networth (SALN), high court Spokesman Jose Midas Marquez told reporters Wednesday.

    “The Chief Justice has filed his SALN. All the justices have submitted their SALNs. I called the Clerk of Court to check last April 30 and she said it is complete,” Marquez said.
    Chief Justice Renato Corona was the last to submit his SALN while the first justice to file his SALN was Associate Justice Martin Villarama who filed it months ahead of the April 30 deadline.

    Under Section 17, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution, public officials and employees are required to file their SALN “upon assumption to office and as often as may be required by law” which under Section 8 (A) of Republic Act 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards and Public Official and Employees should be filed upon entry or exit from government service and on or before April 30.

    The same requirement is found under Section 7 of the Republic Act 3019 or the Anti-Graft Law.

    However, when asked for copies of the SALNs, Marquez said “there is an existing court resolution that prevents the disclosure. Until and unless the court resolution is recalled, then it cannot be released. That has been the policy of the Court.”

    Since 1992, the disclosure of SALNs not only of high court justices but justices from the Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan, Court of Tax Appeals, lower court judges and court personnel have been restricted to shield them from acts that may “endanger, diminish or destroy their independence and objectivity in the performance of their judicial functions.”

    The 1992 ruling was a reiteration of an administrative matter issued by the Supreme Court in 1989 where the high court “unanimously expressed its willingness to have the Clerk of Court furnish copies of the SALs of the Chief Justice and the Associate Justices to any person upon request, provided there is a legitimate reason for the request, it being in fact unlawful for any person to obtain or use any statement filed under RA 6713, the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, for (a) any purpose contrary to morals or public policy, or (b) any commercial purpose other than by news and communications media for dissemination to the general public.”

    Chief Justice Renato Corona has been accused of non-disclosure of his SALN. This is among the articles of impeachment which is subject to a trial that will resume on May 7.
    While Marquez said it is still the call of the justice if they will release their SALN, “they should be guided by the policy of the court.

    “Individual justices who opt to disclose their own SALN, that’s their own decision and it’s up to the Court to require them to perhaps explain if they do so,” he told reporters.

    Source: Tetch Torres, INQUIRER.net, 7:54 pm | Wednesday, May 2nd, 2012

    Defense wants Corona to keep 2011 SALN secret
    MANILA, Philippines – Chief Justice Renato Corona’s defense team on Thursday said he should not publicly disclose his statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth (SALN) for 2011.

    They believe that doing so will go against a Supreme Court resolution that disallows justices from disclosing their SALNs.

    Lawyers Tranquil Salvador, Rico Quicho, and Karen Jimeno said Corona is not consulting them on what he should put in his new SALN.

    All government officials and employees are required to submit their 2011 SALN on or before April 30.

    Source: Jing Castañeda, ABS-CBN News, Posted at 04/26/2012 9:41 PM | Updated as of 04/26/2012 9:43 PM

    Henares: SALN can’t be corrected once filed
    MANILA, Philippines–Internal Revenue Commissioner Kim Henares believes that a statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN) of government officials can no longer be amended once they filed it even if there were inaccuracies in the filing.

    Henares offered this opinion when asked by former Supreme Court Associate Justice Serafin Cuevas, the lead counsel of Chief Justice Renato Corona, during Monday’s impeachment trial in the Senate.

    “My understanding is that SALN may be corrected if not accurate…In this particular case, did you come to the conclusion that this is one which can be corrected pursuant to law or it may not be corrected at all?” asked Cuevas.

    “My personal opinion is it can’t be corrected at all,” said Henares.

    “Because in the first place, it’s sworn to under oath. And then second place, like I said I’m a government official and I would say that the SALN requires me to completely list all my assets because it’s a way for the public to determine whether at the end of the day I have enriched myself because of my position,” she said.

    “So if it can be amended at any time, then it’s a useless exercise to even require government officials to submit a SALN at all,” the BIR chief added.
    After hearing Henare’s reply, Cuevas moved to strike her answer out.

    “That’s your opinion only. We will move to strike out the answer of the witness, your honor,” Cuevas said, which elicited some reactions from the gallery.
    Private prosecutor Arthur Lim, who examined Henares, objected to Cueva’s motion, saying

    “You asked the witness, the witness answered.”
    Even the presiding officer, Senate President Juan Ponce-Enrile was surprised by Cuevas’ motion.

    “Your witness answered already. Why should you ask for the striking out of her answers?” asked Enrile.

    “Because apparently what ‘s being stated of the witness has no basis. That’s her personal opinion according to her,” Cuevas answered.

    Source: Maila Ager, INQUIRER.net 5:05 pm | Monday, February 6th, 2012

  3. 97
    chit navarro says:

    the column of Yoly Villanueva Ong, Feb. 28 is spot -on the computation of Corona.

    http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=782001&publicationSubCategoryId=64

    so, do we expect that in his defense, Corona will show how he legally acquired the funds he used to purchase his numerous real estate properties as well as his cash???

    we await his defense!!!

  4. 96
    Mel says:

    PNoy: Corona lied in his SALN

    MANILA, Philippines (UPDATED) – President Benigno Aquino III on Thursday called on the public not to be deceived by Chief Justice Renato Corona’s lies.

    In a speech commemorating the 26th anniversary of the 1986 People Power Revolution, Aquino claimed Corona continues to trick the people with his “blatant lies.”

    “Hahayaan na lang po ba natin na iilan ang magdesisyon para sa ating pong lahat? Iyan naman po ang sadya ko sa araw na ito: Liwanagin ang dapat liwanagin, at ituwid ang isyung pilit dinidiskaril ng ilan, upang ang karaniwang tao ay malinawan at makilahok sa usapan. Simple lang naman po ang tanong na nais sagutin ng paglilitis na ito: Dapat pa ba tayong magtiwala kay Ginoong Corona?”

    Later in a discussion with students with different schools, Aquino said an acquittal of Corona will be “extremely difficult, if not impossible” for the government’s reform plans.

    Aquino alleged Corona’s lies can be seen in his statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN). He said Corona only disclosed P3.5 million in 2010, when he actually had P31 million in 3 different bank accounts.

    “Noong 2010, nagdeklara siya ng cash na 3.5 million pesos. Ayon sa mga testimonya ng Pangulo ng PS Bank at branch manager ng BPI Ayala, sa tatlong account pa lang na naisiwalat sa impeachment, si Ginoong Corona ay may nakatagong 31.5 million pesos na hindi idineklara. Naman. Maliwanag pa po sa sikat ng araw: Ginoong Corona, ang sinumpaan mong salaysay ay hindi tugma sa natuklas na pag-aari mo. Maski saang paaralan po sa buong mundo, 3.5 million does not equal 31.5 million. Alin po ba ang totoo, Ginoong Corona?” he asked.

    The President said the SALN is not just a piece of scratch paper. He said this is used by all government officers to be accountable to the public.

    “Ilalagay po ito sa isang locked filing cabinet, at huling la-landing sa isang nakakandadong vault. Tanong naman po: Kailan pa po ba naging bahagi ng publiko ang isang locked filing cabinet? Paano mabubusisi ang laman ng SALN na ito kung nakasilid sa isang vault?”

    Aquino also took note of Corona’s statements that he will open his bank accounts in due time. “Mawalang-galang na po, Ginoong Corona, marami pang naunang taon na nagpasa kayo ng SALN na puno ng katanungan. Kailan po ba ang due time? Mukha po yatang overdue ka na.”

    Court interpreter’s case

    The President cited the case of court interpreter Delsa Flores, who was dismissed from her job in 1997 for failing to declare a stall in the public market where she gets rent.

    “Sa isang court interpreter, iyan po ang batayan. Magkano po kaya ang upa sa isang puwesto sa palengke? Sa Punong Mahistrado po ba, dapat naiiba? Kung si Ginang Flores po ay sinisante, ano pa kaya ang dapat hatol kay Ginoong Corona? Kailangan pa po bang tanungin kung impeachable offense ang ginawa niya?”

    He told the delegates at the La Consolacion College: “Kayo nga po ang sumagot: sa tingin po ba ninyo, ang Chief Justice ay exempted sa mga batas na kailangan nating lahat sundin? Kapag ba nasa poder na ay bawal nang tanungin, bawal nang usisain, at bawal nang batikusin?”

    GMA’s protector

    He alleged Corona used his position to protect former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo by issuing a halt order on her travel restraint.

    “Tandaan lang po natin: Punong Mahistrado mismo ang nagpilit na puwedeng umalis ng bansa si Ginang Arroyo. Ang isinampang kaso ng electoral sabotage, 2007 diumano naganap,” he noted in his speech.

    Had Arroyo left for abroad and did not come back by May 2012, any case against her would have already prescribed, Aquino noted. An electoral sabotage case needs to be filed within 5 years after the election.

    Defense vs prosecution

    He noted that the prosecution has been getting all the criticisms even if its members chose to fight against the head of the judiciary.

    “Kung nasa defense ka, ‘di ba’t ngiti ang isasalubong sa iyo ng mga tiwaling hukom, dahil ipinagtanggol mo ang isa sa kanilang uri? Manalo, matalo, panalo ka parati. Kung nasa prosecution ka naman, simangot ang pambungad sa iyo dahil sa pangangahas mong kalabanin ang Punong Mahistrado. Ipagpapasa-Diyos mo na lahat ng kasong hahawakan mo,” he said.

    He said the public should not allow the injustice against the country happen in the hands of Corona.

    “Di po ba’t malinaw ang mga alituntuning kailangang sundin ng lahat? Ang tungkulin natin ngayon ay ibalik ang piring ng katarungan, at gawing balanse ang timbangan. Huwag na po sana nating hintayin na tayo mismo ang maagrabyado. Manindigan na po sana tayo ngayon.”

    He said that the people are now seeing the fruits of the impeachment trial, starting with the “general agreement” to amend the Foreign Currency Deposit Unit Law as well as changes to the Anti-Money Laundering Act.

    He said the people have the right to demand accountability from Corona. “The truth shall set us free. Hindi pa kumpleto ang truth dahil hindi pa sya free.”

    Source: Ira Pedrasa, ABS-CBNNews.com
    Posted at 02/16/2012 11:43 AM | Updated as of 02/16/2012 1:00 PM

    Read related comment: Will he now walk his talk?

  5. 95
    kurapbuster says:

    Actually there are two things in the SALN that Corona have intentionaly lied:

    1. Cash Advance of 11 million (as specified in his SALN).

    It’s proven that Mr and Mrs Corona are not officers in the company nor they are
    stockholders of the company which alledgedly gave them the 11 million.

    There is a big difference between cash advance and a loan.
    A. CASH ADVANCES are given only to the OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES by an employer
    for a short period of time with no inberest inviolved otherwise it is called a loan..
    How could an outsider of the company got this amount money? Lie no.1.

    B. The term CASH ADVANCE was used to avoid interest. This is if there is a record
    of this CASH ADVANCE in the books of the Comapany. (so someone has to
    see the books of the company if this is true. Baka kunyari lang ito. Alam niyo naman
    na ang mga drug dealers ay bumibili ng winning sweepstake tickets para lang
    maging legal ang perang nasa kamay nila.
    C. Liquidation of the CASH ADVANCE- was there really a payment recieved by the
    company as installment made by Corona as per his SALN? Again the prosecutors
    would need to see the books to see the reflection of these transactions.

    2. 9 MILLION worth of property paid in vertually cash, because although it has been paid
    twice by check they were done in the same year of 2008.

    A. Esguerra is insisting the witness as to when the property has been accepted
    by Mrs Corona. Meaning to say if Mrs Corona accepted the property in 2010
    the SALN of Corona is correct because the property was declared in 2010.
    I think Esguerra thinks he can fool every body. No sir…

    Here is the reason why he is fooling every filipino.

    In 2008 Corona have cash of 9 million. He used this money to buy a property.
    Therefore on his 2008 SALN you should have seen on the property column
    his 9 million worth of property.

    No 9 million on his cash column because he used it to buy the said property..

    The SALN of Corona should have been filed this way but he intentionally did not, because according to Guerrero the property should ONLY be declared when it is actually accepted?
    Which is year 2010?

    My question is what happen to the 9 million cash that Corana have in his position in buying the property in 2008?

    I am asking Guerrero the Power House, what do you want to declare in Coronas SALN in 2008? The Property or the cash? You cannot ignore them both do you?

    If you don’t want to declare the property then declare the cash because according to you the sale has not been cosumated yet?

    Either way it is a mis-declaration and betrayal of public trust. Dishonesty. Lie no. 2

  6. 94
    baycas says:

    In the title of Art. 2 of the AOI, 2.2, and 2.3, the QUESTION is:

    “Did Corona publicly disclose his SALN?”

    Obviously, “NO, he didn’t.” To connect the dots…

    To Tupas et al:

    Better call Vitug et al (those who requested for the CJ’s SALN) to the witness stand and ask her/them if she/they were given a copy of the CJ’s SALN she/they requested.

    • 94.1
      baycas says:

      Leon Guerrero was dumbfounded and exasperated in the proceedings yesterday (Please watch the video or read articles on it somewhere out there.). It was on account of Cong. Umali’s “brilliance” as a lawyer.

      Perhaps, we may help the honorable Senator-Judge…

      In the title of Art. 2 of the AOI, and Paragraphs 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3, the QUESTION is:

      Did Corona publicly disclose his SALN?

      Obviously, “NO, he didn’t.

      It’s just now that we came to know Corona’s SALN. Leon Guerrero had only read it also this January 2012.

      Now…

      To Tupas, Umali, Barzaga, and others:

      Better call Vitug (and those who requested for the CJ’s SALN) to the witness stand and ask her (them) if she (they) was (were) given a copy of the CJ’s SALN she (they) requested in the past.

      This will connect the dots and Leon Guerrero will most likely understand that you have proven your allegations in Art. 2 of the AOI when Vitug et al will answer in the NEGATIVE.

    • 94.2
      baycas says:

      One caveat though…if NO ONE really requested for the CJ’s SALN then this strategy will again crumble to the prosecutor’s faces.

      I believe the requests for SALNs in the past were not specific to the CJ’s copy.

      …Sayang, I’ve been toying pa naman sana with an idea on “constitutionality question” in line with the SALN issue…

  7. 93
    Mel says:

    Sa wakas, mayruong miyembro na may paninindigan sa House-Prosecution.

    Young lawyer stands ground in Corona trial

    “Private prosecutor Joseph Joemer Perez stood his ground before defense counsel Serafin Cuevas and Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile for an hour or so at the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona.

    Observers noted it was the first time in the first eight days of the trial that a prosecutor was not “eaten alive” by the defense.”

    Source: Cathy C. Yamsuan Philippine Daily Inquirer 2:28 am | Tuesday, January 31st, 2012

    • 93.1
      Mel says:

      Defense admits ‘inaccuracies’ in Corona SALN

      “MANILA, Philippines (UPDATE) – A member of Chief Justice Renato Corona’s defense team admitted Tuesday that there were “inaccuracies” in Corona’s statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN) when he belatedly declared several real estate properties years after they were acquired.

      “Former justice undersecretary Ramon Esguerra said the Chief Justice acquired a condo unit at Spanish Bay Tower, Bonifacio Ridge in 2005 and another condo unit at The Bellagio, Taguig in 2008 but only declared both properties in 2010. The Bonifacio Ridge property was purchased for P9 million; The Bellagio unit P14 million.”

      SOURCE: David Dizon, ABS-CBNnews.com
      Posted at 01/31/2012 11:20 AM | Updated as of 01/31/2012 12:05 PM

      • 93.1.1
        baycas says:

        Esguerra said Corona broke no law when he disclosed ownership of the real estate properties belatedly in his SALN.”It was disclosed although belatedly but does that constitute violation of the law insofar as SALN filing is concerned? It does not. Even the law allows a corrective measure if a filer of a SALN does not accurately reflect what should be reflected in his SALN,” he told Mornings@ANC.Esguerra said that under Republic Act 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials, there is a pertinent provision that a filer must be informed about inaccuracies in his SALN and allowed to correct it.He added that under this particular provision, “no liability for perjury attaches” for inaccuracies in the filing of SALN.Asked if Corona lied in his SALN because he belatedly declared his properties, Esguerra said: “Not really lying. It is really up to the filer. But in the case of the Chief Justice, he did not lie.”He also said that it should the Supreme Court clerk of court that should inform the Chief Justice about inaccuracies in his SALN.

        Of course, Corona was lying on his SALN but the defense may easily, conveniently deny it.

        Nonetheless, that’s the problem when SALNs are kept from public scrutiny. There’s no way of rectifying the mistakes and, most importantly, there’s no way of learning a public official’s wrongdoings.

        With Esguerra’s logic, Corona really COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION AND BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST WHEN HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE TO THE PUBLIC HIS STATEMENT OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES, AND NET WORTH AS REQUIRED UNDER SEC. 17, ART. XI OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION.

        • 93.1.1.1
          Johnny lin says:

          Defense lawyer tactic now is DISTORT, DISTORT, DISTORT!
          Esguerra is talking about corrective measure for SALN involving the same year yet he implies that corrective measure is applicable for SALN filed in previous years.
          He is trying to disorient the public who are trying to learn about the cases or he is addressing Leon and Panday because that is 2 Senator votes at least.

          Technically, Esguerra is resorting to cheating which is not surprising. The lead counsel Justice Cuevas was caught spinning a vicious story filled with LIes, that is why we have not heard from him in 2 days. Its Esguerra turn concocting stories and lies.

          These lawyers have families to go home at night bringing home livelihood out of filthy lies. Poor children with immoral parent. Those squatters scavenging for living have higher moral values than them.

          • 93.1.1.1.1
            baycas says:

            Mamaya sabihin ni Leon at Panday, “STOP NA, STOP NA, (nahuhuli tayo kung papaano magtago ng nakaw na yaman)!”

        • 93.1.1.2
          percy1007 says:

          How would the clerk of court who reports to the CJSC tell his boss his SALN is not correct short of calling him a liar.

      • 93.1.2
        baycas says:

        Esguerra said Corona broke no law when he disclosed ownership of the real estate properties belatedly in his SALN.

        “It was disclosed although belatedly but does that constitute violation of the law insofar as SALN filing is concerned? It does not. Even the law allows a corrective measure if a filer of a SALN does not accurately reflect what should be reflected in his SALN,” he told Mornings@ANC.

        Esguerra said that under Republic Act 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials, there is a pertinent provision that a filer must be informed about inaccuracies in his SALN and allowed to correct it.

        He added that under this particular provision, “no liability for perjury attaches” for inaccuracies in the filing of SALN.

        Asked if Corona lied in his SALN because he belatedly declared his properties, Esguerra said: “Not really lying. It is really up to the filer. But in the case of the Chief Justice, he did not lie.

        “He also said that it should (be) the Supreme Court clerk of court that should inform the Chief Justice about inaccuracies in his SALN.

        Of course, Corona was lying on his SALN but the defense may easily, conveniently deny it.

        Nonetheless, that’s the problem when SALNs are kept from public scrutiny. There’s no way of rectifying the mistakes and, most importantly, there’s no way of learning a public official’s wrongdoings.

        With Esguerra’s logic, Corona COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION AND BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST WHEN HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE TO THE PUBLIC HIS STATEMENT OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES, AND NET WORTH AS REQUIRED UNDER SEC. 17, ART. XI OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION.

        • 93.1.2.1
          percy1007 says:

          Since a SALN is a sworned/notarized document, a person with GOOD INTENT will take time to ensure accuracy and truthfulness of his SALN. He would be expected to think of the properties he bought or acquired the prior year. If J Corona avers they only have very few properties, would it be hard to remember them? Nakalimutan niya kung ilan na condo nila? O kaya sa dami ng tinago, di nila masiguro kung ano nasa pangalan nila at ano nasa mga dummy.
          I expect a Chief Justice to have unquestionable honesty and integrity so I will not have an iota of doubt when he renders a decision kahit na he reverses himself because I will believe in his judgment.
          His defense counsels suppressing evidence to determine his fitness as a justice of the SC demonstrates J Corona is “afraid of the truth” and since he is, he has no right to stay longer in the Supreme Court. For a Supreme Court is mandated to determine and surface the truth and not to hide behind technicalities

      • 93.1.3
        kurapbuster says:

        Bonifacio Ridge 9 million purchased 2005
        Bellagio 14 million purchased 2008

        Both these properties were declared in the 2010 SALN of Corona. Esguerra’s defense here is that the title and the certificate of acceptance were issued in the subsequent years. That is why he persistently asked Besnar about the date of the acceptance.

        Napakababao naman ng depensa nitong si Esguerra. Limang taon bago maissue ang title o kaya ang acceptance?

        Ok payag na ako maski na baluktot ang reason.

        Kung ayaw ni Corona na ipakita sa SALN ang property niya dahil sa wala pang titulo
        na depensa nitong si Esguerra, dapat ito ang pinalitao sa SALN niya na dagdag sa cash position niya:

        Cash on Hand/Bank 2005 9 million
        Cash on Hand/Bank 2008 14 million

        Ang ginawa nila hindi deniklara ang property noon 2005 at 2008 at hindi rin deniklara yong pera?

