More questions about that P11M “cash advance” stated by Chief Justice Corona in SEVEN of his SALNs

My Exclusive

By Raïssa Robles

ONE OF THE THINGS Chief Justice Renato Corona has to prove to the impeachment court is that he correctly filled up his SALNs (Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth) and whatever errors or omissions they contain are minor and not enough to get him kicked out of office.

One section of his SALN has highly intrigued me — the one on LIABILITIES where he is supposed to declare any loans, mortgages – in other words, utang.

In seven of his SALNs, he declared under LIABILITIES a “cash advance”, initially worth P11 million which through the years kept going down. The source of the cash advance? His “wife’s family corporation” – which he identified as Basa-Guidote Enterprises, Inc. in his SALNs for 2003, 2004 and 2005.

Thanks to this cash advance,  CJ Corona became instantly richer by P11 million – money which (according to his lawyers) he used to buy property. By the way, they have yet to show the paper trail from the cash advance to any of the  properties.

This is my question about the“cash advance”:  How could Corona have received millions from a corporation where his wife did not own any shares and where most of the shareholders – who were all her relatives – were openly quarreling with her?

In fact they had sued each other in court.The Basas had sued Corona’s wife Cristina for estafa; while Cristina sued them back for libel. Cristina won her libel suit and to satisfy the award of damages to her, the court allowed the Basa-Guidote shares held by her losing relatives to be auctioned off to the highest bidder.

As it turned out, the highest and only bidder was none other than Cristina Corona’s daughter Carla. QC Sheriff Joseph Bisnar, who had presided over the September 30, 2003 auction, testified last Tuesday (May 8, 2012) that Corona’s daughter bought 4,839 shares of Basa-Guidote for P28,000 – equivalent to 90.87% of the company. Under corporation law, that means Carla Castillo practically owns Basa-Guidote.

But here’s the thing — the advance of millions to Corona was allegedly made to him by Basa-Guidote just days before Carla Castillo won the September 30, 2003 auction and obtained the corporation’s controlling shares, defense lawyer Judd Roy told the impeachment court last Tuesday.

Atty Roy said:

The cash advance  occurred between September 5 and September 30, 2003. Because at the time the cash advance was drawn, the shares had not been sold to Carla Corona.

He then added that:

After September 30 (auction), the facts of the case change because the shares are now owned by a different person. The corporation is now controlled by a different person, Carla Castillo.

Those are Atty Roy’s own words, not mine.

Atty Roy has yet to submit to court any proof that the cash advance was indeed taken out BEFORE September 30, 2003.

But let’s just assume that was what happened.

In this piece, I will not go yet into the strange, strange case of Basa-Guidote. I will only talk about Basa-Guidote’s “cash advance” to CJ Corona and whether he disclosed these correctly in his SALNs.

Defense lawyer Roy implied last week that CJ Corona’s disclosures on his “cash advance” were accurate and complete.

Let’s now examine CJ Corona’s SALNs on the basis of the evidence presented last week by Sheriff Bisnar – that after September 30,  2003 Basa-Guidote was in fact owned by Carla Castillo because she won 90.87% of the company shares in a court auction.

It is in Chief Justice Corona’s SALN for 2003 – which he filed in April 2004 – where it is first recorded that he took out a cash advance from Basa-Guidote, his “wife’s family corporation.”

See below -

SALN 2003 of Chief Justice Corona**

Let’s now examine Chief  Justice Corona’s subsequent SALNs

Let’s see how CJ Corona recorded in his subsequent SALNS his P11 million cash advance and the dramatic change in Basa-Guidote’s ownership.

For his SALN of the following year 2004 which he filed on April 2005, CJ Corona showed that his cash advance remained at P11 million and was drawn from his “wife’s family corporation” :

SALN 2004 of Chief Justice Corona**

This was even though he presumably knew – as the father of Carla and as the spouse of Cristina – that Basa-Guidote was no longer his “wife’s family corporation”. It had become his daughter’s corporation over a year before he had filed his 2004 SALN.

I say the word “presumably” with confidence because after all, he must know a lot about Basa-Guidote because its millions ended up deposited in one of his personal accounts at Philippine Savings Bank (PSB) Katipunan branch.  It was NOT an AND/OR  account. It was a single account where he alone could withdraw from.

Anyway, going back to his SALNs, for CJ Corona’s SALN of 2005 which he filed in April 2006, he listed under “liabilities” a “cash advance” of P10 million due for payment to Basa-Guidote. Again, he described it as his “wife’s family corporation.”

 

SALN 2005 of Chief Justice Corona** 

This was even though Basa-Guidote had ceased being his wife’s family corporation on September 30, 2003, when it became his daughter Carla’s corporation – at least according to Atty Roy and Sheriff Bisnar.

Why didn’t CJ Corona disclose this fact? Perhaps he can explain this if and when he testifies.

But let’s continue.

For CJ Corona’s SALN as of December 31, 2006 which he filed in April 2007, he listed P8 million under “liabilities” and described it as a “cash advance from wife’s family corp.”

 SALN 2006 of Chief Justice Corona** 

This contradicts defense lawyer Roy’s statements and Sheriff Bisnar’s testimony at the impeachment trial. Last Tuesday May 8, Atty Roy told Presiding Senator-Judge Juan Ponce Enrile that the point of Bisnar’s testimony was “to establish that the bulk of the shares of the Basa-Guidote Corporation are now owned by Carla Corona Castillo, the daughter of the Chief Justice.”

Please keep in mind what Atty Roy said as you read the rest of this piece. Roy – a law dean no less –  said “that the bulk of the shares of the Basa-Guidote Corporation are now owned by Carla Corona Castillo, the daughter of the Chief Justice.”

It is for this reason that I am asking why – three years after his daughter Carla had bought the corporation in a court auction – CJ Corona continued to describe Basa-Guidote as his “wife’s family corporation” in his SALN.

For CJ Corona’s SALN as of December 31, 2007 which he filed in April 2008, he listed P6.5 million under “liabilities” and described the amount again as a “cash advance from wife’s family corporation.”

 

SALN 2007 of Chief Justice Corona** 

 

Four years after his daughter Carla bought the corporation in a court auction, why did CJ Corona still describe Basa-Guidote as his “wife’s family corporation”?

In CJ Corona’s SALN as of December 31, 2008 which he filed in April 2009, he listed under “liabilities” a P5 million “cash advance  from wife’s family corporation”. He did this even though five years had passed since his daughter Carla had bought the controlling shares of the company in cash at a court auction.

 

SALN 2008 of Chief Justice Corona** 

For CJ Corona’s SALN as of December 31, 2009 which he filed in April 2010 – on the very eve he became Supreme Court Chief Justice of the Philippines – Corona declared P3 million under “liabilities”. Again, he described the sum as a “cash advance from wife’s family corporation” – six years after his daughter Carla took ownership and control of Basa-Guidote.

SALN 2009 of Chief Justice Corona** 


But wait. There’s more.

Who really owns Basa-Guidote today?

Last January 22, 2012 when I first wrote about CJ Corona’s P11 million cash advance from Basa-Guidote, I interviewed one of Corona’s defense lawyers – Ramon Esguerra.

I asked Atty Esguerra about Basa-Guidote and this is what he told me:

That’s a family corporation of Mrs Corona. My understanding is that this is actually 98% owned by Mrs Corona already. My recollection is that there was some sort of intra-corporate controversy among the stockholders.

Atty Esguerra did not tell me then that it was owned by Carla Castillo. He said it was “actually 98% owned” by Cristina Corona.

When I heard this explanation from Atty Esguerra at that time, I asked him this follow-up question:

You said it’s 98% owned by Mrs Corona and the corporation is unregistered, does that mean he made utang to his own wife?

Esguerra replied to me then:

Hindi naman to his own wife. To her corporation.

So we have a corporation that, depending on which defense lawyer you’re talking to, is either owned by the mother or the daughter. By the way, the defense lawyers have so far not presented any corporate ownership papers to the impeachment court.

Perhaps the defense has yet another witness to present who will testify how Carla’s corporation ended up being owned by her mother today?

In any case, why did CJ Corona’s SALNs for seven consecutive years –  2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010 – state that he owed money to his wife’s family corporation?

Why did SEVEN SALNs he filed consecutively from 2004 to 2010 never disclose that he was in fact returning the “cash advance” to his daughter’s corporation – at least if you go by Sheriff Bisnar’s testimony and defense lawyer Roy?

Please note that even if it was his wife who had acquired Basa-Guidote from Carla, the SALNs of CJ Corona should have stated at some point that his cash advance was to due for payment to his “wife’s corporation”, and not to his “wife’s family corporation.”

Going by the narration of facts presented by the defense and its witness last Tuesday, the word “family” was legally erased on September 30,2003 at a court auction presided over by Sheriff Bisnar and participated in by Corona’s wife Cristina and daughter Carla. And this was only days after CJ Corona had obtained his P11 million cash advance.

Here is my first story last January on Chief Justice Corona’s P11 million cash advance from Basa-Guidote, where I interviewed defense lawyer  Ramon Esguerra and where I accidentally unlocked a messy family feud.

1,743 Responses to “More questions about that P11M “cash advance” stated by Chief Justice Corona in SEVEN of his SALNs”

Read below or add a comment...

  1. 443
    Arnel says:

    Idol talaga ni corona si GMA. Pareho sila ng
    drama. Pa wheel chair wheel chair din. Mas
    iyakin nga lang si corona. Pa awa effect.

  2. 442
    Minda Nao says:

    NATIONAL NEWS AND BANK ACTIVITIES, COINCIDENCE?
    GLORIA’S MR BAGMAN? BRING ME MY BAG (TO THE TUNE OF MR SANDMAN)

    2004
    NEWS:Presidential Election campaign Arroyo vs Fernando Poe
    Bank activities:
    4/1/ 2004 $ $215,788.00
    4/2/ 2004 $315,788.00
    5/11/04 $409,188.00
    5/12/04 ($90,812.00)
    5/14/04 $409,188.00
    5/14/04 ($90,812.00)

    2007
    NEWS: April 21: ZTE-NBN telecommunications project contract signed.
    NEWS May 2007 Philippines general elections New Senate in place, -
    Minor news first recorded series of My Way karaoke bars killings
    Bank activities
    5/29/07 $208,730.22

    NEWS: Week of 7/19/07 Nationwide barangay elections registrations, newly elected Senators start work
    Bank activities
    7/19/07 $221,430.22

    NEWS: Arroyo declared July 27 as iglesia ni cristo day
    NEWS: Mining industry transferred to office of President
    Bank activities
    7/27/07 $321,430.22

    NEWS Week of Erap Verdict plunder
    Bank activities
    9/3/07 $341,430.22

    NEWS: Impeachment news in the house / cash gift charges on congressmen Villarosa
    Bank activities
    12/21/07 $391,430.22

    2008
    NEWS: Joint Seismic Undertaking on Spratlys /JDV lost position Merging of Lakas CMD and KAMPI
    Bank activities
    3/5/08 $421,730.22

    NEWS: joint seismic undertaking, senators questioning legality
    Bank activities
    4/17/08 $445,730.22

    2010
    NEWS: national elections, Imelda and arroyo runs for congress
    Bank activities
    3/12/10 $764,152.46

    NEWS: Week of Corona oath taking (may 17 2010)
    Bank activities
    5/25/10 $728,968.21

    NEWS: SC decides Cityhood laws unconstitutional reversed (aug 23)
    Bank activities
    8/27/10 $798,468.21

    NEWS: Week of SC oral arguments on Truth Commission
    Bank activity
    8/31/10 $764,603.33

    NEWS: Week of Mercedita Gutierrez Impeachment
    NEWS:9/24/2010 Start of impeachment Mercedita Gutierrez in House
    NEWS 9/27/2010 New SC en banc clerk of court custodian Enriqueta Vidal
    NEWS 9/21/2010 SC starts oral arguments on Mercedita Gutierrez impeachment petition
    NEWS 10/06/2010 final oral arguments Mercedita Gutierrez case
    Bank activity
    9/23/10 $721,312.08

    NEWS 12/09/2010 SC rules Truth Commission unconstitutional
    NEWS 12/14/2010 SC affirms return of Leyte Marcos mansion
    NEWS 12/15/2010 SC affirms acquittal of Hubert Webb
    Bank Activities:
    12/22/10 $736,612.08

    NEWS: 1/11/2011 SC rejects oral arguments for MR for Hubert Webb acquittal
    Bank Activities:
    1/2011 $716,733.33

    NEWS: Ampatuan massacre, comptroller Garcia/Ligot, PNoy criticizing SC decisions on Truth Commission
    Bank activities
    1/19/11 $746,733.33
    1/19/11 $1,005,930.89
    1/20/11 $1,178,967.96
    1/21/11 $1,190,667.96

    NEWS: 2/08/2011 Ex AFP chief Angelo Reyes commits suicide
    NEWS: 2/27/2011 SC OK’s Mikey Arroyo to represent security guard group in congress
    NEWS: 03/22/11 Mercedita Gutierrez impeached by congress
    Bank activities
    3/31/11 $1,202,667.96

    NEWS: 7/25/11 President Aquino State of the Nation address
    Bank activities:
    7/27/11 $1,267,167.96

    NEWS: 10/11/2011 Philippine 2007 Poll fraud continues
    NEWS 10/16/11 Aquino ratings increase
    NEWS 11/09/11 Arroyo medical trip denied
    Bank activities
    11/16/11 $1,306,167.96

    NEWS: 11/18/11 Arroyo arrested for Electoral sabotage
    Bank activities
    11/24/11 $1,133,558.38

    NEWS: 12/09/11 Arroyo detained at Veterans Memorial Hospital
    NEWS: 12/12/11 Corona impeached by House of Representatives
    Bank activities
    12/12/11 $998,199.37
    12/13/11 $609,428.15
    12/15/11 $1,585,626.23
    12/15/11 $1,120,626.23
    12/15/11 $777,433.61
    12/15/11 $705,404.28
    12/15/11 $355,404.28
    12/19/11 ($132,593.81)
    12/20/11 ($820,242.36)

    • 442.1
      raissa says:

      Interesting.