  8. 92
    carlito says:

    Ill-gotten wealth, unexplained wealth, ill-gotten CJ Position from ill-gotten Presidency…what else to prove? Pinas.. wake up.!!! Let’s get rid of the bad elements.. the instruments of corruptions, among us.. It’s so clear CJ is a living embodiment of corruption. Kawawang Pinas!!/usa

  9. 91
    Mel says:

    ‘Corona got P10M discount for Bellagio condo’

    “MANILA, Philippines (1st UPDATE) – Chief Justice Renato Corona got a P10 million discount for the purchase of a penthouse unit in The Bellagio in The Fort, Taguig City, one of the impeachment prosecutors said Monday.

    “During Corona’s impeachment trial, private prosecutor Joseph Joemer Perez said he received information from Megaworld finance director Giovanni Ng that Corona received a P10 million discount for the 300-square-meter Bellagio property, which was purchased for P14 million.

    “To be candid, the witness informed us that the chief justice received a 40% discount, or P10 million for the property. We believe this is highly material because it goes to the property in the statement of assets, liabilities and net worth,” he said after being questioned by Sen. Aquilino ‘Koko’ Pimentel III.

    “Perez said the P10 million discount could fall under Article 2 of the Impeachment Complaint, which accuses Corona of failure to “truthfully” disclose his SALN.

    “The prosecutor questioned Corona’s accepting the P10 million discount especially from a developer that might have pending cases before the SC.”

    SOURCE: David Dizon, ABS-CBNnews.com
    Posted at 01/30/2012 4:35 PM | Updated as of 01/30/2012 5:45 PM

    ‘Corona got P10M discount for Bellagio condo’

    ——FORMULA FOR CORONA ILL-GOTTEN WEALTH——-

    Paging CPAs and Lawyers, and fellow commenters. High time to compare our notes with this one by FRANCIN CRUZ FOR ABS-CBNNEWS.COM,01/30/2012 6:05 PM

    SOURCE: INFOGRAPHIC: Ill-gotten wealth according to Renato Corona

  10. 90
    keanleogo says:

    Honorable Senator-Judge Santiago,

    Shouting in the Impeachment Court is perceived as loss of your control and un-senator like. It may always work in your house but absolutely not in public, more so infront of Filipino people who elected you to the Senate. Therefore, no more shouting in the court.
    Please.

    • 90.1
      Mel says:

      Miriam: I refuse to succumb to illness

      MANILA, Philippines – Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago said she is “desperately” trying to get well since she already misses the impeachment trial.

      She said, however, she is trying to get better because “I don’t want to give my political enemies the pleasure of dancing on my grave, chortling like contented snakes.”

      She said she misses the impeachment trial that is “punctuated by certain personalities who have all the charm of show window mannequins.”

      Source: ABS-CBNnews.com Posted at 02/06/2012 2:31 PM | Updated as of 02/06/2012 6:23 PM

      Madam M. Santiago, mag Skype na lang po kayo at para maka participate ho kayo sa Senate Impeachment. Kahit likuran ng mga prosekutor ang makita ninyo sa computer, para hindi tumaas ang presyon ninyo. Namimiss daw kayo ni N. Tupas at ng ibang Prosekutors. Kahit bosses lang, hindi na ninyo kailangang mag-attend ng personal.

      Pupuwede na pu ang Skype. Puwede pa pu kayong maglnis ng kuko at naka PJs. Isang litrato lang pu nuong bata-bata pa kayo – puwede na. Ang mahalaga, iyong bosses ninyo ang marinig. (biro lang pu Madam M. Santiago. magandang exercise daw pu ang tumawa ng tumawa).

  11. 89
    kurapbuster says:

    Sorry I it should read 320,000.00 income after tax and an accumulated income of 32,000,000.00 at the end of the year.

    Waht I mean is, if you have a property of more that this you have an explanation to.

    My apology.

  12. 88
    kurapbuster says:

    I always see this word INCOME, DEBIT AND CREDIT with regards to SALN. Let me try to explain this SALN. Sombody there..correct me if I am wrong.

    SALN is a legal requirement for all government officials and employee ONLY .
    They have to declare what assets and liabilities they have on hand or in their position every year.

    So, all they have to do is list all the assets they have (cash, properties, jewelries,cars,boats etc,etc) and also a list of liabilities.

    Now they have to deduct the total of their liabilities (from the list) to the total of their assets (from the list) to arrive their net worth.

    See how simple it is? Their is no DEBIT, CREDIT and INCOME involved in the calculation
    of net worth. NET WORTH here is just the difference between assets and liabilities when it comes to SALN in the year of filing.

    On the other hand, the NET WORTH of a Company, Partnership and sole proprietorship
    is reflected on the so called BALANCE Sheet Statement. The increase/decrease on the net worth in the BALANCE SHEET is as the the result of the following:

    1. The yearly results of the income or loss as reflected by their Profit and Loss Statement.
    2. Injection of Capital by shares of stock.
    3. Withdrawals ( Partnership and Sole Proprietorship)
    Selling of Stocks by a share holder,

    OTHER TOPIC

    What is the connection of the ITR from the SALN? I will give you an example:

    The ITR reflects your:

    Gross Income say P 500,000.00
    Less: allowable deduction -100,000.00
    ——————
    Income before tax P 400,000.00
    Income tax due ex say -80,000.00
    —————–
    Income after tax P 380,000.00
    ===========

    Assuming that your income is constant over ten years, your accumulated income should read P 13,800,000.00 minus your living and other personal expenses.

    To have properties of say 30 million stated in your SALN at the end of the above number of
    years, you need a lot of explanations to do.

    If you claim to have other income to support the 30 million property make sure the other income you are claiming to have is not taxable otherwise you will be in a much, much much bigger problem.

    • 88.1
      rommel says:

      I do agree that the CJ’s SALN is having discrepancies. However, in the real sense, Assets is a word or a thing or something that was not properly define.

      While it is true that ASSET is something that you owned or have in your possession, but that is not the whole truth. Instead, the real definition of an asset is something that you own that puts money into your pocket or bank account.
      A LIABILITY is something that puts money out from your pocket or bank account.

      For example a yacht, it can be both an asset and a liability.
      It is a liability when and if the owner uses it or if it only in standby mode as you will have to do the maintenance which in this case the owner is spending money out from his pocket. It only becomes an Assets when the owner rent it out to a customer or a tourist who want to rent his yacht.

      So same as the House for instance, it will become an asset when the owner rents it out as it will give the owner an income. But if the owner lives on that same house, it is the owner’s liability because the owner has no income coming the his own house.

  13. 87
    Erl says:

    the legal ramification of this decision penned down by CJ Corona is that he is already estopped. He is bound by the Estoppel Rule.. In other words, he cannot deny the statements he previously asserted as the truth.. He cannot also invoke technicalities to delay the proceedings as he himself declared that technicalities are frowned upon by the Court. As the Immortal Bard Shakespeare perspicaciously said, “Let your own discretion be your tutor, suit the action to the word, the word to the action..” Kudus Raissa for excellent work, the prosecution team lacks legal research training, even if they have the materials in their favor they do not seem to know what and how to argue. Certainly, they need you as a legal researcher..

  14. 86
    Mel says:

    Raïssa, YOU MIGHT BE SUMMONed or INVITEed TO SPEAK IN THE SENATE IMPEACHMENT FOR ARTICLE 7.

    Prosecutors want justices, journalists summoned

    “MANILA, Philippines – Prosecutors are now preparing to present their case on article 7 of the impeachment complaint against Chief Justice Renato Corona. They want to subpoena several journalists, justices and Court Administrator Jose Midas Marquez, among others, as witnesses.”

    “… blogger Raissa Robles who they want to testify, among others, on the close personal relationship between Corona and GMA;”

    Source: Ira Pedrasa, ABS-CBNnews.com and RG Cruz, ABS-CBN News
    Posted at 01/27/2012 12:17 PM |
    http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/01/27/12/prosecutors-want-justices-journalists-summoned

    • 86.1
      pinay710 says:

      sige ms raissa go ka sa trial, dalhin mo lahat ang articles mo para malaman nila fresh from the document ang mga proof na nakalap mo. go go go. i will pray for you now and forever. makakatulong ka sa paglutas ng kasong ito. THE HOLY SPIRIT WILL GUIDE YOU, RAISSA.

  15. 85
    Bobi Rivera says:

    Good day Ms. Raissa. your blog and article was cited by Mr. Jarius Bondoc today in his Philippine Star’s column “Gotcha”.
    http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?publicationSubCategoryId=64&articleId=771624

    • 85.1
      raissa says:

      Thanks for telling me.

    • 85.2
      • 85.2.1
        saxnviolins says:

        What a difference a phrase makes.

        What is the difference between “unexplained wealth” and “ill-gotten wealth”? A lot, if you read RA 3019 and RA 7080.

        Unexplained wealth is defined as:

        Section 8. Dismissal due to unexplained wealth. If in accordance with the provisions of Republic Act Numbered One thousand three hundred seventy-nine, a public official has been found to have acquired during his incumbency, whether in his name or in the name of other persons, an amount of property and/or money manifestly out of proportion to his salary and to his other lawful income, that fact shall be a ground for dismissal or removal. Properties in the name of the spouse and unmarried children of such public official may be taken into consideration, when their acquisition through legitimate means cannot be satisfactorily shown. Bank deposits shall be taken into consideration in the enforcement of this section, notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary.

        So unexplained wealth, as stated in the case of Simplicio Berdon, enjoys a legal presumption. The burden shifts to the Defendant, to prove that he acquired the property legally.

        http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1989/apr1989/gr_74225_1989.html

        Note that Corona’s ponencia was about RA 1379, which is about unexplained wealth, not ill-gotten wealth.

        On December 17, 1991, petitioner Republic, through the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG), represented by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), filed a petition for forfeiture before the Sandiganbayan, docketed as Civil Case No. 0141 entitled Republic of the Philippines vs. Ferdinand E. Marcos, represented by his Estate/Heirs and Imelda R. Marcos, pursuant to Nb.RA 1379

        Unexplained wealth is defined in RA 3019, which refers to RA 1379

        But “ill-gotten wealth” is defined as follows:

        Section 1 d) Ill-gotten wealth means any asset, property, business enterprise or material possession of any person within the purview of Section Two (2) hereof, acquired by him directly or indirectly through dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates and/or business associates by any combination or series of the following means or similar schemes:

        1) Through misappropriation, conversion, misuse, or malversation of public funds or raids on the public treasury;

        2) By receiving, directly or indirectly, any commission, gift, share, percentage, kickbacks or any other form of pecuniary benefit from any person and/or entity in connection with any government contract or project or by reason of the office or position of the public officer concerned;

        3) By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition of assets belonging to the National Government or any of its subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities or government-owned or -controlled corporations and their subsidiaries;

        4) By obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or indirectly any shares of stock, equity or any other form of interest or participation including promise of future employment in any business enterprise or undertaking;

        5) By establishing agricultural, industrial or commercial monopolies or other combinations and/or implementation of decrees and orders intended to benefit particular persons or special interests; or

        6) By taking undue advantage of official position, authority, relationship, connection or influence to unjustly enrich himself or themselves at the expense and to the damage and prejudice of the Filipino people and the Republic of the Philippines.

        RA 7080

        There is no presumption here. “Ill-gotten wealth” is defined by the means with which it has been acquired, such as:

        1) Misappropriating public funds

        2) Receiving a commission or kickback

        3) Illegal or fraudulent conversion of assets belonging to the National government

        etc.

        The prosecution has to prove that property was acquired by the means stated in the definition.

        Article 2.4 of the Articles of Impeachment states:

        2.4. Respondent is likewise suspected and accused of having accumulated ill-gotten wealth, acquiring assets of high values and keeping bank accounts with huge deposits.

        Diyos ko po. Pinahirapan mo naman ang sarili mo Niel Tupas. Had you stated “accumulating unexplained wealth” home free ka na with the SALN and ITR. But now, you need evidence to prove the means of acquisition stated in RA 7080.

        In basketball, when your player is not performing well, you do not call for a substitution of the referee, or ask the referee to be more liberal. You substitute your player.

        • 85.2.1.1
          raissa says:

          Ang galing.

          UPDATE – wait a minute.

          I was curious, so I did a phrase search of CJ Corona’s decision.

          He mentioned the word “ill-gotten” 12 times

          He only mentioned “unexplained wealth” 3 times

          What doe this mean, in relation to your analysis?

          • 85.2.1.1.1
            baycas says:

            Ditto…

            • johnny lin says:

              @saxnviolins
              Welcome back, my friend. I could not resist not posting when I read the very legalese, unexplained and illegal wealth?
              There are only two sources of wealth, legal and Illegal.

              Explained LEGAL WEALTH includes employment income including mandated commissions insurance and real estate agents, lobbyists and self employment; inheritance; donation and legal gambling/ lottery winnings, legal treasure hunters like famous Mel Fisher or fictional Indiana Jones.

              If source is UNEXPLAINED WEALTH what would be the logical conclusion? Its ILLEGAL, sourced from bribe, corruption of government funds directly or illegal commission from bloated government projects, crime sources like illegal gambling of jueteng, theft, robbery, carnapping, kidnapping, smuggling, insurance fraud, ponzi scheme or scams and extortion.

              What example of unexplained wealth could anyone think that is not illegal? None!

              Corona himself could not distinguish the logical difference that led him to mix the wordings in his Marcos Ponencia because they are interchangeable, not only in usage but also in meaning.

              • johnny lin says:

                @saxnviolins
                Dont fall to the trap of claiming il-legal is different from ill-gotten! You are an erudite lawyer; not pilosopong Tasyo, different spelling so they have different meanings.

              • Mel says:

                Happy ngayon si @Johnny.

                Akala namin nasa overseas trip ka @Johnny?

                Kaya bumalik si @saxnviolins.

                @saxnviolins, nice to see and read your structured approach to legal definition, comparison and narration of subjects (e.g. “unexplained wealth” and “ill-gotten wealth”) that affects the Senate Impeachment today.

            • baycas says:

              STATUTORY AND JURISPRUDENTIAL BARRIERS TO THE RECOVERY OF ILL-GOTTEN WEALTH

              Pls read from the link.

              —–

              Realistically, Art. II Par. 2.4 of the AOI most likely will not be considered if they continue to be strict in handling the defective complaint.

              If ever the Impeachment Court will relax, connecting the dots will still be a burden on the prosecution before the burden will shift to the defense.

              Kinda tall order…

              • johnny lin says:

                In jurisprudence, the rule of law states that the latest decision of the SC on certain disputed matters becomes the latest rule of the land based on the interpretation of the justices. All the pertinent laws attributed to ill gotten or unexplained wealth are now ssuperseded by the interpreation of Corona in his Marcos Ponencia in 2003.

                I am not a lawyer but do I understand Corona Ponencia is irrelevant and non binding to other cases like this impeachment article?
                The laws you cited were before the Corona promulgation; unexplained or ill gotten wealth have been clarified by that decision practically molding them into one category or interconnected together with each other along with SALN.

                Its understandable legal minds would quote all applicable laws but at then of the day the recent SC decision on interpretation of the laws takes precedence, unless Senate would disregard the new law created by Corona decision. That simple isn’t it, why complicate?

                Everybody got familiarized with Marcos ill gotten wealth SC decision because of Raissa reporting that it could no longer be ignored thereby it should become the norm in the future.

                Before gall bladder surgery was approached by long incision achieved by cutting on abdominal skin closed by large pieces of gauze; now its by band aid closing thru laparoscopic laser surgery, corollary to the Corona ponencia by simplifying the process. Every surgeon got familiarized with the procedure that is the norm now.
                Same common sense cookie!

              • johnny lin says:

                Enrile has already stated that ill gotten wealth is the end product, definitely what Corona meant in finality of his deccision.

              • Leona says:

                “ill-gotten property” I find too ungrammatical. Why call it “ill?” It is not a “sick” property like a person or living thing. Lawmakers just makes it difficult to understand their so many complez definitions of words for meanings. “Unexplained wealth” is another. For every law, a different definition for the same subject matter. It just confuses an ordinary person and even lawyers and judges.A simple definition like “Any property, real or personal including stocks and other tangible items, stolen, acquired, possessed, secured, owned or other manner of acquisitions, permanent or otherwise, in violation of any civil, criminal or procedural laws or rules and regulations is UNLAWFULLY ACQUIRED PROPERTY.”

              • johnny lin says:

                @leona
                You are correct, they are all unlawfully acquired property whether referred as ill gotten or unexplained.

                @Mel
                Yes I m in Vegas, trying to snoop on Marissa Lapid smuggling case, Just passed by their big house on North Buffalo Street that was placed on lien by the federal government last Friday as collateral for her smuggling case punishable by $500,000 fine and 10 yrs imprisonment

                @saxnviolins is confusing people but he would not comment on the unexplained wealth”statement” that is also mentioned in his ill gotten wealth definition. interchangeable phrases that saxniviolins refused to elaborate after being caught in his own web of deceptive legalese tactics(Administrative provision of RA 3019). He also would not define PECUNIARY Benefits that he defined under ill gotten wealth because he could not interpret his own definition except to admit he was wrong.
                Saxniviolins silence means he was deceiving people , the way he tried to deceive before and kept silent for a while because he was caught wrong in his own interpretation of laws he quoted, and he calls himself a lawyer.

              • Mel says:

                @johnny lin

                hey máte, nice of you to touch base.

                the latest from PH.

                Who wants retired Supreme Court Justice Serafin Cuevas out of the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona? The 83-year-old Cuevas, who has become a sort of a rock star because of his performance as lead defense counsel in the afternoon TV-radio spectacle before a nationwide audience, has revealed purported efforts by Malacañang to get him out just two weeks into the Senate trial. http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/136379/palace-pressuring-me-to-quit%e2%80%93cuevas

                Senator Santiago absent as impeachment trial resumes

                Enrile eyes pre-trial in Corona case

                As for Lapid’s big house on North Buffalo Street, are there any traces of the pocketed lahar fortunes up there?

                take care.

              • Mel says:

                Has retired SC Justice Serafin Cuevas accidentally kicked his foot into his mouth?

                Kayo ang maghusga.

                Transcript of PDI interview with retired SC Justice Serafin Cuevas

                “MANILA, Philippines—Here is the transcript of the interview Inquirer reporter Christian V. Esguerra had with retired Supreme Court Justice Serafin Cuevas at the latter’s Makati office Friday night. This was the basis of a Phililippine Daily Inquirer story about Cuevas which appeared on Sunday, Jan. 29, 2012.

                “Cuevas spoke largely in Filipino and this is retained in the transcript to ensure fidelity to his statements and avoid misinterpretation. The Inquirer questions are in bold letters.

                “Cuevas on Monday denied that a lawyer with links to Malacañang had approached him, urging that he quit his role as lead counsel of Corona’s defense team.”

                SOURCE: Philippine Daily Inquirer
                7:11 pm | Monday, January 30th, 2012
                Transcript of PDI interview with retired SC Justice Serafin Cuevas

          • 85.2.1.1.2
            saxnviolins says:

            Corona was citing the PCGG regulations, which use the phrase “ill-gotten wealth” . The PCGG regulations, define ill-gotten wealth with the same text as RA 7080:

            Sec. 1. Definition.

            (A) “Ill-gotten wealth” is hereby defined as any asset, property, business enterprise or material possession of persons within the purview of Executive Orders Nos. 1 and 2, acquired by them directly, or indirectly thru dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates and/or business associates by any of the following means or similar schemes:

            (1) Through misappropriation, conversion, misuse or malversation of public funds or raids on the public treasury;

            (2) Through the receipt, directly or indirectly, of any commission, gift, share, percentage, kickbacks or any other form of pecuniary benefit from any person and/or entity in connection with any government contract or project or by reason of the office or position of the official concerned.

            (3) By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition of assets belonging to the government or any of its subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities or government-owned or controlled corporations;

            (4) By obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or indirectly any shares of stock, equity or any other form of interest or participation in any business enterprise or undertaking;

            (5) Through the establishment of agricultural, industrial or commercial monopolies or other combination and/or by the issuance, promulgation and/or implementation of decrees and orders intended to benefit particular persons or special interests; and

            (6) By taking undue advantage of official position, authority, relationship or influence for personal gain or benefit.

            The definition requires the element of method of acquisition. There is no such requirement in RA 1379, when a forfeiture case is filed. The administrative provision of RA 3019 (Section 8) actually uses the phrase “unexplained wealth” in relation to RA 1379, for purposes of dismissal. But the dismissal only comes after a forfeiture court has made a finding. One must first win a civil case, to enjoy the presumption, for purposes of dismissal.

            Corona was deciding a case based on RA 1379, which requires a lower quantum of evidence; it enjoys the presumption declared in Simplicio Berdon. The reason for that is that forfeiture is a civil case, and only works the return of government property to the government.

            So although the PCGG calls it “ill-gotten wealth”, and it presumably is, the filing of the forfeiture case under RA 1379 is what qualified it for the legal presumption laid down in the Simplicio Berdon case.

            But when one uses the phrase “ill-gotten wealth” to impeach, one has to find some definition in law. And that phrase, twice (EO 1 of Cory and RA 7080) defined by law, includes the method of acquisition as part of the definition. So evidence of the method of acquisition must be introduced.