      The depositors to his bank accounts will have to be matched.

      • 442.1.1
        jun 2 says:

        Kaya nga maraming sa kabila ng mga katotohanan, they need this man in 2013! kaya dito kitang kita natin ang kanilang pag hahanda, again para i blackmail ang buong bansa at mag patuloy sila sa pag gahasa sa kaban ng bayan. Sa pag upo ng OMB, very candid ang ilang senator, takot na takot sa naging hakbang ng ombudsman at ang naging reply ng AMLC. We need to work more, as we can see it, pospos ang kanilang pag kilos, na dapat sana tayong taong bayan ay ganon din!

        • 442.1.1.1
          Eber Redi says:

          @jun 2

          tama ka pare, mukhang siya ang puntahan pag may election….lalo na siguro pag may electoral protest na maaring umakyat sa SC…. hindi malayong sila Bongbong nagbigay rin tsaka si MDS and those Senators na halos makipagbuntalan sa mga witness na laban kay Corona na nagkamali lang umupo sa witness…….sisiw lang pala yung Basa guidote compared to this..hindi malayong pagbintangan niya rin si Pnoy an me patago..sabi nya siya lang ang nakaka alam tulad ng 100 million bribe nila….
          baka pati si Pope sabihin nya may patago…

          mabagsik pala pag pinagsama ang gahamang economist at gahang seraniko ng transistor..wasak ang bayan…

      • 442.1.2
        pelang says:

        wow! Minda Nao, kuha mo talaga! ang galing! dapat kasama ka sa prosecution taga imbestiga. kaya naman pala kating-kati na si Goyang na makatakas at kung anu-anong sakit na naman ang nararamdaman. malapit nang mabisto ng husto.

    • 442.2
      Deng says:

      @Minda Nao,

      Wow ! Nice presentation, man. Too much activities, too much money, can he be the bagman of the GMA mafia? Could it be a conspiracy?

      • 442.2.1
        Eber Redi says:

        @Deng

        The evil genius of their partnership is the employment of a constitutional principle: JUDICIARY INDEPENDENCE.

        This they implemented by the non accountability of their financial activities and expenses as well as non transparency and nondisclosure of SALNs.

        So Corona was the perfect conduits of their groups’ funds as well as bribes and
        other illegal funds that Corona himself receive from cases he is involved in. No wonder as reported here, this caught the attention of international anti money laundering organizations monitoring money trail of terrorists organizations and alerted our own AMLC.

        Perfect crime until….

    • 442.3
      Ella Tovara says:

      very nice presentation. grabe talaga everytime merong mga political happenings sa bansa, big as in big amounts of money is moved from one place to another. grabe talagang pagnanakaw at pangungurakot.

      sana po makita ito at mabasa tapos maintindihan ng mga senador-judges para patalsikin na po ang kumag na kurakot na corona.

    • 442.4
      Leona says:

      Very interesting! But are the “transactions” withdrawals or deposits on each date? I guess the one for “12/12/11 to 12/20/11″ are indeed WITHDRAWALS amounting to
      $7, 105, 008. 32.

      Seven Million One Hundred Five Thousands and Thirty Eight/32 !!! In PESOS my comput is P305, 555, 344.00+ . CORONA “withdrew”

      THREE HUNDRED FIVE MILLION FIVE HUNDRED FIFTY FIVE THOUSAND and THREE HUNDRED FORTY-FOUR pesos on those dates? What bank is this?

      That’s a lot of money! My wishful thinking blurs me!

      • 442.4.1
        JiroArturo says:

        @Leona
        Withdrawals on said dates Dec 2011 total $6,103,880.11. Pesos withdrawal = P161,151,897.64

        • 442.4.1.1
          Leona says:

          I may have to “change” my cell phn’s ‘calculator’ then…mas grabi pala itong calculator ko kaysa akin!

    • 442.5
      simon olivares says:

      isama mo na 10/ 4/ 2011 FASAP decision reversal. Teka, kelan ba pumasok yung Allied bank account nya? Nakareflect ba sa records?

  3. 441
    Sam says:

    something from rappler
    ——————————
    Is Corona’s defense team ‘sinking’?

    According to Ronny Roy, the dad of Judd “Judd is fed up. He never wanted [Ombudsman Conchita] Morales to testify, at least he wud’ve wanted her LAST after Risa [Hontiveros], [Harvey Keh], etc.but was overruled by [defense team lead counsel Serafin] Cuevas.”
    (text message send to Harry Roque)

    ——————————————-

    kaya pala wala si Roy that day when the Ombudsman took the witness stand.

    • 441.1
      Leona says:

      Ohhhh…how Cuevas cried a lot for approving to present Ombudsman Morales and first among those witnesses! He must have had a horrible nightmare the following the night in bed!

      What caused this blunder? Over confident sila! Never never make that mistake in trial. Why they thought that Ombuds Morales had nothing to give?

      The defense is now showing fatigue. Tired. Cannot think and focus. They’re going to have a long rest after this proceedings is over.

      • 441.1.1
        Sam says:

        @Leona

        Tama ka dyan, actually also in the article, Roy was so fed up daw due to corona won’t do a rehearsal before taking the witness stand.

        • 441.1.1.1
          • 441.1.1.1.1
            duquemarino says:

            @baycas

            I saw this movie and liked it, but will cuevas do a turn-around? Maybe, if his vertigo attacks when he is presenting the summation. Just a wishful thinking, he he he. Gandang twist nito pag nangyari.

            • Leona says:

              Mr. Cuevas “doing a turn-around?” I doubt it very much. One real good lawyer will be praying for guts to that! But Artur Kirkland’s situation is that he believes his clients are innocent. Does Mr. Cuevas have the same belief?
              That is a big Q.

              I’ve not seen the movie; just read what that website gave about it. Thanks.

        • 441.1.1.2
          netty says:

          Maybe he is also weary that he would end it all, baka nasa magic brown envelope ang WMD. beware!!

        • 441.1.1.3
          Leona says:

          Taking the witness stand, I gave my piece on the ENGLISH RULE in contrast to the AMERICAN RULE. What our courts adopts or follows is the ENGLISH RULE. It is somewhere here down. I just hope this point will not be a long debate/argument between the defense and the prosecution; might also be with the Senate or with Hon. Enrile.

  4. 440
    Renato Pinokyo says:

    THE POLITICS OF ARROYO AND CORONA

    NEWS:Election campaign Arroyo vs Fernando Poe
    Bank activities:
    4/1/ 2004 $ $215,788.00
    4/2/ 2004 $315,788.00
    5/11/04 $409,188.00
    5/12/04 ($90,812.00)
    5/14/04 $409,188.00
    5/14/04 ($90,812.00)

    From the above revealed bank activities by TJ, I thought of going over some news items at that time and I came to this item which displayed the sheer gall of this partnership to cheat their way to power. No direct link to Corona but the money angle and the date is interesting.It is thus important that TJ be out of this axis of corruption, otherwise his acquittal will be a perpetuation of the politics that enslaved the Philippines for a long long time..