            Tupas will have to introduce evidence of kickbacks, etc. Charge it to draftsmanship.

            • johnny lin says:

              @saxnviolins
              Review your own posting on definition: any gift, kickback or any form of pecuniary benefit from a person or entity.

              The deed of sale of Bellagio is a proof of pecuniary benefit. A discounted property is a form of pecuniary benefit. Look at RA 6713 under definition of gifts and public official. PECUNIARY has wide range of implication because it pertains to money of any kind including cents or pennies. A public official must not accept accept any pecuniary benefit in kind that could compromise the official’s position. Corona was handling Megaworld pending or resolved cases.

              Proof of ill gotten wealth: monetary discount is pecuniary benefit received by CJ from Megaworld based on deed of absolute sale.

              As I said before, even free meals of Corona from his wife who was pres and CEO, paid by CJH business expense is a form of pecuniary benefit if CJH has pending cases with SC. Having dinner together personally paid from spouse daily food allowance fringe benefit with CJH IS NOT Pecuniary benefit.
              It might look complicated but actually simple when audited properly. The wife might not be thinking of propriety when she paid the meals. If paid from business expense account of CJH because she was trying to save her personal daily food allowance, only after the audit that the conflict of interest impropriety would be proven. By this time its too late for Mrs Corona to correct her company business charges.

              We all know, both private and government expense accounts, there are official personal expenses which are employee fringe benefits and business which are company expenses, both usually enjoyed by president, CEO and chairman of the board of companies.

              Tupas has only show proof the Bellagio brochures on the cost of condo and compare with the amount that Corona paid. Even a discount of one peso is pecuniary benefit. There is the proof of your own definition

        • 85.2.1.2
          Baltazar says:

          @Sax,
          Splendid! Tiyak na Espada itong baraha mo – tuhog sila. Kay Cuevas kaya ano, Sotang Bastos? :-) But does this mean they still have to amend the articles then again go for the signing? (Medyo malabo sa akin yung part na yun kasi wala akong alam sa rules :-( )

          • 85.2.1.2.1
            Mel says:

            @Baltazar, @saxnviolins, @johnny lin

            Reading the comments and exchanges as above, one layman’s question:

            What is good for the gander (G.R. No. 152154. July 15, 2003 – CJ Corona’s ponencia re RA 1379, unexplained wealth, not ill-gotten wealth), is it good for the goose (Senate Impeachment Case No. 002-2011 [Article 2, minus 2.4 ...ill‐gotten wealth])?

            Is CJ Renato Corona’s ‘formula’ suitable for his own conviction?

            Either by Yes or No answer, by what legal diction unexplained wealth or ill-gotten wealth?

            Agyaman ak.

        • 85.2.1.3
          BP says:

          It is also logical to say that in any case where the wealth acquired cannot be explained, then the presumption is that the wealth is ill-gotten which could have been acquired by any of the means enumerated in R.A. 7080, specifically Item No. 6 of Section 1 (d) which is so broad an act.

    • 85.3
      ric says:

      Raissa, Your star is rising. Keep it up!

  16. 84
    nonon says:

    is it possible that the prosecutors will stop at article 2 and ask for a ruling right away so that they will not present the other articles of impeachment if the cj is convicted. but what will happen if cj is acquited, can they continue with the rest of the articles.

    • 84.1
      raissa says:

      I’ll have to check that.

      • 84.1.1
        Alejandro Tagab Laganson, Sr says:

        In my opinion, all of the 8 impeachable offenses will be discussed first. then they will vote on each of the eight. Sabi ni Senator Enrile, ” hindi gamitin sa Senado ang “it is not beyond reasonable doubts” because it is not a criminal case. The purpose of impeachment if convicted is just to drive out an impeachable officer from his office and that he can not be an employee again of the government forever.I do not exactly knew if it is 50% plus one or 2/3 para kailangan man convict an impeachable officer. Kahit isa lang convicted vote sa 8, puede ng mapatalsikk and impeachable officer. Hindi lahat sa 8 impeachable offenses

  17. 83
    ronnie bernardo says:

    Bravo Miss Raissa!, you are a god-sent.

  18. 82
    johnny lin says:

    ABS-CBN NEWS —-CORONA STIFLES RUMOR OF RESIGNATION

    Senate must continue trial even if Corona resigns for the simple reason it is their constitutional duty under impeachment law.

    Resignation is not allowed when Senate trial has convened, spelled in Article IX
    They must finish trial by conviction even if Corona resigns.

    The rumor was floated by own Corona camp to gauge public response and of course the senators who should not fall under this trap, lest they will be malign for cover up. Senate integrity at stake.

    • 82.1
      raissa says:

      If he resigns, the trial will grind to a stop because the only objective of the trial is either to remove him from office or not.

      The Ombudsman and BIR will take over any investigation.

      • 82.1.1
        johnny lin says:

        Resignation,he will retain all his government benefits and ability to return to govt service.
        Conviction aside from removal from office he also is disqualified from holding govt office under Article XI Section 3 (7) of Phil Constitution.

        Only After Ombudsman conviction when benefits could be forfeited. Tax evasion since its a crime, not sure if benefits are forfeited.

        There is a rule on resignation which was raised during Gutierrez but the consensusvwas trial did not commenceyet so she was allowed. Maybe someone could find the link on resignation while being impeached.

  19. 81
    van says:

    I don’t know much about lawyerly stuff, but if Corona is successfully impeached, will a criminal case be in the works after? I don’t feel it’s enough that he’s just booted from office. i feel he deserves jail time for his treachery vs the people.

  20. 80
    kurapbuster says:

    Lapid,s wife of $50,000 ? Nagtatanong lang ako kong ito na kaya ang mga perang ipinamumod ni GMA sa mga Senador. Kaya hanggang ngayon kampanti sila na mayroon silang senador na pikit matang aayonan si Corona?

    Bakit ayaw padaanin sa bank to bank? Para hindi ma trace. Ngayon ,bilangin ninyo kung ilang beses nag abroad ang mga Arroyo. Same procedure..
    Yan ang patakaran dahil alam nilang mga tanga ang mga pilipino. Kailangan pang mga amerikano pa ang makahuli.

    Dapat dito pa lang magsimula mg mag-imbestiga ang mga ahensiya ng gobyerno kung talagang seryoso silang palitawin ang mg Corrupt. Saan galaing yan? Hindi na lkailangan ang SALN niyan. Nadiyan na eh.

    • 80.1
      saudiboy says:

      @kurapbuster,

      ano po kaya ang nangyari sa kaso ng mag-amang lapid tungkol sa income sa lahar?

      pwede po kaya mai-post ni ma’am raissa ang saln ng mag-ama. curious lang kung gaano sila kayaman. baka may ill-gotten wealth din, maisabay na. hehehe.

      naalala ko po kc yung napanood kong interview sa kanya ni abner mercado, nakakalula sa laki yung mansion nya sa gitna ng bukid. parang sumakay pa si abner sa golf cart para libutin ang kapaligiran ng bahay. at saka hindi man lang pinapasok yung bisita nya sa loob ng bahay.

  21. 79
    Ben Ceniza says:

    If the Supreme Court did not file Alpha list for Corona from 2003 – 2005. There is a possibility that all supreme court justices from 2003 – 2005 did not have alpha list also. It means they did not pay taxes as no taxes were withheld.

    • 79.1
      kurapbuster says:

      That’s correct but who is responsible?

      All I can say is that, this is the kind of practice of the magistrates during Arroyo’s time knowing that the PGMA will not do anything to harm them on the notion that they will not do anything to harm GMA.

      VIZ A VIZ ika nga.

    • 79.2
      Roger says:

      yes you are right. we have to think that they are too lawyer worked in the government subject to rules & regulation about filing SALN. Whew those are the remnants of the past administration…mga spoiled brats……

    • 79.3
      Mike says:

      Yes Ben. It seemed to me that the BIR Chief said that although the alpha list had not been submitted for those years 2003-2005, the tax had in fact been paid by the Supreme Court to the BIR. Though I must say that although the english language of BIR Chief was otherwise very good, in this particular case it was not exactly 100% clear.

  22. 78
    kurapbuster says:

    Hindi macha-charge ng tax evasion si Corona dahil covered siya ng tax code section 51.

    Nakasaad na ang kanyang income at bayad sa tax sa sinasabi nilang alpha list na sina-submit ng supreme court taon taon sa BIR..

  23. 77
    johnny lin says:

    Lapid’s vote a toss up?

    NEWS: Senator Lapid’s wife Marissa arrested in Las Vegas airport Jan 15 by Federal agents for smuggling charges of undeclared $50,000 last November. 2011. Transporting money above $10,000.00 internationally is an offense under money laundering law like the Euro generals in Russia.Here is another spouse with money problems. The Lapids have a house in Vegas in Summerlin area on why she goes there frequently.

    Surprising how people would not use regular bank account transactions when they have successful business ventures? Marissa apparently is major owner of Generics pharmacy? Unless that amount was smuggled ill gotten wealth, AGAIN?

    Senetor Lapid requested assistance of DFA to assist wife. The impeachment vote of Lapid is getting murky now.

    • 77.1
      Mike says:

      USD 10,000 limit is unreasonably low and has not been increased in line with inflation .You can compare the stupid P10000 limit for carrying of Pesos in and out of Philippines.

  24. 76
    johnny lin says:

    TO ALL THOSE PRO CORONA/GMA BIBLE-PHILIACS

    Here is the proof that Corona is the best example on ” He who is not without sin shall cast the first stone”

    Check previous postings and identify them, he he he.

    • 76.1

      If we use that Bible phrase against CJ Corona, then it will be hard to cast the stones on him since it looks that nobody deserves to throw the first stone and CJ Corona will get out Scott free…Like probably why the Marcoses are still enjoying their questionable wealth. That is the very thing he has been doing against P’noy and other accusers that instead of standing answerable to all the issues, he is diverting the eyes to other issue not so relevant at a time.

  25. 75
    johnny lin says:

    A salaried income earner without filing annual income tax; is that tax evasion?

    In the US non filing of tax every year of an income earner whether there is tax to be paid or not is an offense under the Revenue Code. The Rule is file ITR, the reason even retirees whose only income is Social Security benefits has to file tax return annually even if the tax due is zero.

    The prosecutors has to ask KimHenares or they themselves show Revenue Code document stating that it is a criminal offense not to file annual ITR if there is income for the year, irregardless of tax due.

    Why was Alpha list. Missing for so many years? Was the evidence obstructed?

    The Alpha list was missing but it did not mean the justices did not receive salary nor there was no withholding taxes or GSIS contribution deducted from salary. Prosecution must prove the law by eliciting Henares testimony in eliciting the existence of a law, then accuse CORONA of wilful tax evasion which is not only betrayal of public trust but in fact because its tax evasion, a crime. Al Capone was convicted of tax evasion for not reporting his true income. Corona’s on filing of tax is the same, not reporting true income, Capone by understating true income while Corona for not revealing true income.

    From tax evadion, that could lead to proving ill gotten wealth by saying that taxes due to the government were kept to buy properties. Money due to the government was technically stolen and used to accumulate enormous wealth, therefore ill gotten. That will be followed by revealing all the wealth that were accumulated during the years of unfiled tax returns.

    The key is NON FILING OF TAX RETURN ANNUALLY IS TAX EVASION.

    • 75.1
      johnny lin says:

      National Internal Revenue Code Title X, Chapter II, Section 255 Failure to write/ file tax return is a crime punishable by fine of not less than 10,000 pesos and imprisonment.

      Also under RA 7642 Sec 2. Sec 253 any person who wilfully attempts to evade or defeat any tax impose ……………. is punishable under this law of a fine not less than 30,000 pesos orimprisonment not less than 2-4 years.

      Corona was alleged not filing income tax from 2002-2005.

      • 75.1.1
        johnny lin says:

        It is the responsibility of the taxpayer to keep a record of his income and tax deductions for the year under RA 7642 Sec 2. Sec 253. Failure by the employer in issuing a W2 or witholding tax record for the year is not a reason not to file ITR.

        Record keeping is the same for employed and self employed taxpayers. Simple for employed, complex for self employed.

        • 75.1.1.1
          johnny lin says:

          Mrs. Corona apparently file ITR in 2003 but no recor of ITR on Justice Corona. RA 7697 Section 8, Husband and Wife Filing, might have been voilated on revealing sources of income.

          Also RA 7697 section 14. Sec. 254 deals with amended provisions for not filing tax return.

          • 75.1.1.1.1
            saudiboy says:

            sir johnny lin,

            baka dito nga po siguro nakasaad yung BIR ruling na kapag tama na yung withholding tax na nabawas sa taxable income ng isang employee, di na kelangan mag file pa ng ITR. hindi ko lang po sigurado kung kelan ang effectivity nun. sa company po kc namin, every february nakaktanggap po kami ng certificate of compensation/payment/tax withheld mula sa HRD (bir form 2316) at nakasaad na dun yung tax due at tax withheld kaya pag pareho yung figures di na po kelangan mag file.

            sa kaso po ni CJ, assume na po natin na nagkaroon ng bureaucratic delay lang sa pag submit ng alpha list. tiyak naman na natanggap nila yung sweldo nung mga taon na yun at assume din po natin na nabawas yung tamang withholding tax, so hindi na po kelangan niyang mag file ng ITR dahil may BIR ruling na po tungkol dun. sa palagay ko po, lusot siya sa tax evasion kung eto lang pagbabasehan.

            pero kung yun lang ang pagbabasehan income nya, paano siya nakabili ng mga real properties na milyones? wala pang isang milyon yung kinikita nya sa loob ng isang taon, isang bakasyon lang nila sa abroad ubos kaagad yun. ibig sabihin meron siyang other source of income na undeclared na hindi binayaran ng tax, shoot sya sa tax evasion pag nagkataong hindi makapag-isip ng palusot si superlolo serafin and co.

            pwede po kaya yun, wag ng talakayin yung ibang articles para matapos na, eto na lang ang pagbotohan kc malakas ang ebidensya.

            psensya na po kung mahaba ang comment.

            • kurapbuster says:

              Tama ka Saudiboy, Basi sa tax code 51, Corona is not required to file an income tax return.

              The supreme court annually submits the alpha list which is equivalent to W2 to BIR which contains the taxable income and the tax withheld by corona. So there is no tax evasion here.

              In the year 2003 to 2005 the supreme court did not submit the alpha list to BIR. So, Corona cannot be held responsible for not filing his ITR because supreme court failed to file the alpha list.

            • baycas says:

              @saudiboy,

              pero kung yun lang ang pagbabasehan income nya, paano siya nakabili ng mga real properties na milyones?

              Dapat ikonekta ng prosecution ang SALN at ang INCOME ni Corona. Pag nangyari ‘yon si Corona na mismo ang magpapatunay na hindi ill-gotten wealth ang pinagmulan ng pondo para magkamal ng mga ari-arian.

              Pakibasa dito:

              http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/01/25/12/enrile-cj-not-yet-hook-ill-gotten-wealth

              • saudiboy says:

                @baycas,

                mabuti naman po kung ganun pala ang batas re: ill-gotten wealth, ang burden of proof ay nasa akusado.

                tanong lang po: pag nag submit ng SALN, hindi pala kasama yung ITR?

                nagtataka lang po ako kung bakit hinaharang ng depensa na ilabas yung ITR samantalang nailabas na yung SALN. sa palagay ko dapat tingnan pareho yung financial status (saln) at financial results (itr) kung ang layunin ay i-monitor yung net worth ng opisyal.

      • 75.1.2
        baycas says:

        There are instances when one may not file an ITR. Please refer to NIRC Chap. IX, Sec. 51. Corona may have been covered by this provision.

        • 75.1.2.1
          raissa says:

          And was the Mrs covered too?

          • 75.1.2.1.1
            Mel says:

            It is getting too complicated, and murkier by each trial day that pass.

            Raïssa, you may have to release again a report in the near future if Mrs Corona is excempted since by Atty Esguerra’s past account – joint ang SALN nila ni R Corona.

            Is R Corona’s SC Alphalist good enough also for their Missus</a?

            Sana mayruong dito sa mga commenters mo na CPA-Lawyer experts sa ITR and Alphalist areas to educate us on this.

          • 75.1.2.1.2
            baycas says:

            I don’t know. But her inclusion in the alpha list from JHMC started only in 2007.

            http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/01/25/12/mrs-corona-bought-p11m-property-no-income

            • kurapbuster says:

              The 11 milion allegedly was a loan by Chief Justice to Company which is controlled by Mrs Corona to buy a certain property.

              Yes this is true, but what came out in yesterday’s hearing, the buyer as listed on the certificate of Registration produced by Henares turned out to be Mrs Corona only?

              Does not matter cause it is conjugal anyway but why is it in the name of Mrs Corona and exclude the CJ as buyer when the money used to buy it is from the loan of the CJ?

              Hokus pokus eh?

          • 75.1.2.1.3
            johnny lin says:

            I dont know ITR rule in Philippines, that is why in the beginning I asked, is it tax evasionfor failure to file ITR but RA 7697 Sec 14 Sec 254 failure to write tax specifically implied its a violation unless there is another provision Sec 51. However, in same RA 7697 under houseband and wife it was mentioned that spouse has to file even when filing separately because BIR has obligation to consolidate ITR.

            @ baycas ps try to attach link so everyone can interpret. Calling expert Accountants

            In the US non filing of annual ITR is a tax offense whether you have tax dueor not as long as you have filed before includingthose with monthly govt pensions.

            • johnny lin says:

              @baycas
              Pls attach link Chapter IX Sec 51 A 2(b) (c)
              These 2b,2c is where Corona could apply as exempted from filing:

              2b- that is if withholding taxes were withheld from salary provided further that income was not more than 60,000 pesos in one year. Corona had more than 400,000 income as associate justice.

              2c- exemption states that if income is based only on salary. If Corona claims ITR exemption under this provision, then Atty Esguerra could not aasert that Corona had other income from allowances or other sources

              2a and 2d dont apply to Corona based on gross income.

              My opinion, Corona committed tax evasion in 2002-2005 just based on his income, tatswhy Henares was treading gingerly because of absence of Alphalist, which is actually a list of all SC employees. Basing on the 2006-2010 list thereis no reason to doubt tgat Corona did not gross more than 60,000 pesos.

              Henares could testify on this if Prosecutors know how to elicit her testimony.
              catch him on tax evasion, non filing of ITR. Even the president files annual ITR despite thefact that most of his daily expensesare shouldered by government, that comparison alone is enough to deduce that Corona failed to file ITR.

    • 75.2
      kurapbuster says:

      Johnny in the case of Corona there is no tax evasion because section 51 of tax code exempts him from filing ITR.

      It is the responsibility of the supreme court to file the so called alpha list to BIR. Alpha list
      contains the taxable income and the tax withheld of Corona.

      • 75.2.1
        johnny lin says:

        @kurapbuster
        That is assuming his income was only from salary, however in that Sec 52 A2b it is applicable only to those whose gross income do not exceed 60,000 a year.

        Common sense, Just imagine, if Employees like Corona are all exempted from filing ITR then most government employees need not file anymore which is far from truth if not impossible because many exceed the 60,000 gross income threshold.

        Again, even if SC did not supply Alphaland, Corona is still has obligation to file and liable under RA 7642 and 7697. Its personal responsibilty aside from patriotic duty to pay taxes on gross income specified by NIRC. Corona should know that unless he was testing the system having SGV tax lawyer experience

        • 75.2.1.1
          kurapbuster says:

          Yes you are right . Provided that his salary is his only income.

          The reason I did not include that in my comment is that the Commissioner
          of the BIR said on the impeachment trial, Corona did not file his ITR but he is in in alpha list.

          So, based on that testimony of the Commissioner, I knew that he has just one income.

  26. 74
    Arnel Dy says:

    The link to the full ruling reads

    “Information disclosure has been erased!”

    Noooo! Can anyone upload it and post a link to it? It’s a public document right so it should be ok.

    Thanks!

    • 74.1
      baycas says:

      I’m curious. What’s your browser? I can easily access the provided SC link with Firefox and Safari.

      Nonetheless, here’s a link from another site:

      http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2003/jul2003/gr_152154_2003.html

      • 74.1.1
        raissa says:

        I can’t access it from google chrome.

        • 74.1.1.1
          baycas says:

          Hmmm…

        • 74.1.1.2
          Mel says:

          Hi Raïssa

          I am a Chrome user too.

          Make it a habit to clear your browser’s garble data by going to Chrome’s Options, click on the Under the Hood (left sidebar), and click on the Clear browsing data Button.

          • 74.1.1.2.1
            Mel says:

            BTW, restart your browser again.

            It will improve your browsing speed – a bit.

            Now it you still can’t access that original site or any other GR index file cases, the website administrator might have prevented your IP address from accessing its database – redirecting your connection to a page – like ‘your not welcome, you are doing us damage… BIRO LANG.

          • 74.1.1.2.2
            raissa says:

            OK.