    Source:
    http://web.archive.org/web/20060101120753/http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/topofthehour.aspx?StoryId=10350

    Yung dagdag, yung dagdag’
    The Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism granted permission to abs-cbnNEWS.com to publish this entry from PCIJ’s blog. For other stories visit http://www.pcij.org/blog/
    By Sheila Coronel, Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism

    THE president’s voice sounded urgent. She was muttering under her breath. [On Wednesday] morning, using sound enhancement, we listened again to the “Hello, Garci” recording and heard clearly for the first time what Mrs. Arroyo told election commissioner Virgilio Garcillano in a conversation that took place at 11:17 p.m. on May 31, 2004.
    That phone call began with the President relaying to Garcillano the information that the opposition was trying to get Namfrel (National Citizens Movement for Free Elections) copies of municipal certificates of canvass. Garcillano reassured her that Namfrel is “now sympathetic to us.”
    The president’s reply is garbled in the recording, as she lowered her voice and muttered. We asked a sound engineer to enhance the sound for us. We listened again and this is what we heard her telling Garcilliano: “… Namfrel does not tally…pero yun nga, yung dagdag, yung dagdag (but you know, the padding, the padding).”
    [PCIJ didn’t put this in earlier versions of the transcript because we were not sure until now.]
    This is the only time in all the 15 phone calls that Mrs. Arroyo made to Garcillano between May 26 and June 10 that she actually used the word, dagdag.
    Some of the president’s calls dealt with her anxiety about the count and her winning margin (“Will I still get more than 1 M?” she famously asked “Garci” at 9:23 a.m. on May 29).
    The May 31 phone call was more direct. She actually referred to votes being padded. While she did not directly say that she had directed the padding or that she knew her votes had been padded, the purpose of the conversation appears to be to assuage her worry that the padding would not discovered if the Namfrel documents did not tally with the certificates of canvass.
    Many of the presidential calls in the Hello Garci tapes dealt with Mrs. Arroyo’s concern that the count reflected in various election documents — statements of votes and certificates of canvass — did not match. She expressed this worry about the documents from Basilan, Lanao del Sur and Sulu. She was worried because the mismatch in the figures might be seen by the opposition and used by them in alleging fraud by the ruling party.
    The particular conversation where she talked about dagdag seems to be along the same lines. She was fretting about the possibility that the opposition would get hold of Namfrel documents (Namfrel gets the sixth copy of the precinct-level election returns) and discover that these do not match with the certificates of canvass, which contain the aggregated counts of all the precincts in a municipality, city or province.
    This is why Garcillano had to reassure the president that Namfrel is “now sympathetic to us.”
    In her reply, she wanted more reassurance. “Pero yun nga, yung dagdag, yung dagdag,” she said.
    When this call was made on May 31, most of the certificates of canvass had already been submitted to Congress. It would have meant trouble if the count reflected in these certificates were questioned either by Namfrel or the opposition, based on their own copies of the election returns. At this point, the president seemed to be concerned about two things: 1) that the spurious documents would not be discovered; and 2) that the counts in the places where special elections were held and the counting delayed would show her as the winner.
    Special elections were conducted in late May in some towns and barangay in Basilan, Lanao del Sur, Lanao del Norte, Maguindanao, Sulu and Tawi-Tawi. Some of the president’s phone calls dealt with the counting in these places.
    The content of those phone calls was previously reported in this blog. Here are the transcript and enhanced audio of the “dagdag” phone call.
    Conversation between Gary (V. Garcillano) and an unidentified female believed to be GMA (Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo) on 31 23:17 hotel May 2004
    Garcillano: Hello, ma’am.
    GMA: Hello, tsaka ano yung kabila, they’re trying to get the Namfrel copies of the Municipal COCs.
    Garcillano: Namfrel copies ho?
    GMA: Uhm-um.
    Garcillano: Ay wala naman, ok naman ang Namfrel sa atin. They are now sympathetic to us.
    GMA (mumbling): Oo, oo … (garbled) …Namfrel does not tally. Pero yun nga, yung dagdag, yung dagdag.
    Garcillano: Oho, we will get an advance copy ho natin kung anong hong kwan nila.
    GMA: Oo, oo.
    Garcillano: Sige po.

    Source:
    http://web.archive.org/web/20060101120753/http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/topofthehour.aspx?StoryId=10350

  5. 439
    Sam says:

    another big problem for the corona
    ———————————————

    from inquirer (a portion of the article)
    —————————————————
    Ana Basa: We will get back what is rightfully ours

    Guilty or not in the impeachment trial, Chief Justice Renato Corona, along with his wife, Cristina, and daughter Carla, will have to pay for their “illegal takeover” of the Basa-Guidote Enterprises Inc. (BGEI) from its stockholders and for “squandering” its finances.
    Thus said an heir of the corporation’s majority stockholders, Ana Basa.

    “We will not let this go away. We will get back what is rightfully ours,” declared Basa, the second of nine children of Jose Maria Basa III, one of the original stockholders of BGEI. Ana called up this reporter, who is on an East-West Center fellowship grant, from Las Vegas, Nevada, where she has been in the casino business for over 20 years, to talk about the Basa family’s course of action against the Coronas in light of revelations about the company in the Corona impeachment trial.

    Basa said the Coronas probably did not expect the Basa family and their relatives to unite and shoot back considering the Chief Justice’s position in the judiciary following their “long years of persecution and prosecution.

    • 439.1
      Sam says:

      Lagot na ang mga Corona … galit na ang mga BASA

    • 439.2
      Sam says:

      @Raissa

      nag double post hehehe paki delete na lang itong na post ko. someone has post the same article na .. sorry

  6. 438
    kalakala says:

    CORONA IMPEACHMENT TRIAL
    Ana Basa: We will get back what is rightfully ours
    By Cynthia D. Balana
    Philippine Daily Inquirer

    HONOLULU—Guilty or not in the impeachment trial, Chief Justice Renato Corona, along with his wife, Cristina, and daughter Carla, will have to pay for their “illegal takeover” of the Basa-Guidote Enterprises Inc. (BGEI) from its stockholders and for “squandering” its finances, an heir of the corporation’s majority stockholders said.

    ‘All liable’

    According to Ana, their lawyers said all three Coronas, as well as the regional trial judge and the sheriff that executed the auction of her family’s majority shares in the corporation were all liable under the law.

    http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/196853/ana-basa-we-will-get-back-what-is-rightfully-ours

  7. 437
    Pedro says:

    Ana Basa Says ” We will get back what is rightfully ours :- ( Per Inquirer)