            • Baltazar says:

              Now it you still can’t access that original site or any other GR index file cases, the website administrator might have prevented your IP address from accessing its database –

              I was actually thinking of that too when I can easily access the site and Raissa can’t. That one is not a big problem anyhow. Anyways, Ms Raissa, it’s prudent to increase the security even of your emails as they contain also the footprints of your IP address. I suggest when uploading and updating your blogs, don’t use Windows OS but instead switch to Linux. WordPress is web-based anyways and it is OS independent.Linux is free , Ubuntu distro is the most supported. Just let me know if you need assistance, its free from me as long as you will keep on writing about the truth :P

              • Mel says:

                Maselan kasi ang ginagawa ni Raïssa.

                Raïssa, DO YOU GET AN ERROR MESSAGE? WHAT NO THAT IS SHOWN?

                O baka naman you need to update lang your Chrome to the latest vers. or update your windows operating system, or your virus protections software, try microsoft security essentials.

                —————

                She’s stepping into a lot of people’s ‘toes’.

                Kaya inggat ka Raïssa.

                IF they were monitoring your Requests to their website, they already have certain ranges of your IP addresses. Maraming magaling na pinoy who are into this. They can block IP address, and direct to another page with garble messages or with malware.

                As for your email IP address, ok lang iyan. as long as your log in, pw details are not compromised.

                BUT THEY HAVE TO UNDERSTAND YOU ARE DOING A NOBLE AND HUMANITARIAN SERVICE. PARA SA BAYAN. MAG APPEAL TAYO SA MABUTING PAGKATAO NILA. I HOPE WHATEVER MONIES THEY ARE PAID OR PROMISE IS NOT COMMENSURATE WITH THE WORK THAT Raïssa IS DOING FOR THE NATION.

                AN ALTERNATIVE IS TO USE A PROXY WEBSITE TO VISIT SITES THAT FILTER OR STOP YOU FROM ACCESSING THEIR DATABASE OR INFO – directly.

                USE GMAIL NA LANG – THIS IS A TROLL. AGAINST THE ‘COMMENTS’ POLICY NI Raïssa. lol!

              • raissa says:

                Thanks for the tips.

  27. 73
    liling says:

    Magaling ka, Mrs. Robles! You are so much better than someone who wrote about Corona’s PhD but stopped at getting the side of UST. I tip my hat off to you…

  28. 72
    kurapbuster says:

    A tripod cannot stand with two legs alone.
    You are a big help to President Aquino and DOJ Delema in fighting these formidable corrupt government officials, that are being hindrance to the progress of the Philippines for so long.

    With you as a third leg, this tripod cannot be moved, toppled or tricked by these syndicated
    government officials of this country.

    I salute you madam.

    • 72.1
      raissa says:

      Hi,

      I’m not doing this for them but for the country’s future.

      We owe it to ourselves to make officials accountable, including the incumbents.

      But thanks for your salute.

  29. 71
    Jay says:

    Marcos Jr just admitted that they will use the ruling penned by Corona on the forfeiture of their family’s Swiss accounts. And this gave the direction to the Senate on how to solve the tricky issue of ill-gotten wealth allegation against Corona. Ms. Raissa, your article is really perfect timing. Your kakulitan really paid off and this should mainly be credited to you.

  30. 70
    Arnel Dy says:

    Just a little more. They now have the CAR as evidence. You trace the CAR to the properties – you trace the properties to his SALN – and you lay down the basis for allowing Article 2.4.

    I was literally jumping for joy when Recto finally stopped the sideshow and just – went for the jugular!

  31. 69
    Bernard Dino says:

    Just watched the day 6 of the trial. I’d like to think that the prosecution is reading your blog as well because I noticed that they use this same argument in their memorandum submitted to the senate with regards to the article 2 of the complaint. After watching Senator Enrile’s interview in the ANC after adjournment he gave a hint that they this will use this formula tackle article II 2.4 which the senate set aside in admitting evidence.

    You are right. If everybody will contribute for the betterment of the nation, however small, it will have significant effect. I admire your patriotism and resolved.

    Mabuhay Ka!!!

  32. 68
    Jherskie says:

    i’ve been reading through your blog for a while now, Ms Raissa. this is the first time for me to comment :)

    basing on his words, corona is indeed of great intellect. too bad he gave in to the callings of greed. and since he’s still clinging on to that side, there’s no where else for him to go but down.

  33. 67
    B says:

    the problem is, their accusation is based only on reports & suspicion unlike sa case ng mga marcoses accusation pa lang may hard evidence na.

  34. 66
    juan caballero says:

    Raissa, Congratulations! Napansin na ng Prosecutors blog mo.. They just cited Republic vs. Sandiganbayan..

  35. 65
    Mel says:

    Corona tax withheld & gross compensation

    2002 to 2005 – No ITR filed and no alphalist submitted by Supreme Court

    Source: ABS-CBNnews.com Posted at 01/25/2012 3:54 PM | Updated as of 01/25/2012 3:56 PM

    1 down, 7 to go. Can’t they just rule in this Article II complaint as guilty so that the Supreme Court can move on with a new appointed CJ? And let the Tanodbayan thru the Ombudsman to criminally charge [ex] CJ R Corona.

    • 65.1
      Suplada at Bastos says:

      The following is what Senator-judge Miriam Defensor Santiago said after insisting that Henares could not play such role since the [impeachment ] court has already decided on the inadmissibility of paragraph 2.4.

      “She said Henares can only be an authenticating officer at this point. “Nagkasundo na e. Tapos na pala e. Ito na ang na-file sa BIR. We can do the authentication outside…Tapos na ang trabaho ng babaeng ito.”

      Source: http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/01/25/12/senate-excludes-ill-gotten-wealth-clause

    • 65.2
      Mel says:

      I may have jump the gun on this when I wrote this “1 down, 7 to go. Can’t they just rule in this Article II complaint as guilty so that the Supreme Court can move on …” With out knowing that the Senate-Judges excluded Article 2.4 of the Impeachment Complaint before the start of today’s trial proceedings.

      I read the other online reports after I submitted this with haste.

  36. 64
    • 64.1
      raissa says:

      Hanep. Above the law.

      • 64.1.1
        Makikisuyo says:

        Puwede pong manawagan?

        Kinakabahan po ako para kay CJ Renato Corona at sa Missis niya.

        Kung puwede pong paki kamusta sila, lalo na pu si ginoong Renato Corona.

        Baka magtangka po si ginoong R Corona. Gaya ni Angie.

        Kung sino po ang mga kamag anak niya na tumatangkilik dito, paki saklolo po ninyo sila.

        • 64.1.1.1
          raissa says:

          Hindi naman siguro.
          Malaki ang paniwala niya sa Diyos.

          • 64.1.1.1.1
            Mel says:

            Hi Raïssa,

            I hope he wouldn’t do IT.

            What would be his ploy to do it to himself by not honoring an unwritten rule and that was to pay his own share of tax to the gov’t that he represents and receives his salary.

            Parang Mikee Arroyo din.

            With no ITRs for that period, he just added more calamities to his problems. Not the gov’t will really go after him.

            Does that mean, he didn’t pay any tax?

            Makes us wonder what are the penalties for not submitting/reporting a working citizen’s tax return – not only for a year but 4 to 10 years.

            Indeed, a second set of Rule of Law, a Law unto themselves.

            • Mel says:

              erratum

              instead of ‘Not the gov’t will really go after him.’

              it should read ‘NOW the gov’t will really go after him.’

      • 64.1.2
        baycas says:

        Wait. Pag isa lang ang nagpapasuweldo puede nang di mag-file ng ITR. May withholding tax naman na ‘yun.

        Ang problem sapat ba ‘yun to acquire properties he reportedly has? Meron ba talaga siya ng other source of funds na hindi naman taxable?

        Mahirap pa ring ipalabas ang ebidensiya kung walang “wide latitude” o “flexibility” lalo na sa Article II, Paragraph 2.4 ng AOI…

      • 64.1.3
        Mel says:

        One of Raïssa’s CPA commenter who would be disappointed is Arnel Dy: January 23, 2012 at 8:03 pm. (CJ Corona’s P11M ‘cash advance’)

        “I would really love to see his 2003 and 2010 ITR.”

        R Corona’s ITR for 2003 is non existent, only 2010 BUT as part of the SC Alpha list – but no 2010 ITR.

        Na Technical and mga marurunong, lalung lalo na ang prosekusyon.

        This is where Raïssa’s [this article] 1st note on ‘About the three things that struck me about CJ Corona’s ruling that could prove relevant to his ongoing impeachment trial’ comes in.

        “First, CJ Corona had this to say about technicalities that simply delayed the trial. He wrote…” (please read above for the full section.)

        The next big question is, will the senate-judges recall their recent exclusion of article 2.4 due to this revelation?

        Senator-judge Franklin Drilon said, however: “However, under article 2.4, which asserts that these are… that such properties could be ill-gotten, the court did not rule on that and will rely on the presumptions of evidence on the presumptions of law particularly, the anti-graft law.”

        ——————–

        Part of today’s development.

        It beggar’s belief that why would “Senator-judges decided to drop article 2.4 of the complaint, which had been the rallying cry of the prosecution in their effort to seek a Corona conviction for betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution.” Source: http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/01/25/12/senate-excludes-ill-gotten-wealth-clause

        Of all timing, BIR Commissioner Kim Henares was supposed to sit as witness YESTERDAY, then Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago suddenly jumped from her sick bed to join the Impeachment proceeding YESTERDAY & today, and then – ‘walaa’, the ill-gotten wealth clause of Article 2.4 was excluded before the start of the impeachment trial today.

        A rotting fish is starting to permeate the impeachment trial. Something fishy is going on.

    • 64.2
      Johnny Two III says:

      I earn more, much more than what CJ Corona’s declared income and I can’t afford the properties he has acquired, specially the condo unit in Bellagio Condominiums.

  37. 63
    shin taro says:

    Excellent !…Raissa…God bless you in your advocacy for truth and justice! I am now your fan! May God give you good health and keep you from danger!

  38. 62

    @raissa or to anyone who has a better knowledge in the impeachment subject..

    Now that the senate had excluded the clause for the ill gotten wealth issue…

    can we still impeach him if it will be proven that he is not telling the whole truth about his SALN?

    thanks.. just want to be sure, he’s not out of the hook yet..

    • 62.1
      raissa says:

      we have to wait and see what happens.

    • 62.2
      Arnel Dy says:

      The word is “set aside” … for now.

      If they can lay down the basis for pursuing Article 2.4 – then the court will accede to allowing it to be pursued.

      The CARs lay down the groundwork for Article 2.4. Do not give up hope yet.

      • 62.2.1
        baycas says:

        Yes, pieces of evidence for 2.2 and 2.3 will inevitably lead to 2.4.

        The best thing about it is that the burden of proof on 2.4 will be shifted to the defense.

        Tupas et al must make up for lost time as a result of the inherent defect of 2.4 (as well as failing to charge Corona for graft and corruption).

        —–

        Just a thought, the Impeachment Court must provide a wide latitude or flexibility in accepting 2.4 as an allegation inasmuch as Corona’s SALN was never publicly disclosed.

  39. 61
    rafael l. vidal says:

    CONGRATZ RAISSA, 20 minutes from now, the prosecution will submit their delayed memorandum wherein they mentioned your research on corona as ponente on the ill-gotten wealth case against the marcoses.

    Let’s wait and see

  40. 60
    pinay710 says:

    raissa maraming salamat sa mga researches mo. sinabi ko sa apo ko na gayahin ka. kasi magtatapos na sya sa mass com at print journalism ang major nya. sabi ko magbasa sya ng article ni RAISSA ROBLES at marami syang matutuhan.ako din kahit matanda na ako marami akong nalaman sa mga articles mo. salamat sa pagbibigay ng liwanag

    • 60.1
      raissa says:

      Sabihin mo sa apo mo pumunta muna siya sa diyaryo bago mag TV.

      ang mga nag-umpisa sa diyaryo mas magaling pagpunta sa broadcasting.

      Salamat sa pagbasa mo.

      • 60.1.1
        pinay710 says:

        maraming maraming salamat raissa sa payo mo. at bigyan ka pa sana ng PANGINOON DIOS ng mas malalim na kakulitan para maiambag mo sa Pilipinas nating mahal ang iyong katalinuhan. maraming salamat.

      • 60.1.2

        I am really grateful Raissa that your blog is being used. Congratulations!
        May you and your husband live longer for the purpose driven life you were created for.
        May you also have a great number of descendants that will carry your legacy for generations.

  41. 59
    rey says:

    im so happy and thanks to you raissa… the prosecution has used your research in their memorandum.. spokesman for the prosecution right now is citing said corona decision in his interview in anc… it’s is so damaging for the defense i believe… another victory for us who want the truth to come out of this impeachment trial. again, thanks…

    • 59.1
      raissa says:

      We, the people, are all welcome :)

    • 59.2
      Mel says:

      Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap,

      Encore

      Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap,

      Maraming salamat sa Diyos at may Raïssa Robles ang Pilipinas.

      Your hubby Alan and son must be proud of you.

  42. 58
    Call Center Employee says:

    Ma’am Raissa,

    Thanks for your passion and diligence. sa kagaya kung ordinaryong mamamayan, I become more informed about these mess that Abalos, Gloria, Gonzales, and self serving Puno have orchistrated….palibhasa alam nila ang mangyayari after the election once si Pnoy ang manalo. kaya nila iniupo sa korte suprema si corona na TANGA……
    Siguro po kung wala itong expsose and paper trails matutulad na naman sa dati ang pagantabay ko sa sa isyu noon ni estrada na naghihintay lamang ako sa mga bias na pahayag ng mga plotiko sa magkabilang panig….protecting their personal gains.

    At least after reading all your blogs and carefully made a descernment. It appears na yours is aligned to what the masses is longing for…..justice, genuine democracy and progress for all and for the whole nation.

    Wish ko lang po na hindi lang ang mga bugok na pulitiko ang mabunyag ang mga kalokohan…kasi tulad po ni gloria…before pos siya naluklok sa pagkakaalam ko po ay isa sya sa mga less corrupt pero simula nya kunin ang serbisyo ni Ronnie Puno kapansin pansin na pagsalungat nya sa diwa ng edsa 2. Sino ba si Puno? Di ba sya rin ang nasa likod ni Erap kung saan kaliwat kanan din ang corruption…

    OO nga pala…may narinig pala ako na isang dating pangulo na kinaiinisan din ni Erap ang nag tayo ng isang mall sa sa singapore at doon nya dinala ang kanyang ill gotten wealth….palibhasa nasa malayo hindi naamoy ng mga pinoy tabako nya. hehehe

    • 58.1
      Call Center Employee says:

      ops nakalimuta ko pala….si Ronnie Puno ay nagserbisyo rin sa ilalim ni Ramos.

    • 58.2
      raissa says:

      Talaga?

      • 58.2.1
        chaospanic says:

        nice posts regarding another angle on the impeachment tria
        keep it up!
        hmm.. but reading the all the positive replies above..
        bawal ba mag-negate sa article

    • 58.3
      Baltazar says:

      @Call Center,
      Baka hearsay lang yung mall ha? For all I know, and aware din ang maraming Pinoy dito, yung IMM mall (just google it) daw belongs to the Marcoses hence the name – Imelda Marcos Mall. Pero walang facts yan so iapply natin ang due process both kay FVR & Imelda. But if you can pinpoint the mall, I can check the national library for some records. Baka may makita tayo. Transparent ang system dito so we can check it.

  43. 57
    1320 says:

    Having properties that can’t be justified by one’s income over the years in public service raises a presumption that it’s ill-gotten. The prosecution knows this and has had initial success in presenting the testimonies and documents of the registers of deeds and the SALN of CJ. However, they’re having a problem in proceeding to the next step (that of showing CJ’s income via his and his family’s ITRs) because of a vaguely written Article 2, which involves the charge of failure to publicly disclose the SALN only. The defense’s game plan, which has succeeded, is to bar the prosecution from proceeding to step 2.

    The Senate should now rise to the occasion and allow the reception of evidence of CJ’s income. If very ordinary collection cases allow amendments to a complaint, why not in this case where public interest is involved? At any rate, CJ’s rights aren’t prejudiced. He can still rebut whatever evidence the prosecution may present when it’s time for him to present his. Blocking the presentation of such evidence on mere technicality, at this point, may benefit CJ’s position at the Senate, but will ultimately damage his image in the bar of public opinion.

  44. 56
    abdullah says:

    you’re at it again raissa. you and your rumor mill.

    firstly, let me just emphasize:

    on your first: “It is rather a contest in which each contending party fully and fairly lays before the court the facts in issue and then, brushing aside as wholly trivial and indecisive all imperfections of form and technicalities of procedure, asks that justice be done upon the merits. ” – RC

    precisely. what he did was not in contrast to his previous “marcos” ruling.

    on your second: ” (3)said amount is manifestly out of proportion to his salary as such public officer or employee and to his other lawful income and the income from legitimately acquired property.” – RC

    your malicious intention here is to paint and impression that renato has no capacity or have no access to other means to lawful income. how well do you know that?

    wala ka nang ginawang matino. chismosa ka.

    • 56.1
      raissa says:

      Sabihin mo yan kay CJ.

      Huwag sa akin.

      SA kanya itong decision na ito.

      Siya ang naghusga.

      • 56.1.1
        johnny lin says:

        Pasensiya na kay Abdullah.

        Marunong siyang magbasa ng English, hindi lang niya maintindihan ang binabasa. Sabi nga ni Cuevas absent ka siguro nung ang subject matter ay ” understanding and interpretation” Rumor daw yung nakasulat sa supreme court na si Corona ang mismong sumulat at hindi si Raissa.

        Tagalog na para maintindihan sabi nga ni Enrile.

        • 56.1.1.1
          1320 says:

          @abdullah:

          Magulo ang sinabi mo brod.

          Wala namang sinabi si Ms. Robles na walang legitimate source of income si CJ. ang ibig lang niyang sabihin sa piece niya ay kung susukatin natin si CJ sa issue ng ill-gotten wealth (kung ang ebidensiya dito ay tatanggapin ng Senado) ay maari tayong tumingin sa sukatang inilatag ni CJ mismo sa kanyang desisyon. Kaya nga binanggit ng husto ang Desisyon para maliwanagan ang mambabasa sa sukatang legal para masabing may ill-gotten wealth ang isang opisyal sa pamahalaan.

          Again, ang gulo ng sinabi mo. Hindi ko kinaya.

    • 56.2
      Johnny Two III says:

      @abdullah, if CJ Corona has access to other “lawful” income, he most defiinitely did not file any tax on them as it was proven in the Senate today, if your were listeining, that he did not file any Income Tax Return since 2002 to present as required by law. Other than the alpha list SC submitted I think starting 2009 he has not filed any ITR. If he had no other income outside of his SC salary, how did he buy those properties? And excuse me, maraming ginagawang matino si Ms. Robles. Di mo ba nababasa how thankful many of her readers are for opening their eyes, including mine, to documented truth?

    • 56.3
      johnny lin says:

      Abdullah
      Tumpak na Tumpak ka.
      Corona has capacity and access to other means of LOW FOOL INCOME

      LOW – Under the Table
      FOOL- panloloko sa position nya.

      HE ALSO HAS CAPACITY COMMITTING GRAFT AND CORRUPTION

    • 56.4
      callmejames says:

      @Abdullah, based on records at hand, Hindi talaga proportion ang income niya sa amount ng properties niya. Malinaw, wala siyang ibang sources of income maliban sa kanyang sweldo. Gamitin mo naman isip mo kahit minsan lang, maigi yan sa kalusugan. ;)

  45. 55
    johnny lin says:

    In the picture, what is Bongbong saying?

    MARCOS WARNING TO CORONA

    “Watch your thoughts, for they become words,
    Watch your words, for they become actions
    Watch your actions, for they become habits
    Watch your habits, for they become character
    Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny”

  46. 54
    c.s says:

    The document is Chief Justice Corona’s landmark decision on July 15, 2003 turning over the Marcoses’ loot stashed in Swiss banks to the Philippine government.

    I want to be objective here. This decision was made in 2003, the Chief Justice Corona just became Chief Justice in 2010.

  47. 53

    at this point of the trial this i can say:

    the cj is now being tied to a post in the middle of plaza miranda, naked,
    bitten by red ants. people see him extending his hand for help and calling
    gloria…… gloria…… masdan ang ginawa mo……

    • 53.1
      bcoolman says:

      masyado yata g(l)ory ang dating anyway magsamasama na silang mga kampon wala akong pakialam. hinay lang

  48. 52
    christian bernard says:

    Again another masterpiece! Wow if only those prosecutors can have you as their researcher/investigator, they wouldn’t have anymore problem. Hat’s off again. Thank you for doing us an excellent service. Hope those people up the hill will be seeing your site. I know Henry Omaga Diaz of ABS-CBN is watching your site. He’s doing an article and mentioning your site too. It’s too obvious that Neil Tupas is still a rookie. However given time, he will be an excellent congressman along with the newbies associated with this impeachment trial.