    HONOLULU—Guilty or not in the impeachment trial, Chief Justice Renato Corona, along with his wife, Cristina, and daughter Carla, will have to pay for their “illegal takeover” of the Basa-Guidote Enterprises Inc. (BGEI) from its stockholders and for “squandering” its finances, an heir of the corporation’s majority stockholders said.
    “We will not let this go away. We will get back what is rightfully ours,” declared Ana Basa, the second of nine children of Jose Maria Basa III, one of the original stockholders of BGEI. Ana called up this reporter, who is on an East-West Center fellowship grant, from Las Vegas, Nevada, where she has been in the casino business for over 20 years, to talk about the Basa family’s course of action against the Coronas in light of revelations about the company in the Corona impeachment trial.
    Basa said the Coronas probably did not expect the Basa family and their relatives to unite and shoot back considering the Chief Justice’s position in the judiciary following their “long years of persecution and prosecution.
    The US-based Basa family has been meeting with their lawyers in the United States and in the Philippines about their course of action against the Coronas to challenge in court the “illegal” transfer of BGEI ownership to her niece Carla for a measly sum of P28,000, as well as the sale of a BGEI property worth millions of pesos to Carla for also the measly sum of P28,000 through an auction.
    Ana said her family was relieved by the fact that the truth about Corona and Cristina, who is Ana’s cousin, had finally come out.
    ‘All liable’
    According to Ana, their lawyers said all three Coronas, as well as the regional trial judge and the sheriff that executed the auction of her family’s majority shares in the corporation were all liable under the law.
    During the impeachment trial, court Sheriff Bisnar testified under oath that he delivered both the writ of execution and garnishment of the Basa shares on the same day at an address given to him by Cristina, which was actually the address of the latter.
    “That address was Asuncion’s address. Bahay naman nila Cristina iyon (Cristina also stayed in that house). She grew up there. Hindi namin bahay iyon (That is not our house),” Ana said.
    “My parents never received any type of notice. My dad would have never allowed BGEI shares to be auctioned off because that was his promise to his mother. He would have figured out another way to pay it. Remember the court issue of writ of execution and garnishment eight months after my dad passed away.”
    Ana believed they now have a fighting chance to pursue their cases in court against the Coronas “without obstruction and harassment,” unlike before when Renato enjoyed the confidence of two former presidents—Fidel Ramos and Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.
    “We were told by the lawyers that they are all liable to the stockholders, especially Cristina, for gross negligence and bad faith in directing the affairs of BGEI for allowing the shares to go for a mere P28,000. They said she is also guilty of acquiring personal or pecuniary interest in conflict with her duty as a trustee,” Basa said.
    ‘Highly questionable’
    She said the sale itself of the BGEI property in Sampaloc was highly questionable since up to now, there was still no decision in the probate case, which Cristina herself filed against them.
    She said other BGEI properties in the same area, which were levied by the Coronas, were actually in the name of her father, Jose Maria III, up to now, that was why the Coronas could not sell it.
    Ana expressed the belief that her cousin could have not done all of the abuses and manipulations “without the backing of the Chief Justice.”
    This, she said, was precisely the reason why her aunts and uncle decided to sell their shares to her father, the most successful businessman among the five children of Rosario Basa. Sister Concepcion and Sister Flory lived in the convents, Asuncion was a housewife, while Mario Basa had a bonzai business and supplied bonzai at the Atrium in Makati.
    “Dad’s siblings said they did not want headaches because magulo si Cristina (Cristina was troublesome), tenants were complaining, so they decided to go sell their shares and Dad bought them because Lola’s wish was for the Basa family to continue to own and control the corporation that’s why our family became the majority stockholders,” Ana said.
    ‘A gift to Dad’
    Ana also addressed the claim of Corona’s defense lawyers that her father removed Asuncion’s name from the title of a property in Libis (Eastwood), Quezon City.
    “What title is she talking about? That property in Libis was a gift by my lola to Dad when he graduated with a degree in animal husbandry from the University of California in Davis. But that property in Libis, binayaran din ng Dad sa Lola over the years kaya nakapangalan lang sa kaniya (But Dad paid Lola for that property in Libis over the years, that’s why it is in his name). Dad was able to pay because we had a farm, we had poultry, piggery and he was very successful. My dad was an amazing man, you would have liked him,” she said.
    On the Chief Justice’s reported multiple dollar accounts as revealed by the Ombudsman and the Anti-Money Laundering Council, Basa said they were just as shocked as the rest of the country upon learning this.
    “The defense is simply doing damage control by deflecting the focus away from Rene Corona, They’ve blamed black propaganda, the President, Carpio, Ombdusman, etc.,” she added.

    • 437.1
      Kim says:

      ……“My parents never received any type of notice. …” the magical notice.

    • 437.2
      Sam says:

      lagot ang mga corona, galit na ang mga BASA.

    • 437.3
      Leona says:

      Throw the heavy wrench at them!

      Turn the tables around!

      Go, give ‘em some real headaches this time!

      File the complaint and attach the properties!

      And hang ‘em high!

  8. 436
    Chavydada says:

    A MESSAGE FOR CJ CORONA ON THE EVE OF HIS SENATE APPEARANCE

    I have three words for you, CJ Corona. “REMEMBER THE ALAMO” (Battlecry of US Troops under Gen. Houston).

    ALAM MO namang mai-impeach ka pag tinanggap mo ang ‘midnight appointment”. No less than Fr. Bernas cautioned.

    ALAM MO namang ang SALN ay sinumpaang dokumento kaya’t dapat ay wasto, tapat, sapat, at makatotohanan ang paglalahad nito.

    ALAM MO namang pag ginamit mo ang Basa-Guidote Enterprises, Inc. sa iyong depensa ay malalahad kung paano ito nabili ng iyong anak sa ‘irregular’ na pamamaraan.

    ALAM MO namang highly intelligent witness si Ombudsman Morales, ay bakit mo ipinatawag bilang defense witness.

    ALAM MO namang maraming lawyers ang nagpakadalubhasa sa Constitution, Corporation Law, Bank Secrecy Law, Anti-Money Laundering Law, Ombudsman Law, at iba pang law, bukod kay Miriam at Atty Cuevas.

    ALAM MO namang walang lihim na di nabubunyag sa takdang panahon.

    ALAM MO namang public office is a public trust, kaya dapat ay walang pagdududa sa sinumang nakaupong opisyal, lalo na ang Chief Justice ng Supreme Court.

    ALAM MO namang pag-upo mo sa witness stand ay maaari ka nang matanong ng mga Senador, kahit na sa mga bagay na wala sa impeachment complaint.

    ALAM MO rin kayang beyond technicalities, alam na nang marami ang katotohanan, subalit naghihintay lamang ng iyong sasabihin.

    YES, CJ, “REMEMBER THE ALAMO”. Alam na alam mo ang pinapasukan mo.

    • 436.1
      amante_rador says:

      @chavvydada,
      alamo ba? alam ni corona na mailulusot nya ang kaso nya. gaya nang mga palusot nila nung panahon nila ni gma. hanggang ngayon ay iyon ang paniwala nya…

    • 436.2
      Rene-Ipil says:

      Chavydada @436

      At the Alamo, the last man standing was the legendary Davy Crocket , an excellent shooter and a Texas Congressman. While he was about to be executed by General Sta Ana, he was asked to say his last statement. Davy Crocket told the general to surrender, lay down their arms and go back to Mexico. He also warned the Mexicans that he was a loud screamer. That was when the Mexicans riddled him with bullets. In the end, General Sta Ana surrendered Texas to General Houston.

      At the senate, Corona will be the lone man at the witness stand. He will make a statement first before testifying. He will ask the senators to surrender their power to try him or else he will scream loud and squeal all the names of the senators and their business partners or protégées who deposited the dollars indicated in the AMLC report to Ombudsman.

      Will the senate convict and execute Corona or surrender and capitulate to his demand for acquittal?