  49. 51
    jorgebernas says:

    Ha Ha Ha , magigisa na naman si thief justice corona sa sariling mantika. kong walang itinatago ay walang dapat ikabahala. dapat pagsabihan na niya mga defense panel niya na huwag mag object dahil hindi ito tugma sa mga naging decesion niya(corona) noon.Tama kasabihan, “kong ano itinanim ay siya ring aanihin” HISTORY REPEAT ITSELF kaya humanda kana thief justice corona dahil unti unti ka nang nahuhubaran at lumalabas na ang BAHO mo thief justice corona… Nakakahiya at Nakakadiri na Pag MUMUKHA mo thief corona…Puwweeee….

    • 51.1
      jorgebernas says:

      Tuwing makikita ko pagmumukha nina thief justice renato corona, fake president pandak, fake com. chair abalos, fake ombudsman guittirez etc.etc.. Nasusuka ako at Naaawa sa kanila dahil napakaganda at mabuti na tayo nila sa lipunan kaso hindi pa rin nakontento at gumawa pa nang MALI at the expenses of the poor people of the Philippines…Pati mga Pari, Obispo etc. ay ginamit para sa pansariling kaginhawahan at kapangyarihan….

  50. Mel says:

    re SALN 2011, Deadline: 30 April 2012

    Corona, justices file SALN; SC still bars disclosure

    MANILA, Philippines—All the 15 justices of the Supreme Court have submitted their Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Networth (SALN), high court Spokesman Jose Midas Marquez told reporters Wednesday.

    “The Chief Justice has filed his SALN. All the justices have submitted their SALNs. I called the Clerk of Court to check last April 30 and she said it is complete,” Marquez said.
    Chief Justice Renato Corona was the last to submit his SALN while the first justice to file his SALN was Associate Justice Martin Villarama who filed it months ahead of the April 30 deadline.

    Under Section 17, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution, public officials and employees are required to file their SALN “upon assumption to office and as often as may be required by law” which under Section 8 (A) of Republic Act 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards and Public Official and Employees should be filed upon entry or exit from government service and on or before April 30.

    The same requirement is found under Section 7 of the Republic Act 3019 or the Anti-Graft Law.

    However, when asked for copies of the SALNs, Marquez said “there is an existing court resolution that prevents the disclosure. Until and unless the court resolution is recalled, then it cannot be released. That has been the policy of the Court.”

    Since 1992, the disclosure of SALNs not only of high court justices but justices from the Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan, Court of Tax Appeals, lower court judges and court personnel have been restricted to shield them from acts that may “endanger, diminish or destroy their independence and objectivity in the performance of their judicial functions.”

    The 1992 ruling was a reiteration of an administrative matter issued by the Supreme Court in 1989 where the high court “unanimously expressed its willingness to have the Clerk of Court furnish copies of the SALs of the Chief Justice and the Associate Justices to any person upon request, provided there is a legitimate reason for the request, it being in fact unlawful for any person to obtain or use any statement filed under RA 6713, the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, for (a) any purpose contrary to morals or public policy, or (b) any commercial purpose other than by news and communications media for dissemination to the general public.”

    Chief Justice Renato Corona has been accused of non-disclosure of his SALN. This is among the articles of impeachment which is subject to a trial that will resume on May 7.
    While Marquez said it is still the call of the justice if they will release their SALN, “they should be guided by the policy of the court.

    “Individual justices who opt to disclose their own SALN, that’s their own decision and it’s up to the Court to require them to perhaps explain if they do so,” he told reporters.

    Source: Tetch Torres, INQUIRER.net, 7:54 pm | Wednesday, May 2nd, 2012

    Defense wants Corona to keep 2011 SALN secret
    MANILA, Philippines – Chief Justice Renato Corona’s defense team on Thursday said he should not publicly disclose his statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth (SALN) for 2011.

    They believe that doing so will go against a Supreme Court resolution that disallows justices from disclosing their SALNs.

    Lawyers Tranquil Salvador, Rico Quicho, and Karen Jimeno said Corona is not consulting them on what he should put in his new SALN.

    All government officials and employees are required to submit their 2011 SALN on or before April 30.

    Source: Jing Castañeda, ABS-CBN News, Posted at 04/26/2012 9:41 PM | Updated as of 04/26/2012 9:43 PM

    Henares: SALN can’t be corrected once filed
    MANILA, Philippines–Internal Revenue Commissioner Kim Henares believes that a statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN) of government officials can no longer be amended once they filed it even if there were inaccuracies in the filing.

    Henares offered this opinion when asked by former Supreme Court Associate Justice Serafin Cuevas, the lead counsel of Chief Justice Renato Corona, during Monday’s impeachment trial in the Senate.

    “My understanding is that SALN may be corrected if not accurate…In this particular case, did you come to the conclusion that this is one which can be corrected pursuant to law or it may not be corrected at all?” asked Cuevas.

    “My personal opinion is it can’t be corrected at all,” said Henares.

    “Because in the first place, it’s sworn to under oath. And then second place, like I said I’m a government official and I would say that the SALN requires me to completely list all my assets because it’s a way for the public to determine whether at the end of the day I have enriched myself because of my position,” she said.

    “So if it can be amended at any time, then it’s a useless exercise to even require government officials to submit a SALN at all,” the BIR chief added.
    After hearing Henare’s reply, Cuevas moved to strike her answer out.

    “That’s your opinion only. We will move to strike out the answer of the witness, your honor,” Cuevas said, which elicited some reactions from the gallery.
    Private prosecutor Arthur Lim, who examined Henares, objected to Cueva’s motion, saying

    “You asked the witness, the witness answered.”
    Even the presiding officer, Senate President Juan Ponce-Enrile was surprised by Cuevas’ motion.

    “Your witness answered already. Why should you ask for the striking out of her answers?” asked Enrile.

    “Because apparently what ‘s being stated of the witness has no basis. That’s her personal opinion according to her,” Cuevas answered.

    Source: Maila Ager, INQUIRER.net 5:05 pm | Monday, February 6th, 2012

  51. chit navarro says:

    the column of Yoly Villanueva Ong, Feb. 28 is spot -on the computation of Corona.

    http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=782001&publicationSubCategoryId=64

    so, do we expect that in his defense, Corona will show how he legally acquired the funds he used to purchase his numerous real estate properties as well as his cash???

    we await his defense!!!

  52. Mel says:

    PNoy: Corona lied in his SALN

    MANILA, Philippines (UPDATED) – President Benigno Aquino III on Thursday called on the public not to be deceived by Chief Justice Renato Corona’s lies.

    In a speech commemorating the 26th anniversary of the 1986 People Power Revolution, Aquino claimed Corona continues to trick the people with his “blatant lies.”

    “Hahayaan na lang po ba natin na iilan ang magdesisyon para sa ating pong lahat? Iyan naman po ang sadya ko sa araw na ito: Liwanagin ang dapat liwanagin, at ituwid ang isyung pilit dinidiskaril ng ilan, upang ang karaniwang tao ay malinawan at makilahok sa usapan. Simple lang naman po ang tanong na nais sagutin ng paglilitis na ito: Dapat pa ba tayong magtiwala kay Ginoong Corona?”

    Later in a discussion with students with different schools, Aquino said an acquittal of Corona will be “extremely difficult, if not impossible” for the government’s reform plans.

    Aquino alleged Corona’s lies can be seen in his statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN). He said Corona only disclosed P3.5 million in 2010, when he actually had P31 million in 3 different bank accounts.

    “Noong 2010, nagdeklara siya ng cash na 3.5 million pesos. Ayon sa mga testimonya ng Pangulo ng PS Bank at branch manager ng BPI Ayala, sa tatlong account pa lang na naisiwalat sa impeachment, si Ginoong Corona ay may nakatagong 31.5 million pesos na hindi idineklara. Naman. Maliwanag pa po sa sikat ng araw: Ginoong Corona, ang sinumpaan mong salaysay ay hindi tugma sa natuklas na pag-aari mo. Maski saang paaralan po sa buong mundo, 3.5 million does not equal 31.5 million. Alin po ba ang totoo, Ginoong Corona?” he asked.

    The President said the SALN is not just a piece of scratch paper. He said this is used by all government officers to be accountable to the public.

    “Ilalagay po ito sa isang locked filing cabinet, at huling la-landing sa isang nakakandadong vault. Tanong naman po: Kailan pa po ba naging bahagi ng publiko ang isang locked filing cabinet? Paano mabubusisi ang laman ng SALN na ito kung nakasilid sa isang vault?”

    Aquino also took note of Corona’s statements that he will open his bank accounts in due time. “Mawalang-galang na po, Ginoong Corona, marami pang naunang taon na nagpasa kayo ng SALN na puno ng katanungan. Kailan po ba ang due time? Mukha po yatang overdue ka na.”

    Court interpreter’s case

    The President cited the case of court interpreter Delsa Flores, who was dismissed from her job in 1997 for failing to declare a stall in the public market where she gets rent.

    “Sa isang court interpreter, iyan po ang batayan. Magkano po kaya ang upa sa isang puwesto sa palengke? Sa Punong Mahistrado po ba, dapat naiiba? Kung si Ginang Flores po ay sinisante, ano pa kaya ang dapat hatol kay Ginoong Corona? Kailangan pa po bang tanungin kung impeachable offense ang ginawa niya?”

    He told the delegates at the La Consolacion College: “Kayo nga po ang sumagot: sa tingin po ba ninyo, ang Chief Justice ay exempted sa mga batas na kailangan nating lahat sundin? Kapag ba nasa poder na ay bawal nang tanungin, bawal nang usisain, at bawal nang batikusin?”

    GMA’s protector

    He alleged Corona used his position to protect former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo by issuing a halt order on her travel restraint.

    “Tandaan lang po natin: Punong Mahistrado mismo ang nagpilit na puwedeng umalis ng bansa si Ginang Arroyo. Ang isinampang kaso ng electoral sabotage, 2007 diumano naganap,” he noted in his speech.

    Had Arroyo left for abroad and did not come back by May 2012, any case against her would have already prescribed, Aquino noted. An electoral sabotage case needs to be filed within 5 years after the election.

    Defense vs prosecution

    He noted that the prosecution has been getting all the criticisms even if its members chose to fight against the head of the judiciary.

    “Kung nasa defense ka, ‘di ba’t ngiti ang isasalubong sa iyo ng mga tiwaling hukom, dahil ipinagtanggol mo ang isa sa kanilang uri? Manalo, matalo, panalo ka parati. Kung nasa prosecution ka naman, simangot ang pambungad sa iyo dahil sa pangangahas mong kalabanin ang Punong Mahistrado. Ipagpapasa-Diyos mo na lahat ng kasong hahawakan mo,” he said.

    He said the public should not allow the injustice against the country happen in the hands of Corona.

    “Di po ba’t malinaw ang mga alituntuning kailangang sundin ng lahat? Ang tungkulin natin ngayon ay ibalik ang piring ng katarungan, at gawing balanse ang timbangan. Huwag na po sana nating hintayin na tayo mismo ang maagrabyado. Manindigan na po sana tayo ngayon.”

    He said that the people are now seeing the fruits of the impeachment trial, starting with the “general agreement” to amend the Foreign Currency Deposit Unit Law as well as changes to the Anti-Money Laundering Act.

    He said the people have the right to demand accountability from Corona. “The truth shall set us free. Hindi pa kumpleto ang truth dahil hindi pa sya free.”

    Source: Ira Pedrasa, ABS-CBNNews.com
    Posted at 02/16/2012 11:43 AM | Updated as of 02/16/2012 1:00 PM

    Read related comment: Will he now walk his talk?

  53. kurapbuster says:

    Actually there are two things in the SALN that Corona have intentionaly lied:

    1. Cash Advance of 11 million (as specified in his SALN).

    It’s proven that Mr and Mrs Corona are not officers in the company nor they are
    stockholders of the company which alledgedly gave them the 11 million.

    There is a big difference between cash advance and a loan.
    A. CASH ADVANCES are given only to the OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES by an employer
    for a short period of time with no inberest inviolved otherwise it is called a loan..
    How could an outsider of the company got this amount money? Lie no.1.

    B. The term CASH ADVANCE was used to avoid interest. This is if there is a record
    of this CASH ADVANCE in the books of the Comapany. (so someone has to
    see the books of the company if this is true. Baka kunyari lang ito. Alam niyo naman
    na ang mga drug dealers ay bumibili ng winning sweepstake tickets para lang
    maging legal ang perang nasa kamay nila.
    C. Liquidation of the CASH ADVANCE- was there really a payment recieved by the
    company as installment made by Corona as per his SALN? Again the prosecutors
    would need to see the books to see the reflection of these transactions.

    2. 9 MILLION worth of property paid in vertually cash, because although it has been paid
    twice by check they were done in the same year of 2008.

    A. Esguerra is insisting the witness as to when the property has been accepted
    by Mrs Corona. Meaning to say if Mrs Corona accepted the property in 2010
    the SALN of Corona is correct because the property was declared in 2010.
    I think Esguerra thinks he can fool every body. No sir…

    Here is the reason why he is fooling every filipino.

    In 2008 Corona have cash of 9 million. He used this money to buy a property.
    Therefore on his 2008 SALN you should have seen on the property column
    his 9 million worth of property.

    No 9 million on his cash column because he used it to buy the said property..

    The SALN of Corona should have been filed this way but he intentionally did not, because according to Guerrero the property should ONLY be declared when it is actually accepted?
    Which is year 2010?

    My question is what happen to the 9 million cash that Corana have in his position in buying the property in 2008?

    I am asking Guerrero the Power House, what do you want to declare in Coronas SALN in 2008? The Property or the cash? You cannot ignore them both do you?

    If you don’t want to declare the property then declare the cash because according to you the sale has not been cosumated yet?

    Either way it is a mis-declaration and betrayal of public trust. Dishonesty. Lie no. 2

  54. baycas says:

    In the title of Art. 2 of the AOI, 2.2, and 2.3, the QUESTION is:

    “Did Corona publicly disclose his SALN?”

    Obviously, “NO, he didn’t.” To connect the dots…

    To Tupas et al:

    Better call Vitug et al (those who requested for the CJ’s SALN) to the witness stand and ask her/them if she/they were given a copy of the CJ’s SALN she/they requested.

    • baycas says:

      Leon Guerrero was dumbfounded and exasperated in the proceedings yesterday (Please watch the video or read articles on it somewhere out there.). It was on account of Cong. Umali’s “brilliance” as a lawyer.

      Perhaps, we may help the honorable Senator-Judge…

      In the title of Art. 2 of the AOI, and Paragraphs 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3, the QUESTION is:

      Did Corona publicly disclose his SALN?

      Obviously, “NO, he didn’t.

      It’s just now that we came to know Corona’s SALN. Leon Guerrero had only read it also this January 2012.

      Now…

      To Tupas, Umali, Barzaga, and others:

      Better call Vitug (and those who requested for the CJ’s SALN) to the witness stand and ask her (them) if she (they) was (were) given a copy of the CJ’s SALN she (they) requested in the past.

      This will connect the dots and Leon Guerrero will most likely understand that you have proven your allegations in Art. 2 of the AOI when Vitug et al will answer in the NEGATIVE.

    • baycas says:

      One caveat though…if NO ONE really requested for the CJ’s SALN then this strategy will again crumble to the prosecutor’s faces.

      I believe the requests for SALNs in the past were not specific to the CJ’s copy.

      …Sayang, I’ve been toying pa naman sana with an idea on “constitutionality question” in line with the SALN issue…

  55. Mel says:

    Sa wakas, mayruong miyembro na may paninindigan sa House-Prosecution.

    Young lawyer stands ground in Corona trial

    “Private prosecutor Joseph Joemer Perez stood his ground before defense counsel Serafin Cuevas and Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile for an hour or so at the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona.

    Observers noted it was the first time in the first eight days of the trial that a prosecutor was not “eaten alive” by the defense.”

    Source: Cathy C. Yamsuan Philippine Daily Inquirer 2:28 am | Tuesday, January 31st, 2012

    • Mel says:

      Defense admits ‘inaccuracies’ in Corona SALN

      “MANILA, Philippines (UPDATE) – A member of Chief Justice Renato Corona’s defense team admitted Tuesday that there were “inaccuracies” in Corona’s statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN) when he belatedly declared several real estate properties years after they were acquired.

      “Former justice undersecretary Ramon Esguerra said the Chief Justice acquired a condo unit at Spanish Bay Tower, Bonifacio Ridge in 2005 and another condo unit at The Bellagio, Taguig in 2008 but only declared both properties in 2010. The Bonifacio Ridge property was purchased for P9 million; The Bellagio unit P14 million.”

      SOURCE: David Dizon, ABS-CBNnews.com
      Posted at 01/31/2012 11:20 AM | Updated as of 01/31/2012 12:05 PM

      • baycas says:

        Esguerra said Corona broke no law when he disclosed ownership of the real estate properties belatedly in his SALN.”It was disclosed although belatedly but does that constitute violation of the law insofar as SALN filing is concerned? It does not. Even the law allows a corrective measure if a filer of a SALN does not accurately reflect what should be reflected in his SALN,” he told Mornings@ANC.Esguerra said that under Republic Act 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials, there is a pertinent provision that a filer must be informed about inaccuracies in his SALN and allowed to correct it.He added that under this particular provision, “no liability for perjury attaches” for inaccuracies in the filing of SALN.Asked if Corona lied in his SALN because he belatedly declared his properties, Esguerra said: “Not really lying. It is really up to the filer. But in the case of the Chief Justice, he did not lie.”He also said that it should the Supreme Court clerk of court that should inform the Chief Justice about inaccuracies in his SALN.

        Of course, Corona was lying on his SALN but the defense may easily, conveniently deny it.

        Nonetheless, that’s the problem when SALNs are kept from public scrutiny. There’s no way of rectifying the mistakes and, most importantly, there’s no way of learning a public official’s wrongdoings.

        With Esguerra’s logic, Corona really COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION AND BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST WHEN HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE TO THE PUBLIC HIS STATEMENT OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES, AND NET WORTH AS REQUIRED UNDER SEC. 17, ART. XI OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION.

        • Johnny lin says:

          Defense lawyer tactic now is DISTORT, DISTORT, DISTORT!
          Esguerra is talking about corrective measure for SALN involving the same year yet he implies that corrective measure is applicable for SALN filed in previous years.
          He is trying to disorient the public who are trying to learn about the cases or he is addressing Leon and Panday because that is 2 Senator votes at least.

          Technically, Esguerra is resorting to cheating which is not surprising. The lead counsel Justice Cuevas was caught spinning a vicious story filled with LIes, that is why we have not heard from him in 2 days. Its Esguerra turn concocting stories and lies.

          These lawyers have families to go home at night bringing home livelihood out of filthy lies. Poor children with immoral parent. Those squatters scavenging for living have higher moral values than them.

          • baycas says:

            Mamaya sabihin ni Leon at Panday, “STOP NA, STOP NA, (nahuhuli tayo kung papaano magtago ng nakaw na yaman)!”

        • percy1007 says:

          How would the clerk of court who reports to the CJSC tell his boss his SALN is not correct short of calling him a liar.

      • baycas says:

        Esguerra said Corona broke no law when he disclosed ownership of the real estate properties belatedly in his SALN.

        “It was disclosed although belatedly but does that constitute violation of the law insofar as SALN filing is concerned? It does not. Even the law allows a corrective measure if a filer of a SALN does not accurately reflect what should be reflected in his SALN,” he told Mornings@ANC.

        Esguerra said that under Republic Act 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials, there is a pertinent provision that a filer must be informed about inaccuracies in his SALN and allowed to correct it.

        He added that under this particular provision, “no liability for perjury attaches” for inaccuracies in the filing of SALN.

        Asked if Corona lied in his SALN because he belatedly declared his properties, Esguerra said: “Not really lying. It is really up to the filer. But in the case of the Chief Justice, he did not lie.

        “He also said that it should (be) the Supreme Court clerk of court that should inform the Chief Justice about inaccuracies in his SALN.

        Of course, Corona was lying on his SALN but the defense may easily, conveniently deny it.

        Nonetheless, that’s the problem when SALNs are kept from public scrutiny. There’s no way of rectifying the mistakes and, most importantly, there’s no way of learning a public official’s wrongdoings.

        With Esguerra’s logic, Corona COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION AND BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST WHEN HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE TO THE PUBLIC HIS STATEMENT OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES, AND NET WORTH AS REQUIRED UNDER SEC. 17, ART. XI OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION.

        • percy1007 says:

          Since a SALN is a sworned/notarized document, a person with GOOD INTENT will take time to ensure accuracy and truthfulness of his SALN. He would be expected to think of the properties he bought or acquired the prior year. If J Corona avers they only have very few properties, would it be hard to remember them? Nakalimutan niya kung ilan na condo nila? O kaya sa dami ng tinago, di nila masiguro kung ano nasa pangalan nila at ano nasa mga dummy.
          I expect a Chief Justice to have unquestionable honesty and integrity so I will not have an iota of doubt when he renders a decision kahit na he reverses himself because I will believe in his judgment.
          His defense counsels suppressing evidence to determine his fitness as a justice of the SC demonstrates J Corona is “afraid of the truth” and since he is, he has no right to stay longer in the Supreme Court. For a Supreme Court is mandated to determine and surface the truth and not to hide behind technicalities

      • kurapbuster says:

        Bonifacio Ridge 9 million purchased 2005
        Bellagio 14 million purchased 2008

        Both these properties were declared in the 2010 SALN of Corona. Esguerra’s defense here is that the title and the certificate of acceptance were issued in the subsequent years. That is why he persistently asked Besnar about the date of the acceptance.

        Napakababao naman ng depensa nitong si Esguerra. Limang taon bago maissue ang title o kaya ang acceptance?

        Ok payag na ako maski na baluktot ang reason.

        Kung ayaw ni Corona na ipakita sa SALN ang property niya dahil sa wala pang titulo
        na depensa nitong si Esguerra, dapat ito ang pinalitao sa SALN niya na dagdag sa cash position niya:

        Cash on Hand/Bank 2005 9 million
        Cash on Hand/Bank 2008 14 million

        Ang ginawa nila hindi deniklara ang property noon 2005 at 2008 at hindi rin deniklara yong pera?

  56. carlito says:

    Ill-gotten wealth, unexplained wealth, ill-gotten CJ Position from ill-gotten Presidency…what else to prove? Pinas.. wake up.!!! Let’s get rid of the bad elements.. the instruments of corruptions, among us.. It’s so clear CJ is a living embodiment of corruption. Kawawang Pinas!!/usa

  57. Mel says:

    ‘Corona got P10M discount for Bellagio condo’

    “MANILA, Philippines (1st UPDATE) – Chief Justice Renato Corona got a P10 million discount for the purchase of a penthouse unit in The Bellagio in The Fort, Taguig City, one of the impeachment prosecutors said Monday.

    “During Corona’s impeachment trial, private prosecutor Joseph Joemer Perez said he received information from Megaworld finance director Giovanni Ng that Corona received a P10 million discount for the 300-square-meter Bellagio property, which was purchased for P14 million.

    “To be candid, the witness informed us that the chief justice received a 40% discount, or P10 million for the property. We believe this is highly material because it goes to the property in the statement of assets, liabilities and net worth,” he said after being questioned by Sen. Aquilino ‘Koko’ Pimentel III.

    “Perez said the P10 million discount could fall under Article 2 of the Impeachment Complaint, which accuses Corona of failure to “truthfully” disclose his SALN.

    “The prosecutor questioned Corona’s accepting the P10 million discount especially from a developer that might have pending cases before the SC.”

    SOURCE: David Dizon, ABS-CBNnews.com
    Posted at 01/30/2012 4:35 PM | Updated as of 01/30/2012 5:45 PM

    ‘Corona got P10M discount for Bellagio condo’

    ——FORMULA FOR CORONA ILL-GOTTEN WEALTH——-

    Paging CPAs and Lawyers, and fellow commenters. High time to compare our notes with this one by FRANCIN CRUZ FOR ABS-CBNNEWS.COM,01/30/2012 6:05 PM

    SOURCE: INFOGRAPHIC: Ill-gotten wealth according to Renato Corona

  58. keanleogo says:

    Honorable Senator-Judge Santiago,

    Shouting in the Impeachment Court is perceived as loss of your control and un-senator like. It may always work in your house but absolutely not in public, more so infront of Filipino people who elected you to the Senate. Therefore, no more shouting in the court.
    Please.

    • Mel says:

      Miriam: I refuse to succumb to illness

      MANILA, Philippines – Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago said she is “desperately” trying to get well since she already misses the impeachment trial.

      She said, however, she is trying to get better because “I don’t want to give my political enemies the pleasure of dancing on my grave, chortling like contented snakes.”

      She said she misses the impeachment trial that is “punctuated by certain personalities who have all the charm of show window mannequins.”

      Source: ABS-CBNnews.com Posted at 02/06/2012 2:31 PM | Updated as of 02/06/2012 6:23 PM

      Madam M. Santiago, mag Skype na lang po kayo at para maka participate ho kayo sa Senate Impeachment. Kahit likuran ng mga prosekutor ang makita ninyo sa computer, para hindi tumaas ang presyon ninyo. Namimiss daw kayo ni N. Tupas at ng ibang Prosekutors. Kahit bosses lang, hindi na ninyo kailangang mag-attend ng personal.

      Pupuwede na pu ang Skype. Puwede pa pu kayong maglnis ng kuko at naka PJs. Isang litrato lang pu nuong bata-bata pa kayo – puwede na. Ang mahalaga, iyong bosses ninyo ang marinig. (biro lang pu Madam M. Santiago. magandang exercise daw pu ang tumawa ng tumawa).

  59. kurapbuster says:

    Sorry I it should read 320,000.00 income after tax and an accumulated income of 32,000,000.00 at the end of the year.

    Waht I mean is, if you have a property of more that this you have an explanation to.

    My apology.

  60. kurapbuster says:

    I always see this word INCOME, DEBIT AND CREDIT with regards to SALN. Let me try to explain this SALN. Sombody there..correct me if I am wrong.

    SALN is a legal requirement for all government officials and employee ONLY .
    They have to declare what assets and liabilities they have on hand or in their position every year.

    So, all they have to do is list all the assets they have (cash, properties, jewelries,cars,boats etc,etc) and also a list of liabilities.

    Now they have to deduct the total of their liabilities (from the list) to the total of their assets (from the list) to arrive their net worth.

    See how simple it is? Their is no DEBIT, CREDIT and INCOME involved in the calculation
    of net worth. NET WORTH here is just the difference between assets and liabilities when it comes to SALN in the year of filing.

    On the other hand, the NET WORTH of a Company, Partnership and sole proprietorship
    is reflected on the so called BALANCE Sheet Statement. The increase/decrease on the net worth in the BALANCE SHEET is as the the result of the following:

    1. The yearly results of the income or loss as reflected by their Profit and Loss Statement.
    2. Injection of Capital by shares of stock.
    3. Withdrawals ( Partnership and Sole Proprietorship)
    Selling of Stocks by a share holder,

    OTHER TOPIC

    What is the connection of the ITR from the SALN? I will give you an example:

    The ITR reflects your:

    Gross Income say P 500,000.00
    Less: allowable deduction -100,000.00
    ——————
    Income before tax P 400,000.00
    Income tax due ex say -80,000.00
    —————–
    Income after tax P 380,000.00
    ===========

    Assuming that your income is constant over ten years, your accumulated income should read P 13,800,000.00 minus your living and other personal expenses.

    To have properties of say 30 million stated in your SALN at the end of the above number of
    years, you need a lot of explanations to do.

    If you claim to have other income to support the 30 million property make sure the other income you are claiming to have is not taxable otherwise you will be in a much, much much bigger problem.

    • rommel says:

      I do agree that the CJ’s SALN is having discrepancies. However, in the real sense, Assets is a word or a thing or something that was not properly define.

      While it is true that ASSET is something that you owned or have in your possession, but that is not the whole truth. Instead, the real definition of an asset is something that you own that puts money into your pocket or bank account.
      A LIABILITY is something that puts money out from your pocket or bank account.

      For example a yacht, it can be both an asset and a liability.
      It is a liability when and if the owner uses it or if it only in standby mode as you will have to do the maintenance which in this case the owner is spending money out from his pocket. It only becomes an Assets when the owner rent it out to a customer or a tourist who want to rent his yacht.

      So same as the House for instance, it will become an asset when the owner rents it out as it will give the owner an income. But if the owner lives on that same house, it is the owner’s liability because the owner has no income coming the his own house.

  61. Erl says:

    the legal ramification of this decision penned down by CJ Corona is that he is already estopped. He is bound by the Estoppel Rule.. In other words, he cannot deny the statements he previously asserted as the truth.. He cannot also invoke technicalities to delay the proceedings as he himself declared that technicalities are frowned upon by the Court. As the Immortal Bard Shakespeare perspicaciously said, “Let your own discretion be your tutor, suit the action to the word, the word to the action..” Kudus Raissa for excellent work, the prosecution team lacks legal research training, even if they have the materials in their favor they do not seem to know what and how to argue. Certainly, they need you as a legal researcher..

  62. Mel says:

    Raïssa, YOU MIGHT BE SUMMONed or INVITEed TO SPEAK IN THE SENATE IMPEACHMENT FOR ARTICLE 7.

    Prosecutors want justices, journalists summoned

    “MANILA, Philippines – Prosecutors are now preparing to present their case on article 7 of the impeachment complaint against Chief Justice Renato Corona. They want to subpoena several journalists, justices and Court Administrator Jose Midas Marquez, among others, as witnesses.”

    “… blogger Raissa Robles who they want to testify, among others, on the close personal relationship between Corona and GMA;”

    Source: Ira Pedrasa, ABS-CBNnews.com and RG Cruz, ABS-CBN News
    Posted at 01/27/2012 12:17 PM |
    http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/01/27/12/prosecutors-want-justices-journalists-summoned

    • pinay710 says:

      sige ms raissa go ka sa trial, dalhin mo lahat ang articles mo para malaman nila fresh from the document ang mga proof na nakalap mo. go go go. i will pray for you now and forever. makakatulong ka sa paglutas ng kasong ito. THE HOLY SPIRIT WILL GUIDE YOU, RAISSA.

  63. Bobi Rivera says:

    Good day Ms. Raissa. your blog and article was cited by Mr. Jarius Bondoc today in his Philippine Star’s column “Gotcha”.
    http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?publicationSubCategoryId=64&articleId=771624

    • raissa says:

      Thanks for telling me.

      • saxnviolins says:

        What a difference a phrase makes.

        What is the difference between “unexplained wealth” and “ill-gotten wealth”? A lot, if you read RA 3019 and RA 7080.

        Unexplained wealth is defined as:

        Section 8. Dismissal due to unexplained wealth. If in accordance with the provisions of Republic Act Numbered One thousand three hundred seventy-nine, a public official has been found to have acquired during his incumbency, whether in his name or in the name of other persons, an amount of property and/or money manifestly out of proportion to his salary and to his other lawful income, that fact shall be a ground for dismissal or removal. Properties in the name of the spouse and unmarried children of such public official may be taken into consideration, when their acquisition through legitimate means cannot be satisfactorily shown. Bank deposits shall be taken into consideration in the enforcement of this section, notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary.

        So unexplained wealth, as stated in the case of Simplicio Berdon, enjoys a legal presumption. The burden shifts to the Defendant, to prove that he acquired the property legally.

        http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1989/apr1989/gr_74225_1989.html

        Note that Corona’s ponencia was about RA 1379, which is about unexplained wealth, not ill-gotten wealth.

        On December 17, 1991, petitioner Republic, through the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG), represented by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), filed a petition for forfeiture before the Sandiganbayan, docketed as Civil Case No. 0141 entitled Republic of the Philippines vs. Ferdinand E. Marcos, represented by his Estate/Heirs and Imelda R. Marcos, pursuant to Nb.RA 1379

        Unexplained wealth is defined in RA 3019, which refers to RA 1379

        But “ill-gotten wealth” is defined as follows:

        Section 1 d) Ill-gotten wealth means any asset, property, business enterprise or material possession of any person within the purview of Section Two (2) hereof, acquired by him directly or indirectly through dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates and/or business associates by any combination or series of the following means or similar schemes:

        1) Through misappropriation, conversion, misuse, or malversation of public funds or raids on the public treasury;

        2) By receiving, directly or indirectly, any commission, gift, share, percentage, kickbacks or any other form of pecuniary benefit from any person and/or entity in connection with any government contract or project or by reason of the office or position of the public officer concerned;

        3) By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition of assets belonging to the National Government or any of its subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities or government-owned or -controlled corporations and their subsidiaries;

        4) By obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or indirectly any shares of stock, equity or any other form of interest or participation including promise of future employment in any business enterprise or undertaking;

        5) By establishing agricultural, industrial or commercial monopolies or other combinations and/or implementation of decrees and orders intended to benefit particular persons or special interests; or

        6) By taking undue advantage of official position, authority, relationship, connection or influence to unjustly enrich himself or themselves at the expense and to the damage and prejudice of the Filipino people and the Republic of the Philippines.

        RA 7080

        There is no presumption here. “Ill-gotten wealth” is defined by the means with which it has been acquired, such as:

        1) Misappropriating public funds

        2) Receiving a commission or kickback

        3) Illegal or fraudulent conversion of assets belonging to the National government

        etc.

        The prosecution has to prove that property was acquired by the means stated in the definition.

        Article 2.4 of the Articles of Impeachment states:

        2.4. Respondent is likewise suspected and accused of having accumulated ill-gotten wealth, acquiring assets of high values and keeping bank accounts with huge deposits.

        Diyos ko po. Pinahirapan mo naman ang sarili mo Niel Tupas. Had you stated “accumulating unexplained wealth” home free ka na with the SALN and ITR. But now, you need evidence to prove the means of acquisition stated in RA 7080.

        In basketball, when your player is not performing well, you do not call for a substitution of the referee, or ask the referee to be more liberal. You substitute your player.

        • raissa says:

          Ang galing.

          UPDATE – wait a minute.

          I was curious, so I did a phrase search of CJ Corona’s decision.

          He mentioned the word “ill-gotten” 12 times

          He only mentioned “unexplained wealth” 3 times

          What doe this mean, in relation to your analysis?

          • baycas says:

            Ditto…

            • johnny lin says:

              @saxnviolins
              Welcome back, my friend. I could not resist not posting when I read the very legalese, unexplained and illegal wealth?
              There are only two sources of wealth, legal and Illegal.

              Explained LEGAL WEALTH includes employment income including mandated commissions insurance and real estate agents, lobbyists and self employment; inheritance; donation and legal gambling/ lottery winnings, legal treasure hunters like famous Mel Fisher or fictional Indiana Jones.

              If source is UNEXPLAINED WEALTH what would be the logical conclusion? Its ILLEGAL, sourced from bribe, corruption of government funds directly or illegal commission from bloated government projects, crime sources like illegal gambling of jueteng, theft, robbery, carnapping, kidnapping, smuggling, insurance fraud, ponzi scheme or scams and extortion.

              What example of unexplained wealth could anyone think that is not illegal? None!

              Corona himself could not distinguish the logical difference that led him to mix the wordings in his Marcos Ponencia because they are interchangeable, not only in usage but also in meaning.

              • johnny lin says:

                @saxnviolins
                Dont fall to the trap of claiming il-legal is different from ill-gotten! You are an erudite lawyer; not pilosopong Tasyo, different spelling so they have different meanings.

              • Mel says:

                Happy ngayon si @Johnny.

                Akala namin nasa overseas trip ka @Johnny?

                Kaya bumalik si @saxnviolins.

                @saxnviolins, nice to see and read your structured approach to legal definition, comparison and narration of subjects (e.g. “unexplained wealth” and “ill-gotten wealth”) that affects the Senate Impeachment today.

            • baycas says:

              STATUTORY AND JURISPRUDENTIAL BARRIERS TO THE RECOVERY OF ILL-GOTTEN WEALTH

              Pls read from the link.

              —–

              Realistically, Art. II Par. 2.4 of the AOI most likely will not be considered if they continue to be strict in handling the defective complaint.

              If ever the Impeachment Court will relax, connecting the dots will still be a burden on the prosecution before the burden will shift to the defense.

              Kinda tall order…

              • johnny lin says:

                In jurisprudence, the rule of law states that the latest decision of the SC on certain disputed matters becomes the latest rule of the land based on the interpretation of the justices. All the pertinent laws attributed to ill gotten or unexplained wealth are now ssuperseded by the interpreation of Corona in his Marcos Ponencia in 2003.

                I am not a lawyer but do I understand Corona Ponencia is irrelevant and non binding to other cases like this impeachment article?
                The laws you cited were before the Corona promulgation; unexplained or ill gotten wealth have been clarified by that decision practically molding them into one category or interconnected together with each other along with SALN.

                Its understandable legal minds would quote all applicable laws but at then of the day the recent SC decision on interpretation of the laws takes precedence, unless Senate would disregard the new law created by Corona decision. That simple isn’t it, why complicate?

                Everybody got familiarized with Marcos ill gotten wealth SC decision because of Raissa reporting that it could no longer be ignored thereby it should become the norm in the future.

                Before gall bladder surgery was approached by long incision achieved by cutting on abdominal skin closed by large pieces of gauze; now its by band aid closing thru laparoscopic laser surgery, corollary to the Corona ponencia by simplifying the process. Every surgeon got familiarized with the procedure that is the norm now.
                Same common sense cookie!

              • johnny lin says:

                Enrile has already stated that ill gotten wealth is the end product, definitely what Corona meant in finality of his deccision.

              • Leona says:

                “ill-gotten property” I find too ungrammatical. Why call it “ill?” It is not a “sick” property like a person or living thing. Lawmakers just makes it difficult to understand their so many complez definitions of words for meanings. “Unexplained wealth” is another. For every law, a different definition for the same subject matter. It just confuses an ordinary person and even lawyers and judges.A simple definition like “Any property, real or personal including stocks and other tangible items, stolen, acquired, possessed, secured, owned or other manner of acquisitions, permanent or otherwise, in violation of any civil, criminal or procedural laws or rules and regulations is UNLAWFULLY ACQUIRED PROPERTY.”

              • johnny lin says:

                @leona
                You are correct, they are all unlawfully acquired property whether referred as ill gotten or unexplained.

                @Mel
                Yes I m in Vegas, trying to snoop on Marissa Lapid smuggling case, Just passed by their big house on North Buffalo Street that was placed on lien by the federal government last Friday as collateral for her smuggling case punishable by $500,000 fine and 10 yrs imprisonment

                @saxnviolins is confusing people but he would not comment on the unexplained wealth”statement” that is also mentioned in his ill gotten wealth definition. interchangeable phrases that saxniviolins refused to elaborate after being caught in his own web of deceptive legalese tactics(Administrative provision of RA 3019). He also would not define PECUNIARY Benefits that he defined under ill gotten wealth because he could not interpret his own definition except to admit he was wrong.
                Saxniviolins silence means he was deceiving people , the way he tried to deceive before and kept silent for a while because he was caught wrong in his own interpretation of laws he quoted, and he calls himself a lawyer.

              • Mel says:

                @johnny lin

                hey máte, nice of you to touch base.

                the latest from PH.

                Who wants retired Supreme Court Justice Serafin Cuevas out of the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona? The 83-year-old Cuevas, who has become a sort of a rock star because of his performance as lead defense counsel in the afternoon TV-radio spectacle before a nationwide audience, has revealed purported efforts by Malacañang to get him out just two weeks into the Senate trial. http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/136379/palace-pressuring-me-to-quit%e2%80%93cuevas

                Senator Santiago absent as impeachment trial resumes

                Enrile eyes pre-trial in Corona case

                As for Lapid’s big house on North Buffalo Street, are there any traces of the pocketed lahar fortunes up there?

                take care.

              • Mel says:

                Has retired SC Justice Serafin Cuevas accidentally kicked his foot into his mouth?

                Kayo ang maghusga.

                Transcript of PDI interview with retired SC Justice Serafin Cuevas

                “MANILA, Philippines—Here is the transcript of the interview Inquirer reporter Christian V. Esguerra had with retired Supreme Court Justice Serafin Cuevas at the latter’s Makati office Friday night. This was the basis of a Phililippine Daily Inquirer story about Cuevas which appeared on Sunday, Jan. 29, 2012.

                “Cuevas spoke largely in Filipino and this is retained in the transcript to ensure fidelity to his statements and avoid misinterpretation. The Inquirer questions are in bold letters.

                “Cuevas on Monday denied that a lawyer with links to Malacañang had approached him, urging that he quit his role as lead counsel of Corona’s defense team.”

                SOURCE: Philippine Daily Inquirer
                7:11 pm | Monday, January 30th, 2012
                Transcript of PDI interview with retired SC Justice Serafin Cuevas

          • saxnviolins says:

            Corona was citing the PCGG regulations, which use the phrase “ill-gotten wealth” . The PCGG regulations, define ill-gotten wealth with the same text as RA 7080:

            Sec. 1. Definition.

            (A) “Ill-gotten wealth” is hereby defined as any asset, property, business enterprise or material possession of persons within the purview of Executive Orders Nos. 1 and 2, acquired by them directly, or indirectly thru dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates and/or business associates by any of the following means or similar schemes:

            (1) Through misappropriation, conversion, misuse or malversation of public funds or raids on the public treasury;

            (2) Through the receipt, directly or indirectly, of any commission, gift, share, percentage, kickbacks or any other form of pecuniary benefit from any person and/or entity in connection with any government contract or project or by reason of the office or position of the official concerned.

            (3) By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition of assets belonging to the government or any of its subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities or government-owned or controlled corporations;

            (4) By obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or indirectly any shares of stock, equity or any other form of interest or participation in any business enterprise or undertaking;

            (5) Through the establishment of agricultural, industrial or commercial monopolies or other combination and/or by the issuance, promulgation and/or implementation of decrees and orders intended to benefit particular persons or special interests; and

            (6) By taking undue advantage of official position, authority, relationship or influence for personal gain or benefit.

            The definition requires the element of method of acquisition. There is no such requirement in RA 1379, when a forfeiture case is filed. The administrative provision of RA 3019 (Section 8) actually uses the phrase “unexplained wealth” in relation to RA 1379, for purposes of dismissal. But the dismissal only comes after a forfeiture court has made a finding. One must first win a civil case, to enjoy the presumption, for purposes of dismissal.