    • 436.3
      Springwoodman says:

      Therefore he cannot be forgiven for he knows what he is doing.

  9. 435
    Sam says:

    Question

    Defense lawyer Rico Quicho said the supposed records of Corona’s dollar accounts as bared by Ombudsman Conchita Morales have not been accepted yet as evidence by the impeachment court.
    ————————-
    Since Ombudsman Conchita Morales is defense’s witness, should her testimony and documents presented be formally offered to be considered “accepted”?

    • 435.1
      baycas says:

      Despite Cuevas’ difficulty of ascertaining Carpio-Morales as hostile witness, Presiding Officer Enrile LIBERALLY ruled that she be declared “hostile” witness in order NOT to belabor the issue. (She actually didn’t pass as such if Cuevas’ reasoning is to be considered.)

      The prosecution will offer the Ombudsman’s revelations inasmuch as her testimony will strengthen the case of the accusers, the Filipino people, as represented by the 188+ Congressmen.

    • 435.2
      Leona says:

      After the Defense rest their case, the prosecution having marked the documents presented during Defense’s in-chief and the testimony of defense witnesses, will of course be offered by prosecution as “additional evidence” or Exhibits for the Prosecution. Mr. Rico Quicho’s statement is correct, “not accepted yet” but it will be later on. So, there is nothing to be apprehensive about. He is the one apprehensive about it because it is going to be accepted as evidence by the impeachment court.

    • 435.3
      Rene-Ipil says:

      Sam@435

      Testimonies are offered and admitted as evidence during their presentation unless ruled as inadmissible or excluded by the rules and our laws. For example: hearsay evidence and products of illegal search.

      • 435.3.1
        Rene-Ipil says:

        Documentary exhibits are formally offered as evidence after completion of the testimonies in chief or in rebuttal, if any.

  10. 434
    Aussiebeck says:

    http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/05/20/12/luisita-farmers-give-all-out-support-cj

    Oh my GOD! Pati ba naman Luisita Farmers nagpa-uto at nag-pagamit na rin kay THIEF JUSTICE CORONA!!!

  11. 433
    johnny Lin says:

    Reasons Corona lawyers did not subpoena bank officials to testify and Corona will instead.

    The mock trials Defense had been conducting for the past 3 days resulted to the following:

    1. Corona will admit to bank accounts provided by PSB but not to all tose reported by Morales claiming as either one original account ending to multiple accounts after repeated reinvestment. Figures coming as deposit from unknown source were not his, could be bank errors. Claiming some to be entrusted accounts from family members or friends might open more questions.

    2. Many accounts revealed by Morales were fictitious and questionable like those withdrawals and deposits amounting to less tha $10,000 that are not covered by AMLA reporting so these reportsdid not comefrom AMLA but definitely fictionalized by Morales and she obviously violated RA 6426 confidentiality.

    3. By not calling bank officials to testify they would be preserving SC TRO on FCD and if Prosecution will call them on rebuttal, they would manifest the TRO ruling. Reversal of Senate on their vote on SC TRO to subpoena bank officials on FCD willresult to confrontation between Senate and SC.

    4. Corona will not sign a waiver on his FCD. He will confront the Senators to revote on their acceptance of SC TRO confronting the issue thereby forcing the Impeachment Court on a collision course with SC decision on Constitutional grounds.

    5.Corona will ask the court for him to allow reading a prepared speech before the trial. The draft of this speech corrected many times has been finalized dealing mainly on attacks on Aquino and conspiracy to persecute Corona. His lawyers will insist that it is the right of the Respondent to make such opening statement from a question from his lawyer. How the rest of the Senators will respond is still a gamble but they have gathered the consent of 5-7 senators to this cause already. THIS IS A TEST ON THE JUDGMENT OF ENRILE AS PRESIDING OFFICER

    6. Lawyers will manifest the testimony of Morales was uncorroborated evidence and should not be accepted despite her being their hostile witness because the source of the documents was not certified.

    • 433.1
      Kabalyero01 says:

      @JL

      appreciate the way you discern issues of concern and sharing with us your wisdom on how best we can rationally keep abreast of the day to day development on R Corona’s case – with your indulgence sir if you can comment on below analysis translated into laymans term since we are not so familiar with the banking and financial lingo. thanks
      ————————————–
      Comments from Mr. ABC, a finance-oriented professional:

      “What they should have done is to ‘net out’ the deposits and the withdrawals, rather than add them all up,” said the banker, who heads a commercial bank.

      “Netting out” is financial industry jargon for determining the difference between two values, usually the result of a purchase vis-a-vis a sale, or a deposit vis-a-vis a withdrawal.

      COA Commissioner Heidi Mendoza knew what was a most crucial revelation that can be extracted from the 17-page AMLC report testified to by Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales–and that was what the quoted BANKER supposedly suggested: the net result of dollar deposits vs. dollar withdrawals over the period covered by the report–April 2003 to early 2012. Thus, the amounts (total dollar deposits vs. total dollar withdrawals) that should be “netted” out were what she precisely stated as her opening statement when she was allowed to briefly take over from the Ombudsman.

      According to Commissioner Heidi Mendoza, the total deposit/inflow was $28.7 MILLION while the total withdrawal/outflow was $30.7 MILLION (Cathy Yamsuan and Christian Esguerra, “CJ keeping $12M in 5 banks–Ombudsman,” Philippine Daily Inquirer, May 15, 2012, page A6), or an excess of withdrawals–or NET OUTFLOW–in the amount of $2.0 MILLION, which could have come from the balance of CJ Corona’s dollar accounts as of April 2003, the beginning of the AMLC reporting period. This means that there was a beginning balance of at least $2.0 MILLION in CJ Corona’s dollar accounts that was not shown in the AMLC report of CJ Corona’s dollar transactions–not balances.

      Translated to PESOS, CJ Corona’s $2.0 MILLION beginning dollar-account balance as of April 2003 was at least P86 MILLION, which cannot be fully explained by the P34.7 MILLION sales proceeds of the Basa-guidote property sold in 2001. It was not shown in CJ Corona’s SALNs. It was also way above the P50 million threshold for the crime of plunder.

      Further, the alleged 82 accounts might have been opened and used during the AMLC reporting period (spanning roughly nine years), but 78 accounts of which were eventually closed, thereby leaving only four dollar accounts opened at present.
      ———————

      Bankers find columnist’s explanation of Corona dollar accounts ‘plausible’

      By Daxim L. Lucas
      Philippine Daily Inquirer
      12:45 am | Friday, May 18th, 2012

      Bankers Thursday described as “plausible” the explanation posited by Inquirer columnist Rigoberto Tiglao who defended Chief Justice Renato Corona from allegations of having amassed some $12 million in as many as 82 bank accounts.

      The bankers—speaking to the Inquirer on condition that they don’t be identified because of the political nature of the topic—uniformly said that an estimate of the Supreme Court chief’s bank account balances made by adding up all transaction values over time would be incorrect.

      More importantly, the columnist’s explanation for Corona’s bank transactions may be a preview of the line of defense that the Chief Justice may put forward when he testifies before the Senate impeachment court on Tuesday, the bankers said.

      “What they should have done is to ‘net out’ the deposits and the withdrawals, rather than add them all up,” said the banker, who heads a commercial bank.