            Corona was deciding a case based on RA 1379, which requires a lower quantum of evidence; it enjoys the presumption declared in Simplicio Berdon. The reason for that is that forfeiture is a civil case, and only works the return of government property to the government.

            So although the PCGG calls it “ill-gotten wealth”, and it presumably is, the filing of the forfeiture case under RA 1379 is what qualified it for the legal presumption laid down in the Simplicio Berdon case.

            But when one uses the phrase “ill-gotten wealth” to impeach, one has to find some definition in law. And that phrase, twice (EO 1 of Cory and RA 7080) defined by law, includes the method of acquisition as part of the definition. So evidence of the method of acquisition must be introduced.

            Tupas will have to introduce evidence of kickbacks, etc. Charge it to draftsmanship.

            • johnny lin says:

              @saxnviolins
              Review your own posting on definition: any gift, kickback or any form of pecuniary benefit from a person or entity.

              The deed of sale of Bellagio is a proof of pecuniary benefit. A discounted property is a form of pecuniary benefit. Look at RA 6713 under definition of gifts and public official. PECUNIARY has wide range of implication because it pertains to money of any kind including cents or pennies. A public official must not accept accept any pecuniary benefit in kind that could compromise the official’s position. Corona was handling Megaworld pending or resolved cases.

              Proof of ill gotten wealth: monetary discount is pecuniary benefit received by CJ from Megaworld based on deed of absolute sale.

              As I said before, even free meals of Corona from his wife who was pres and CEO, paid by CJH business expense is a form of pecuniary benefit if CJH has pending cases with SC. Having dinner together personally paid from spouse daily food allowance fringe benefit with CJH IS NOT Pecuniary benefit.
              It might look complicated but actually simple when audited properly. The wife might not be thinking of propriety when she paid the meals. If paid from business expense account of CJH because she was trying to save her personal daily food allowance, only after the audit that the conflict of interest impropriety would be proven. By this time its too late for Mrs Corona to correct her company business charges.

              We all know, both private and government expense accounts, there are official personal expenses which are employee fringe benefits and business which are company expenses, both usually enjoyed by president, CEO and chairman of the board of companies.

              Tupas has only show proof the Bellagio brochures on the cost of condo and compare with the amount that Corona paid. Even a discount of one peso is pecuniary benefit. There is the proof of your own definition

        • Baltazar says:

          @Sax,
          Splendid! Tiyak na Espada itong baraha mo – tuhog sila. Kay Cuevas kaya ano, Sotang Bastos? :-) But does this mean they still have to amend the articles then again go for the signing? (Medyo malabo sa akin yung part na yun kasi wala akong alam sa rules :-( )

          • Mel says:

            @Baltazar, @saxnviolins, @johnny lin

            Reading the comments and exchanges as above, one layman’s question:

            What is good for the gander (G.R. No. 152154. July 15, 2003 – CJ Corona’s ponencia re RA 1379, unexplained wealth, not ill-gotten wealth), is it good for the goose (Senate Impeachment Case No. 002-2011 [Article 2, minus 2.4 ...ill‐gotten wealth])?

            Is CJ Renato Corona’s ‘formula’ suitable for his own conviction?

            Either by Yes or No answer, by what legal diction unexplained wealth or ill-gotten wealth?

            Agyaman ak.

        • BP says:

          It is also logical to say that in any case where the wealth acquired cannot be explained, then the presumption is that the wealth is ill-gotten which could have been acquired by any of the means enumerated in R.A. 7080, specifically Item No. 6 of Section 1 (d) which is so broad an act.

    • ric says:

      Raissa, Your star is rising. Keep it up!

  64. nonon says:

    is it possible that the prosecutors will stop at article 2 and ask for a ruling right away so that they will not present the other articles of impeachment if the cj is convicted. but what will happen if cj is acquited, can they continue with the rest of the articles.

    • raissa says:

      I’ll have to check that.

      • Alejandro Tagab Laganson, Sr says:

        In my opinion, all of the 8 impeachable offenses will be discussed first. then they will vote on each of the eight. Sabi ni Senator Enrile, ” hindi gamitin sa Senado ang “it is not beyond reasonable doubts” because it is not a criminal case. The purpose of impeachment if convicted is just to drive out an impeachable officer from his office and that he can not be an employee again of the government forever.I do not exactly knew if it is 50% plus one or 2/3 para kailangan man convict an impeachable officer. Kahit isa lang convicted vote sa 8, puede ng mapatalsikk and impeachable officer. Hindi lahat sa 8 impeachable offenses

  65. ronnie bernardo says:

    Bravo Miss Raissa!, you are a god-sent.

  66. johnny lin says:

    ABS-CBN NEWS —-CORONA STIFLES RUMOR OF RESIGNATION

    Senate must continue trial even if Corona resigns for the simple reason it is their constitutional duty under impeachment law.

    Resignation is not allowed when Senate trial has convened, spelled in Article IX
    They must finish trial by conviction even if Corona resigns.

    The rumor was floated by own Corona camp to gauge public response and of course the senators who should not fall under this trap, lest they will be malign for cover up. Senate integrity at stake.

    • raissa says:

      If he resigns, the trial will grind to a stop because the only objective of the trial is either to remove him from office or not.

      The Ombudsman and BIR will take over any investigation.

      • johnny lin says:

        Resignation,he will retain all his government benefits and ability to return to govt service.
        Conviction aside from removal from office he also is disqualified from holding govt office under Article XI Section 3 (7) of Phil Constitution.

        Only After Ombudsman conviction when benefits could be forfeited. Tax evasion since its a crime, not sure if benefits are forfeited.

        There is a rule on resignation which was raised during Gutierrez but the consensusvwas trial did not commenceyet so she was allowed. Maybe someone could find the link on resignation while being impeached.

  67. van says:

    I don’t know much about lawyerly stuff, but if Corona is successfully impeached, will a criminal case be in the works after? I don’t feel it’s enough that he’s just booted from office. i feel he deserves jail time for his treachery vs the people.

  68. kurapbuster says:

    Lapid,s wife of $50,000 ? Nagtatanong lang ako kong ito na kaya ang mga perang ipinamumod ni GMA sa mga Senador. Kaya hanggang ngayon kampanti sila na mayroon silang senador na pikit matang aayonan si Corona?

    Bakit ayaw padaanin sa bank to bank? Para hindi ma trace. Ngayon ,bilangin ninyo kung ilang beses nag abroad ang mga Arroyo. Same procedure..
    Yan ang patakaran dahil alam nilang mga tanga ang mga pilipino. Kailangan pang mga amerikano pa ang makahuli.

    Dapat dito pa lang magsimula mg mag-imbestiga ang mga ahensiya ng gobyerno kung talagang seryoso silang palitawin ang mg Corrupt. Saan galaing yan? Hindi na lkailangan ang SALN niyan. Nadiyan na eh.

    • saudiboy says:

      @kurapbuster,

      ano po kaya ang nangyari sa kaso ng mag-amang lapid tungkol sa income sa lahar?

      pwede po kaya mai-post ni ma’am raissa ang saln ng mag-ama. curious lang kung gaano sila kayaman. baka may ill-gotten wealth din, maisabay na. hehehe.

      naalala ko po kc yung napanood kong interview sa kanya ni abner mercado, nakakalula sa laki yung mansion nya sa gitna ng bukid. parang sumakay pa si abner sa golf cart para libutin ang kapaligiran ng bahay. at saka hindi man lang pinapasok yung bisita nya sa loob ng bahay.

  69. Ben Ceniza says:

    If the Supreme Court did not file Alpha list for Corona from 2003 – 2005. There is a possibility that all supreme court justices from 2003 – 2005 did not have alpha list also. It means they did not pay taxes as no taxes were withheld.

    • kurapbuster says:

      That’s correct but who is responsible?

      All I can say is that, this is the kind of practice of the magistrates during Arroyo’s time knowing that the PGMA will not do anything to harm them on the notion that they will not do anything to harm GMA.

      VIZ A VIZ ika nga.

    • Roger says:

      yes you are right. we have to think that they are too lawyer worked in the government subject to rules & regulation about filing SALN. Whew those are the remnants of the past administration…mga spoiled brats……

    • Mike says:

      Yes Ben. It seemed to me that the BIR Chief said that although the alpha list had not been submitted for those years 2003-2005, the tax had in fact been paid by the Supreme Court to the BIR. Though I must say that although the english language of BIR Chief was otherwise very good, in this particular case it was not exactly 100% clear.

  70. kurapbuster says:

    Hindi macha-charge ng tax evasion si Corona dahil covered siya ng tax code section 51.

    Nakasaad na ang kanyang income at bayad sa tax sa sinasabi nilang alpha list na sina-submit ng supreme court taon taon sa BIR..

  71. johnny lin says:

    Lapid’s vote a toss up?

    NEWS: Senator Lapid’s wife Marissa arrested in Las Vegas airport Jan 15 by Federal agents for smuggling charges of undeclared $50,000 last November. 2011. Transporting money above $10,000.00 internationally is an offense under money laundering law like the Euro generals in Russia.Here is another spouse with money problems. The Lapids have a house in Vegas in Summerlin area on why she goes there frequently.

    Surprising how people would not use regular bank account transactions when they have successful business ventures? Marissa apparently is major owner of Generics pharmacy? Unless that amount was smuggled ill gotten wealth, AGAIN?

    Senetor Lapid requested assistance of DFA to assist wife. The impeachment vote of Lapid is getting murky now.

    • Mike says:

      USD 10,000 limit is unreasonably low and has not been increased in line with inflation .You can compare the stupid P10000 limit for carrying of Pesos in and out of Philippines.

  72. johnny lin says:

    TO ALL THOSE PRO CORONA/GMA BIBLE-PHILIACS

    Here is the proof that Corona is the best example on ” He who is not without sin shall cast the first stone”

    Check previous postings and identify them, he he he.

    • If we use that Bible phrase against CJ Corona, then it will be hard to cast the stones on him since it looks that nobody deserves to throw the first stone and CJ Corona will get out Scott free…Like probably why the Marcoses are still enjoying their questionable wealth. That is the very thing he has been doing against P’noy and other accusers that instead of standing answerable to all the issues, he is diverting the eyes to other issue not so relevant at a time.

  73. johnny lin says:

    A salaried income earner without filing annual income tax; is that tax evasion?

    In the US non filing of tax every year of an income earner whether there is tax to be paid or not is an offense under the Revenue Code. The Rule is file ITR, the reason even retirees whose only income is Social Security benefits has to file tax return annually even if the tax due is zero.

    The prosecutors has to ask KimHenares or they themselves show Revenue Code document stating that it is a criminal offense not to file annual ITR if there is income for the year, irregardless of tax due.

    Why was Alpha list. Missing for so many years? Was the evidence obstructed?

    The Alpha list was missing but it did not mean the justices did not receive salary nor there was no withholding taxes or GSIS contribution deducted from salary. Prosecution must prove the law by eliciting Henares testimony in eliciting the existence of a law, then accuse CORONA of wilful tax evasion which is not only betrayal of public trust but in fact because its tax evasion, a crime. Al Capone was convicted of tax evasion for not reporting his true income. Corona’s on filing of tax is the same, not reporting true income, Capone by understating true income while Corona for not revealing true income.

    From tax evadion, that could lead to proving ill gotten wealth by saying that taxes due to the government were kept to buy properties. Money due to the government was technically stolen and used to accumulate enormous wealth, therefore ill gotten. That will be followed by revealing all the wealth that were accumulated during the years of unfiled tax returns.

    The key is NON FILING OF TAX RETURN ANNUALLY IS TAX EVASION.

    • johnny lin says:

      National Internal Revenue Code Title X, Chapter II, Section 255 Failure to write/ file tax return is a crime punishable by fine of not less than 10,000 pesos and imprisonment.

      Also under RA 7642 Sec 2. Sec 253 any person who wilfully attempts to evade or defeat any tax impose ……………. is punishable under this law of a fine not less than 30,000 pesos orimprisonment not less than 2-4 years.

      Corona was alleged not filing income tax from 2002-2005.

      • johnny lin says:

        It is the responsibility of the taxpayer to keep a record of his income and tax deductions for the year under RA 7642 Sec 2. Sec 253. Failure by the employer in issuing a W2 or witholding tax record for the year is not a reason not to file ITR.

        Record keeping is the same for employed and self employed taxpayers. Simple for employed, complex for self employed.

        • johnny lin says:

          Mrs. Corona apparently file ITR in 2003 but no recor of ITR on Justice Corona. RA 7697 Section 8, Husband and Wife Filing, might have been voilated on revealing sources of income.

          Also RA 7697 section 14. Sec. 254 deals with amended provisions for not filing tax return.

          • saudiboy says:

            sir johnny lin,

            baka dito nga po siguro nakasaad yung BIR ruling na kapag tama na yung withholding tax na nabawas sa taxable income ng isang employee, di na kelangan mag file pa ng ITR. hindi ko lang po sigurado kung kelan ang effectivity nun. sa company po kc namin, every february nakaktanggap po kami ng certificate of compensation/payment/tax withheld mula sa HRD (bir form 2316) at nakasaad na dun yung tax due at tax withheld kaya pag pareho yung figures di na po kelangan mag file.

            sa kaso po ni CJ, assume na po natin na nagkaroon ng bureaucratic delay lang sa pag submit ng alpha list. tiyak naman na natanggap nila yung sweldo nung mga taon na yun at assume din po natin na nabawas yung tamang withholding tax, so hindi na po kelangan niyang mag file ng ITR dahil may BIR ruling na po tungkol dun. sa palagay ko po, lusot siya sa tax evasion kung eto lang pagbabasehan.

            pero kung yun lang ang pagbabasehan income nya, paano siya nakabili ng mga real properties na milyones? wala pang isang milyon yung kinikita nya sa loob ng isang taon, isang bakasyon lang nila sa abroad ubos kaagad yun. ibig sabihin meron siyang other source of income na undeclared na hindi binayaran ng tax, shoot sya sa tax evasion pag nagkataong hindi makapag-isip ng palusot si superlolo serafin and co.

            pwede po kaya yun, wag ng talakayin yung ibang articles para matapos na, eto na lang ang pagbotohan kc malakas ang ebidensya.

            psensya na po kung mahaba ang comment.

            • kurapbuster says:

              Tama ka Saudiboy, Basi sa tax code 51, Corona is not required to file an income tax return.

              The supreme court annually submits the alpha list which is equivalent to W2 to BIR which contains the taxable income and the tax withheld by corona. So there is no tax evasion here.

              In the year 2003 to 2005 the supreme court did not submit the alpha list to BIR. So, Corona cannot be held responsible for not filing his ITR because supreme court failed to file the alpha list.

            • baycas says:

              @saudiboy,

              pero kung yun lang ang pagbabasehan income nya, paano siya nakabili ng mga real properties na milyones?

              Dapat ikonekta ng prosecution ang SALN at ang INCOME ni Corona. Pag nangyari ‘yon si Corona na mismo ang magpapatunay na hindi ill-gotten wealth ang pinagmulan ng pondo para magkamal ng mga ari-arian.

              Pakibasa dito:

              http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/01/25/12/enrile-cj-not-yet-hook-ill-gotten-wealth

              • saudiboy says:

                @baycas,

                mabuti naman po kung ganun pala ang batas re: ill-gotten wealth, ang burden of proof ay nasa akusado.

                tanong lang po: pag nag submit ng SALN, hindi pala kasama yung ITR?

                nagtataka lang po ako kung bakit hinaharang ng depensa na ilabas yung ITR samantalang nailabas na yung SALN. sa palagay ko dapat tingnan pareho yung financial status (saln) at financial results (itr) kung ang layunin ay i-monitor yung net worth ng opisyal.

      • baycas says:

        There are instances when one may not file an ITR. Please refer to NIRC Chap. IX, Sec. 51. Corona may have been covered by this provision.

        • raissa says:

          And was the Mrs covered too?

          • Mel says:

            It is getting too complicated, and murkier by each trial day that pass.

            Raïssa, you may have to release again a report in the near future if Mrs Corona is excempted since by Atty Esguerra’s past account – joint ang SALN nila ni R Corona.

            Is R Corona’s SC Alphalist good enough also for their Missus</a?

            Sana mayruong dito sa mga commenters mo na CPA-Lawyer experts sa ITR and Alphalist areas to educate us on this.

          • baycas says:

            I don’t know. But her inclusion in the alpha list from JHMC started only in 2007.

            http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/01/25/12/mrs-corona-bought-p11m-property-no-income

            • kurapbuster says:

              The 11 milion allegedly was a loan by Chief Justice to Company which is controlled by Mrs Corona to buy a certain property.

              Yes this is true, but what came out in yesterday’s hearing, the buyer as listed on the certificate of Registration produced by Henares turned out to be Mrs Corona only?

              Does not matter cause it is conjugal anyway but why is it in the name of Mrs Corona and exclude the CJ as buyer when the money used to buy it is from the loan of the CJ?

              Hokus pokus eh?

          • johnny lin says:

            I dont know ITR rule in Philippines, that is why in the beginning I asked, is it tax evasionfor failure to file ITR but RA 7697 Sec 14 Sec 254 failure to write tax specifically implied its a violation unless there is another provision Sec 51. However, in same RA 7697 under houseband and wife it was mentioned that spouse has to file even when filing separately because BIR has obligation to consolidate ITR.

            @ baycas ps try to attach link so everyone can interpret. Calling expert Accountants

            In the US non filing of annual ITR is a tax offense whether you have tax dueor not as long as you have filed before includingthose with monthly govt pensions.

            • johnny lin says:

              @baycas
              Pls attach link Chapter IX Sec 51 A 2(b) (c)
              These 2b,2c is where Corona could apply as exempted from filing:

              2b- that is if withholding taxes were withheld from salary provided further that income was not more than 60,000 pesos in one year. Corona had more than 400,000 income as associate justice.

              2c- exemption states that if income is based only on salary. If Corona claims ITR exemption under this provision, then Atty Esguerra could not aasert that Corona had other income from allowances or other sources

              2a and 2d dont apply to Corona based on gross income.

              My opinion, Corona committed tax evasion in 2002-2005 just based on his income, tatswhy Henares was treading gingerly because of absence of Alphalist, which is actually a list of all SC employees. Basing on the 2006-2010 list thereis no reason to doubt tgat Corona did not gross more than 60,000 pesos.

              Henares could testify on this if Prosecutors know how to elicit her testimony.
              catch him on tax evasion, non filing of ITR. Even the president files annual ITR despite thefact that most of his daily expensesare shouldered by government, that comparison alone is enough to deduce that Corona failed to file ITR.

    • kurapbuster says:

      Johnny in the case of Corona there is no tax evasion because section 51 of tax code exempts him from filing ITR.

      It is the responsibility of the supreme court to file the so called alpha list to BIR. Alpha list
      contains the taxable income and the tax withheld of Corona.

      • johnny lin says:

        @kurapbuster
        That is assuming his income was only from salary, however in that Sec 52 A2b it is applicable only to those whose gross income do not exceed 60,000 a year.

        Common sense, Just imagine, if Employees like Corona are all exempted from filing ITR then most government employees need not file anymore which is far from truth if not impossible because many exceed the 60,000 gross income threshold.

        Again, even if SC did not supply Alphaland, Corona is still has obligation to file and liable under RA 7642 and 7697. Its personal responsibilty aside from patriotic duty to pay taxes on gross income specified by NIRC. Corona should know that unless he was testing the system having SGV tax lawyer experience

        • kurapbuster says:

          Yes you are right . Provided that his salary is his only income.

          The reason I did not include that in my comment is that the Commissioner
          of the BIR said on the impeachment trial, Corona did not file his ITR but he is in in alpha list.

          So, based on that testimony of the Commissioner, I knew that he has just one income.

  74. Arnel Dy says:

    The link to the full ruling reads

    “Information disclosure has been erased!”

    Noooo! Can anyone upload it and post a link to it? It’s a public document right so it should be ok.

    Thanks!

    • baycas says:

      I’m curious. What’s your browser? I can easily access the provided SC link with Firefox and Safari.

      Nonetheless, here’s a link from another site:

      http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2003/jul2003/gr_152154_2003.html

      • raissa says:

        I can’t access it from google chrome.

        • baycas says:

          Hmmm…

        • Mel says:

          Hi Raïssa

          I am a Chrome user too.

          Make it a habit to clear your browser’s garble data by going to Chrome’s Options, click on the Under the Hood (left sidebar), and click on the Clear browsing data Button.

          • Mel says:

            BTW, restart your browser again.

            It will improve your browsing speed – a bit.

            Now it you still can’t access that original site or any other GR index file cases, the website administrator might have prevented your IP address from accessing its database – redirecting your connection to a page – like ‘your not welcome, you are doing us damage… BIRO LANG.

          • raissa says:

            OK.

            • Baltazar says:

              Now it you still can’t access that original site or any other GR index file cases, the website administrator might have prevented your IP address from accessing its database –

              I was actually thinking of that too when I can easily access the site and Raissa can’t. That one is not a big problem anyhow. Anyways, Ms Raissa, it’s prudent to increase the security even of your emails as they contain also the footprints of your IP address. I suggest when uploading and updating your blogs, don’t use Windows OS but instead switch to Linux. WordPress is web-based anyways and it is OS independent.Linux is free , Ubuntu distro is the most supported. Just let me know if you need assistance, its free from me as long as you will keep on writing about the truth :P

              • Mel says:

                Maselan kasi ang ginagawa ni Raïssa.

                Raïssa, DO YOU GET AN ERROR MESSAGE? WHAT NO THAT IS SHOWN?

                O baka naman you need to update lang your Chrome to the latest vers. or update your windows operating system, or your virus protections software, try microsoft security essentials.

                —————

                She’s stepping into a lot of people’s ‘toes’.

                Kaya inggat ka Raïssa.

                IF they were monitoring your Requests to their website, they already have certain ranges of your IP addresses. Maraming magaling na pinoy who are into this. They can block IP address, and direct to another page with garble messages or with malware.

                As for your email IP address, ok lang iyan. as long as your log in, pw details are not compromised.

                BUT THEY HAVE TO UNDERSTAND YOU ARE DOING A NOBLE AND HUMANITARIAN SERVICE. PARA SA BAYAN. MAG APPEAL TAYO SA MABUTING PAGKATAO NILA. I HOPE WHATEVER MONIES THEY ARE PAID OR PROMISE IS NOT COMMENSURATE WITH THE WORK THAT Raïssa IS DOING FOR THE NATION.

                AN ALTERNATIVE IS TO USE A PROXY WEBSITE TO VISIT SITES THAT FILTER OR STOP YOU FROM ACCESSING THEIR DATABASE OR INFO – directly.

                USE GMAIL NA LANG – THIS IS A TROLL. AGAINST THE ‘COMMENTS’ POLICY NI Raïssa. lol!

              • raissa says:

                Thanks for the tips.

  75. liling says:

    Magaling ka, Mrs. Robles! You are so much better than someone who wrote about Corona’s PhD but stopped at getting the side of UST. I tip my hat off to you…

  76. kurapbuster says:

    A tripod cannot stand with two legs alone.
    You are a big help to President Aquino and DOJ Delema in fighting these formidable corrupt government officials, that are being hindrance to the progress of the Philippines for so long.

    With you as a third leg, this tripod cannot be moved, toppled or tricked by these syndicated
    government officials of this country.

    I salute you madam.

    • raissa says:

      Hi,

      I’m not doing this for them but for the country’s future.

      We owe it to ourselves to make officials accountable, including the incumbents.

      But thanks for your salute.

  77. Jay says:

    Marcos Jr just admitted that they will use the ruling penned by Corona on the forfeiture of their family’s Swiss accounts. And this gave the direction to the Senate on how to solve the tricky issue of ill-gotten wealth allegation against Corona. Ms. Raissa, your article is really perfect timing. Your kakulitan really paid off and this should mainly be credited to you.

  78. Arnel Dy says:

    Just a little more. They now have the CAR as evidence. You trace the CAR to the properties – you trace the properties to his SALN – and you lay down the basis for allowing Article 2.4.

    I was literally jumping for joy when Recto finally stopped the sideshow and just – went for the jugular!

  79. Bernard Dino says:

    Just watched the day 6 of the trial. I’d like to think that the prosecution is reading your blog as well because I noticed that they use this same argument in their memorandum submitted to the senate with regards to the article 2 of the complaint. After watching Senator Enrile’s interview in the ANC after adjournment he gave a hint that they this will use this formula tackle article II 2.4 which the senate set aside in admitting evidence.

    You are right. If everybody will contribute for the betterment of the nation, however small, it will have significant effect. I admire your patriotism and resolved.

    Mabuhay Ka!!!

  80. Jherskie says:

    i’ve been reading through your blog for a while now, Ms Raissa. this is the first time for me to comment :)

    basing on his words, corona is indeed of great intellect. too bad he gave in to the callings of greed. and since he’s still clinging on to that side, there’s no where else for him to go but down.

  81. B says:

    the problem is, their accusation is based only on reports & suspicion unlike sa case ng mga marcoses accusation pa lang may hard evidence na.

  82. juan caballero says:

    Raissa, Congratulations! Napansin na ng Prosecutors blog mo.. They just cited Republic vs. Sandiganbayan..

  83. Mel says:

    Corona tax withheld & gross compensation

    2002 to 2005 – No ITR filed and no alphalist submitted by Supreme Court

    Source: ABS-CBNnews.com Posted at 01/25/2012 3:54 PM | Updated as of 01/25/2012 3:56 PM

    1 down, 7 to go. Can’t they just rule in this Article II complaint as guilty so that the Supreme Court can move on with a new appointed CJ? And let the Tanodbayan thru the Ombudsman to criminally charge [ex] CJ R Corona.

    • Suplada at Bastos says:

      The following is what Senator-judge Miriam Defensor Santiago said after insisting that Henares could not play such role since the [impeachment ] court has already decided on the inadmissibility of paragraph 2.4.

      “She said Henares can only be an authenticating officer at this point. “Nagkasundo na e. Tapos na pala e. Ito na ang na-file sa BIR. We can do the authentication outside…Tapos na ang trabaho ng babaeng ito.”

      Source: http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/01/25/12/senate-excludes-ill-gotten-wealth-clause

    • Mel says:

      I may have jump the gun on this when I wrote this “1 down, 7 to go. Can’t they just rule in this Article II complaint as guilty so that the Supreme Court can move on …” With out knowing that the Senate-Judges excluded Article 2.4 of the Impeachment Complaint before the start of today’s trial proceedings.

      I read the other online reports after I submitted this with haste.

    • raissa says:

      Hanep. Above the law.

      • Makikisuyo says:

        Puwede pong manawagan?

        Kinakabahan po ako para kay CJ Renato Corona at sa Missis niya.

        Kung puwede pong paki kamusta sila, lalo na pu si ginoong Renato Corona.

        Baka magtangka po si ginoong R Corona. Gaya ni Angie.

        Kung sino po ang mga kamag anak niya na tumatangkilik dito, paki saklolo po ninyo sila.

        • raissa says:

          Hindi naman siguro.
          Malaki ang paniwala niya sa Diyos.

          • Mel says:

            Hi Raïssa,

            I hope he wouldn’t do IT.

            What would be his ploy to do it to himself by not honoring an unwritten rule and that was to pay his own share of tax to the gov’t that he represents and receives his salary.

            Parang Mikee Arroyo din.

            With no ITRs for that period, he just added more calamities to his problems. Not the gov’t will really go after him.

            Does that mean, he didn’t pay any tax?

            Makes us wonder what are the penalties for not submitting/reporting a working citizen’s tax return – not only for a year but 4 to 10 years.

            Indeed, a second set of Rule of Law, a Law unto themselves.

            • Mel says:

              erratum

              instead of ‘Not the gov’t will really go after him.’

              it should read ‘NOW the gov’t will really go after him.’

      • baycas says:

        Wait. Pag isa lang ang nagpapasuweldo puede nang di mag-file ng ITR. May withholding tax naman na ‘yun.

        Ang problem sapat ba ‘yun to acquire properties he reportedly has? Meron ba talaga siya ng other source of funds na hindi naman taxable?

        Mahirap pa ring ipalabas ang ebidensiya kung walang “wide latitude” o “flexibility” lalo na sa Article II, Paragraph 2.4 ng AOI…

      • Mel says:

        One of Raïssa’s CPA commenter who would be disappointed is Arnel Dy: January 23, 2012 at 8:03 pm. (CJ Corona’s P11M ‘cash advance’)

        “I would really love to see his 2003 and 2010 ITR.”

        R Corona’s ITR for 2003 is non existent, only 2010 BUT as part of the SC Alpha list – but no 2010 ITR.

        Na Technical and mga marurunong, lalung lalo na ang prosekusyon.

        This is where Raïssa’s [this article] 1st note on ‘About the three things that struck me about CJ Corona’s ruling that could prove relevant to his ongoing impeachment trial’ comes in.

        “First, CJ Corona had this to say about technicalities that simply delayed the trial. He wrote…” (please read above for the full section.)

        The next big question is, will the senate-judges recall their recent exclusion of article 2.4 due to this revelation?

        Senator-judge Franklin Drilon said, however: “However, under article 2.4, which asserts that these are… that such properties could be ill-gotten, the court did not rule on that and will rely on the presumptions of evidence on the presumptions of law particularly, the anti-graft law.”

        ——————–

        Part of today’s development.

        It beggar’s belief that why would “Senator-judges decided to drop article 2.4 of the complaint, which had been the rallying cry of the prosecution in their effort to seek a Corona conviction for betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution.” Source: http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/01/25/12/senate-excludes-ill-gotten-wealth-clause

        Of all timing, BIR Commissioner Kim Henares was supposed to sit as witness YESTERDAY, then Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago suddenly jumped from her sick bed to join the Impeachment proceeding YESTERDAY & today, and then – ‘walaa’, the ill-gotten wealth clause of Article 2.4 was excluded before the start of the impeachment trial today.

        A rotting fish is starting to permeate the impeachment trial. Something fishy is going on.

    • Johnny Two III says:

      I earn more, much more than what CJ Corona’s declared income and I can’t afford the properties he has acquired, specially the condo unit in Bellagio Condominiums.

  84. shin taro says:

    Excellent !…Raissa…God bless you in your advocacy for truth and justice! I am now your fan! May God give you good health and keep you from danger!

  85. @raissa or to anyone who has a better knowledge in the impeachment subject..

    Now that the senate had excluded the clause for the ill gotten wealth issue…

    can we still impeach him if it will be proven that he is not telling the whole truth about his SALN?

    thanks.. just want to be sure, he’s not out of the hook yet..

    • raissa says:

      we have to wait and see what happens.

    • Arnel Dy says:

      The word is “set aside” … for now.

      If they can lay down the basis for pursuing Article 2.4 – then the court will accede to allowing it to be pursued.

      The CARs lay down the groundwork for Article 2.4. Do not give up hope yet.

      • baycas says:

        Yes, pieces of evidence for 2.2 and 2.3 will inevitably lead to 2.4.

        The best thing about it is that the burden of proof on 2.4 will be shifted to the defense.

        Tupas et al must make up for lost time as a result of the inherent defect of 2.4 (as well as failing to charge Corona for graft and corruption).

        —–

        Just a thought, the Impeachment Court must provide a wide latitude or flexibility in accepting 2.4 as an allegation inasmuch as Corona’s SALN was never publicly disclosed.

  86. rafael l. vidal says:

    CONGRATZ RAISSA, 20 minutes from now, the prosecution will submit their delayed memorandum wherein they mentioned your research on corona as ponente on the ill-gotten wealth case against the marcoses.

    Let’s wait and see

  87. pinay710 says:

    raissa maraming salamat sa mga researches mo. sinabi ko sa apo ko na gayahin ka. kasi magtatapos na sya sa mass com at print journalism ang major nya. sabi ko magbasa sya ng article ni RAISSA ROBLES at marami syang matutuhan.ako din kahit matanda na ako marami akong nalaman sa mga articles mo. salamat sa pagbibigay ng liwanag

    • raissa says:

      Sabihin mo sa apo mo pumunta muna siya sa diyaryo bago mag TV.

      ang mga nag-umpisa sa diyaryo mas magaling pagpunta sa broadcasting.

      Salamat sa pagbasa mo.

      • pinay710 says:

        maraming maraming salamat raissa sa payo mo. at bigyan ka pa sana ng PANGINOON DIOS ng mas malalim na kakulitan para maiambag mo sa Pilipinas nating mahal ang iyong katalinuhan. maraming salamat.

      • I am really grateful Raissa that your blog is being used. Congratulations!
        May you and your husband live longer for the purpose driven life you were created for.
        May you also have a great number of descendants that will carry your legacy for generations.

  88. rey says:

    im so happy and thanks to you raissa… the prosecution has used your research in their memorandum.. spokesman for the prosecution right now is citing said corona decision in his interview in anc… it’s is so damaging for the defense i believe… another victory for us who want the truth to come out of this impeachment trial. again, thanks…

    • raissa says:

      We, the people, are all welcome :)

    • Mel says:

      Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap,

      Encore

      Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap, Clap,

      Maraming salamat sa Diyos at may Raïssa Robles ang Pilipinas.

      Your hubby Alan and son must be proud of you.

  89. Call Center Employee says:

    Ma’am Raissa,

    Thanks for your passion and diligence. sa kagaya kung ordinaryong mamamayan, I become more informed about these mess that Abalos, Gloria, Gonzales, and self serving Puno have orchistrated….palibhasa alam nila ang mangyayari after the election once si Pnoy ang manalo. kaya nila iniupo sa korte suprema si corona na TANGA……
    Siguro po kung wala itong expsose and paper trails matutulad na naman sa dati ang pagantabay ko sa sa isyu noon ni estrada na naghihintay lamang ako sa mga bias na pahayag ng mga plotiko sa magkabilang panig….protecting their personal gains.

    At least after reading all your blogs and carefully made a descernment. It appears na yours is aligned to what the masses is longing for…..justice, genuine democracy and progress for all and for the whole nation.

    Wish ko lang po na hindi lang ang mga bugok na pulitiko ang mabunyag ang mga kalokohan…kasi tulad po ni gloria…before pos siya naluklok sa pagkakaalam ko po ay isa sya sa mga less corrupt pero simula nya kunin ang serbisyo ni Ronnie Puno kapansin pansin na pagsalungat nya sa diwa ng edsa 2. Sino ba si Puno? Di ba sya rin ang nasa likod ni Erap kung saan kaliwat kanan din ang corruption…

    OO nga pala…may narinig pala ako na isang dating pangulo na kinaiinisan din ni Erap ang nag tayo ng isang mall sa sa singapore at doon nya dinala ang kanyang ill gotten wealth….palibhasa nasa malayo hindi naamoy ng mga pinoy tabako nya. hehehe

    • Call Center Employee says:

      ops nakalimuta ko pala….si Ronnie Puno ay nagserbisyo rin sa ilalim ni Ramos.

    • raissa says:

      Talaga?

    • Baltazar says:

      @Call Center,
      Baka hearsay lang yung mall ha? For all I know, and aware din ang maraming Pinoy dito, yung IMM mall (just google it) daw belongs to the Marcoses hence the name – Imelda Marcos Mall. Pero walang facts yan so iapply natin ang due process both kay FVR & Imelda. But if you can pinpoint the mall, I can check the national library for some records. Baka may makita tayo. Transparent ang system dito so we can check it.

  90. 1320 says:

    Having properties that can’t be justified by one’s income over the years in public service raises a presumption that it’s ill-gotten. The prosecution knows this and has had initial success in presenting the testimonies and documents of the registers of deeds and the SALN of CJ. However, they’re having a problem in proceeding to the next step (that of showing CJ’s income via his and his family’s ITRs) because of a vaguely written Article 2, which involves the charge of failure to publicly disclose the SALN only. The defense’s game plan, which has succeeded, is to bar the prosecution from proceeding to step 2.

    The Senate should now rise to the occasion and allow the reception of evidence of CJ’s income. If very ordinary collection cases allow amendments to a complaint, why not in this case where public interest is involved? At any rate, CJ’s rights aren’t prejudiced. He can still rebut whatever evidence the prosecution may present when it’s time for him to present his. Blocking the presentation of such evidence on mere technicality, at this point, may benefit CJ’s position at the Senate, but will ultimately damage his image in the bar of public opinion.

  91. abdullah says:

    you’re at it again raissa. you and your rumor mill.

    firstly, let me just emphasize:

    on your first: “It is rather a contest in which each contending party fully and fairly lays before the court the facts in issue and then, brushing aside as wholly trivial and indecisive all imperfections of form and technicalities of procedure, asks that justice be done upon the merits. ” – RC

    precisely. what he did was not in contrast to his previous “marcos” ruling.

    on your second: ” (3)said amount is manifestly out of proportion to his salary as such public officer or employee and to his other lawful income and the income from legitimately acquired property.” – RC

    your malicious intention here is to paint and impression that renato has no capacity or have no access to other means to lawful income. how well do you know that?

    wala ka nang ginawang matino. chismosa ka.

    • raissa says:

      Sabihin mo yan kay CJ.

      Huwag sa akin.

      SA kanya itong decision na ito.

      Siya ang naghusga.

      • johnny lin says:

        Pasensiya na kay Abdullah.

        Marunong siyang magbasa ng English, hindi lang niya maintindihan ang binabasa. Sabi nga ni Cuevas absent ka siguro nung ang subject matter ay ” understanding and interpretation” Rumor daw yung nakasulat sa supreme court na si Corona ang mismong sumulat at hindi si Raissa.

        Tagalog na para maintindihan sabi nga ni Enrile.

        • 1320 says:

          @abdullah:

          Magulo ang sinabi mo brod.

          Wala namang sinabi si Ms. Robles na walang legitimate source of income si CJ. ang ibig lang niyang sabihin sa piece niya ay kung susukatin natin si CJ sa issue ng ill-gotten wealth (kung ang ebidensiya dito ay tatanggapin ng Senado) ay maari tayong tumingin sa sukatang inilatag ni CJ mismo sa kanyang desisyon. Kaya nga binanggit ng husto ang Desisyon para maliwanagan ang mambabasa sa sukatang legal para masabing may ill-gotten wealth ang isang opisyal sa pamahalaan.

          Again, ang gulo ng sinabi mo. Hindi ko kinaya.

    • Johnny Two III says:

      @abdullah, if CJ Corona has access to other “lawful” income, he most defiinitely did not file any tax on them as it was proven in the Senate today, if your were listeining, that he did not file any Income Tax Return since 2002 to present as required by law. Other than the alpha list SC submitted I think starting 2009 he has not filed any ITR. If he had no other income outside of his SC salary, how did he buy those properties? And excuse me, maraming ginagawang matino si Ms. Robles. Di mo ba nababasa how thankful many of her readers are for opening their eyes, including mine, to documented truth?

    • johnny lin says:

      Abdullah
      Tumpak na Tumpak ka.
      Corona has capacity and access to other means of LOW FOOL INCOME

      LOW – Under the Table
      FOOL- panloloko sa position nya.

      HE ALSO HAS CAPACITY COMMITTING GRAFT AND CORRUPTION

    • callmejames says:

      @Abdullah, based on records at hand, Hindi talaga proportion ang income niya sa amount ng properties niya. Malinaw, wala siyang ibang sources of income maliban sa kanyang sweldo. Gamitin mo naman isip mo kahit minsan lang, maigi yan sa kalusugan. ;)

  92. johnny lin says:

    In the picture, what is Bongbong saying?

    MARCOS WARNING TO CORONA

    “Watch your thoughts, for they become words,
    Watch your words, for they become actions
    Watch your actions, for they become habits
    Watch your habits, for they become character
    Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny”

  93. c.s says:

    The document is Chief Justice Corona’s landmark decision on July 15, 2003 turning over the Marcoses’ loot stashed in Swiss banks to the Philippine government.

    I want to be objective here. This decision was made in 2003, the Chief Justice Corona just became Chief Justice in 2010.

  94. at this point of the trial this i can say:

    the cj is now being tied to a post in the middle of plaza miranda, naked,
    bitten by red ants. people see him extending his hand for help and calling
    gloria…… gloria…… masdan ang ginawa mo……

    • bcoolman says:

      masyado yata g(l)ory ang dating anyway magsamasama na silang mga kampon wala akong pakialam. hinay lang

  95. christian bernard says:

    Again another masterpiece! Wow if only those prosecutors can have you as their researcher/investigator, they wouldn’t have anymore problem. Hat’s off again. Thank you for doing us an excellent service. Hope those people up the hill will be seeing your site. I know Henry Omaga Diaz of ABS-CBN is watching your site. He’s doing an article and mentioning your site too. It’s too obvious that Neil Tupas is still a rookie. However given time, he will be an excellent congressman along with the newbies associated with this impeachment trial.

  96. jorgebernas says:

    Ha Ha Ha , magigisa na naman si thief justice corona sa sariling mantika. kong walang itinatago ay walang dapat ikabahala. dapat pagsabihan na niya mga defense panel niya na huwag mag object dahil hindi ito tugma sa mga naging decesion niya(corona) noon.Tama kasabihan, “kong ano itinanim ay siya ring aanihin” HISTORY REPEAT ITSELF kaya humanda kana thief justice corona dahil unti unti ka nang nahuhubaran at lumalabas na ang BAHO mo thief justice corona… Nakakahiya at Nakakadiri na Pag MUMUKHA mo thief corona…Puwweeee….

    • jorgebernas says:

      Tuwing makikita ko pagmumukha nina thief justice renato corona, fake president pandak, fake com. chair abalos, fake ombudsman guittirez etc.etc.. Nasusuka ako at Naaawa sa kanila dahil napakaganda at mabuti na tayo nila sa lipunan kaso hindi pa rin nakontento at gumawa pa nang MALI at the expenses of the poor people of the Philippines…Pati mga Pari, Obispo etc. ay ginamit para sa pansariling kaginhawahan at kapangyarihan….

  97. -->

Trackbacks

  1. [...] Lawyers and judges have also verified my report entitled “From his own mouth: CJ Corona’s guidelines in the use of SALNs & ITRs to prove ill-gott… [...]