      “Netting out” is financial industry jargon for determining the difference between two values, usually the result of a purchase vis-a-vis a sale, or a deposit vis-a-vis a withdrawal.

      Transactions not balances

      Though he could not say so conclusively, the banker said it would be possible for each transaction to represent the same funds moving into and out of an account multiple times. One example, he said, is for the funds to be withdrawn by the account holder to be used to fund an investment in bonds, then returned to the account after it matures, having earned interest.

      Another bank president who spoke to the Inquirer agreed that the contents of the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) report presented by Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales recently represented “transactions” that “do not necessarily represent balances.”

      “I don’t know how they came up with the balances, but if they just summed up the transactions, then it wouldn’t be accurate,” he added.

      One ranking bank official also stressed that, in banking parlance, the term “account balance” is not synonymous with “transaction balance,” the latter having been used by the Ombudsman to describe the amounts allegedly belonging to Corona.

      Where’s money from?

      When viewed in this context, the banker said the contents of the bank accounts in question may turn out to be significantly lower than the $12 million initially suggested by the Ombudsman.

      “Maybe the question should be where those funds came from, regardless of how much they were,” he said.

      Thursday, the Inquirer spoke to an official of the AMLC, the agency that prepared the report on Corona’s transactions.

      To recall, the law allows the AMLC, traditionally with the benefit of a court order, to look into suspicious bank “transactions”—meaning the movement of funds into and out of accounts—but not the account balances themselves.

      This fine but key distinction may be one reason for the confusion as to exactly how much Corona has in his bank accounts.

      The AMLC official, on condition of anonymity, described Tiglao’s column published Thursday as being “on the correct track.”

      • 433.1.1
        johnny Lin says:

        Importante sa accounts bank numbered account o kahit anong account yung beginnjng balance lalo na kung malaki ang beginning deposit. Pag malaki tatlo lamang ang nakakaalam, yung depositor, ang bangko at ang AMLA dahil nareport yun.

        Hindi ako accountant pero bigyan natin ng comparison sa mga high rollers ng casino sa Vegas Pero pareho dinang suma kasi kapag more than $10000.00 ang transaction reportable din sa AMLA yun ng mga casino.

        Sa Casino ang high roller meron siyang account number din kahit na cash ang dala niyang pera o “marker” and gamit niya. Marker ay parang beinning loan account ng gambler nagumpisa na siyang magsugal.

        Kunwari meron high roller nagpapalit ng $10000 cash sa table #1. Nilista kaagad yun ng casino pit. Kapag nanalo siya ng $5000 pinalit iya ang pera niya na $15,000 at bumalik sa ibang table para maglaro ulit at nagpapalit ng $10,000 ulit? Bagong lista sa table #2 yun na $10,000 pero sa master list ng casino account meron na siya 15,000. Kung tumayo siya at meron pa rin 10,000 pinacash niya ulit yung chips niya at pumunta sa table #3 nagpalit na naman ng $10,000 alam ng master account 15,000 pa rin ang pera niya. Pagtapos tumayo siya nanalo ng 5000 ulit at pinalit 15,000 alam ng master account meron siyang 20,000 yung original niyang 10,000 at dalawang panalo ng 5,000 so total 20,000.

        Pero tingnan mo ang suma. Tatlo ang table nagpalit o nagdeposit ng 10,000 each so 30,000 ang pinalit na cash pero sa tatlong times pagtayo o nagwithdraw, ang total niya $40,000. Netting out nito ay $10,000 at yung original niya na $10,000 so tama yung master account $20,000 ang net perang chips sa bulsa ng high roller.

        Ngayun yung chip niya ng $20000 hindi niya pinapalit at pumunta sa table #4 at nagpapalit ng bagong cash na $5000, nakalista sa master account yun na meron siyang originl chips na 20,000 at bagong cash account na $5,000. Tumayo siya natalo ng 2000 at inuwi 3000 So ang total na chips na pera niya ay. 23,000. Hindi niya pinacash ang chips at kinabukasan nagpalit siya ng cash money totalling 20,00 at nanalo ng 15,000 so panibagong account 2nd day account niya meron siyang 35,000 at alam nila meron na siyang total money on hand at least 60,000 after 2days.
        Ganyan din sa bangko na mayroon bagong deposit account ginawa si Corona na galing kunwari sa ibang bangko. Madaling itrace sa bangko dahil may paper documents.Madaling itrace yung mga accounts kahit ilan pang accounts pinagbabaligtad ni Corona.

        Dahil nnirereport sa AMLA ang casino transaction more than $10,000 tatlo din ang nakakaalam sa transaction, gambler o depositor, casino master account o bank master account at AMLA.

        Parehong pareho, ang bangko at casino tracking, di ba? Kaya yung withdrawal at deposit ginawa frequently ni Corona akala niya hindi matrace nagkamali siya. Kung sa casino na tra track nila na walang paper documents e di lalo na sa bangko madaling itrace dahil may paper trail documents.

        Noon pa sinabi ko na yung “Kristo” lang sa sabong kayang saluksukin ang mga pera ni Corona, lalo na yung batikang auditor kagaya ng galing sa Commission on Audit. Kaya yung forensic accountant ni Corona ayaw magtestigo dahil magmumukha siyang moron sa pagexplain na walang katotohanan at malulusutan.

    • 433.2
      chit navarro says:

      iN 2004, EXCHANGE RATE IS $56.314 TO a USD
      hence, $9,340.00 deposited on Nove. 5 is equivalent to P525,972.80.

    • 433.3
      baycas says:

      Corona will ask the court for him to allow reading a prepared speech before the trial. The draft of this speech corrected many times has been finalized dealing mainly on attacks on Aquino and conspiracy to persecute Corona. His lawyers will insist that it is the right of the Respondent to make such opening statement from a question from his lawyer. How the rest of the Senators will respond is still a gamble but they have gathered the consent of 5-7 senators to this cause already. THIS IS A TEST ON THE JUDGMENT OF ENRILE AS PRESIDING OFFICER

      LIBERALITY will supervene…no question about it. He must be allowed…

      • 433.3.1
        baycas says:

        I remember that former SolGen Frank Chavez said in December, I believe, that impeachment is all about propaganda on either side.

        “Hearts and minds” of ALL Filipinos are involved here. Impeachment cases is POLITICAL.

        He who WINS the hearts and minds of the people, as represented by Senate now, WINS.

        At best, his prepared speech is an APPEAL TO EMOTION.

        However, his appeal to emotion does not make HIDDEN WEALTH a regular part of his official function as Chief Justice…

        Appeal to emotion, as experts say, is one of the logical fallacies.

        At best…for the prosecution, as well as The Filipino People as accusers…

        His prepared speech is a FALLACY that will eventually merit a conviction!

      • 433.3.2
        raissa says:

        Of course.

    • 433.4
      Leona says:

      To read a prepared speech as part of his testimony after a question is asked of him so as to read that speech is not authorized under the Rules of Evidence and Procedure because we follow the ENGLISH RULE that answers of a witness must be upon questions propounded by counsel for every answer. The AMERICAN RULE allows a witness to “tell a story” without question and answer method.

      So, if that is how the defense will present the CJ, the Senate presiding officer should not allow that even as an exception under no ground(s) at all! The CJ must give answer only after every question and not to read any prepared speech or “tell a long story.” Why is it not allowed. Because by reading a prepared speech or telling a story, many “inadmissible items” as evidence cannot be “Objected to” by the other party for being immaterial, irrelevant, impertinent, hearsay atbpa under the rules on evidence. It is unfair to the other side. The prosecution never adopted such method even with Ombudsman Morales or any of their witnesses during their evidence in-chief.

      His prepared speech if any, should be read at the balcony of the SC building when he gets back from the Senate! There, nobody will object to his reading it. But not at the Senate during his testimony.

      Again, if that is the “plan” of the Defense to allow the CJ to read a speech, what does it show? Guess…they want to put into record for evidentiary purposes or whatever, anything inadmissible without the prosecution being able to make objections. Their suspicion is that the defense of the CJ is altogether without any merits, it is weak and the odds as against whatever the prosecution has presented is 95% vs 5% against the CJ.

      Defense is showing this because of that situation. A fear they have now. A real fear at that.

      They will try anything desperate. Hon. Enrile should throw the book at them! if they ask for any reading of a speech.

      Hon. Enrile has never been a judge before but this time since he is and as presiding officer, he should know the reasons why allowing a witness and respondent to read a speech rather than give answer to every question is and has never been allowed in the courts or anywhere except when appearing for “confirmation” before a legislative body like Commission on Appointments, etc., as an appointee for a position in the gov’t.

      Never in court proceedings or Impeachment court. No. The CJ should be denied that chance. Just answer the question if he wants to testify. No reading of a speech!

  12. 432
    rafael l. vidal says:

    TIME IS RUNNING OUT

    Judgment day is just a week or two and the corona camp is literally moving heaven and earth to ensure his acquittal.

    It was reported that the INC has started a high-powered lobby in the senate while the thief’s media group composed of tatad/maceda/tiglao/magno/jurado,etc is pretty busy crafting their lantern of lies.

    PNoy has already started his DAANG MATUWID drive and will not culminate even if the thief is acquitted, which is very likely as of this moment.

    However, our group has still ample time to drive home our point to the senator-judges, especially those on the UNA senatorial ticket – A VOTE FOR ACQUITTAL/ABSTENTION IS A POLITICAL SUICIDE. Let us remind them always what happened to those senators who voted not to open the 2nd envelope during Erap’s impeachment trial in 2001, as mentioned by a fellow commenter yesterday.

    The infamy list I made (# 379), was culled from the comments of our fellow CPMERS whenever the subject of senator-judges’ voting inclination came out in this Blog during the long impeachment trial.

    The list may always be modified considering that Lapid is a creation of GMA and he is politically beholden to her, while Allan Cayetano is an enigma – he being fiercely anti-corruption and a very principled man.

    The others are “givens” unless they see the light at the end of the tunnel.

    CPMERS – CONTINUE THE FIRE BURNING, FOREVER

    • 432.1
      Rene-Ipil says:

      Rafael@426

      Let us employ block voting in the coming election/s. Zero vote for a political party which includes a senator who abstained or voted for acquittal of Corona or such senator’s son, relative, protege, or friend.

    • 432.2
      Leona says:

      All fears of lobbying will not “kindle” yet any fires for the CJ until he has testified! If at all he will.

      Many things can happen when he testifies. He may be denied to “read his prepared speech” by Hon. Enrile. That will be very embarrassing!

      Next, he may not be able to give good answers even on his direct examination. Worst on the cross-examination stage. How he will fair at all during his testimony is now in his hands. He has never been a good witness on the witness stand. Tuesday will prove how it will be for him. If and when he starts showing to “shift away” from answering directly the questions asked, he will start fidgetting, perspiring and be making many “abnormal” body English, a sign of not telling the truth or what?

      So, Tuesday is his D Day. He knows “the beaches” are well entrenched and well defended. Where will he attempt to land? He doesn’t know that. With the best battery of lawyers he has he cannot claim his case was railroaded. But if he is really innocent even with just a country lawyer he will be exonerated and proven innocent of the charges.

      There is no DNA testing here to prove he is innocent. Only his SALNs documents have been the source of his problem. The case against him is what we call airtight! Or he is in a vise grip. A lock has been put on him. Only the truth is the key to unlock it.

      There is no other way. May God have mercy on him!

  13. 431
    johnny Lin says:

    Answer to #399.6

    Public officials have the ethical responsibility, truthfulness, morality of reporting ASSETS without divulging where they are stashed, meaning despite listing the dollar oasset in equivalent pesos the confidentiality of the FCD accounts remained confidential.

    Those reported large ASSETS become a problem when the amount is massive requiring investigation on their source. Therefore, NON DISCLOSURE is hiding unexplained wealth with the intention to avoid further investigation. Simple, which Corona was very much aware based alone on his Marcos Ponencia.

    If the ASSETS are explainable in terms of source, the public employee does not have to be worried, ethically and morally.

    The mere fact an ASSET is not revealed, the employee is presumed to be hiding wealth, how small or big, unless it is an inadvertent error which according to law could be corrected with the year the SALN was filed. Leaving it unreported the following year or many years is no longer considered an error but a pattern of NON DISCLOSURE. This is where Corona committed his impeachable offense.

    RAs 6426 and 6713 are not in conflict with each other, nor one takes precedence over the other. For a Filipino public official, rules in reporting SALN is crystal clear muddled only by corrupt people hiding behind RA 6426 in which Corona is GUILTY. His impending testimony will dwell only on:
    1. how to further meddle the issue by refusing to give waiver on investigating his FCD accounts and keep pounding the confidentiality of RA 6426 including denying some accounts reported by AMLA.
    2. resorting to technicalities by saying for example that he had one original account but by repeated withdrawal and reinvestment of the same original money, it was given multiple account numbers by the bank so Morales was wrong. Ingenous but understandable only to morons like Corona lawyers and followers but never to well informed CPMers and Netizens.
    3. Demonizing Pres Aquino, Omb. Morales and justice Carpio as conspirators against him, as well as keeping Hacienda Luisita issue alive and appealing to farmers that he is their protector from oppression by the rich like the Cojuangcos.
    4. Preaching that his fight is about Court Independence but, actually, it is a warning to court employees that with his departure their corrupt activities will be curtailed so if they want to continue earning extra money thru illegal means, court employees must side with him. It is his CALL TO CONTINUE THEIR CORRUPTION.

    Very simple way to be ethically and morally right to follow by public officials which Corona intentionally violated because immorality is ingrained in his body and soul, shared by his wife and genetically inherited by their children. Publicly receiving holy communion by entire family while stolen BGE money is still kept by them is beyond reprehensible. Only devils possess such character.

    Mag-asawang Corona at mga anak, Ginagamit ang ngalan ng Diyos habang nakatampisaw at nakalubog sa kasalanan ng pagnanakaw.

    Walang budhi mga Corona, he he he.

  14. 430
    Den says:

    Two days before embattled Renato Corona takes the witness stand in defence of himself, there is a wealth of information on Sunday’s newspapers. For people who are keenly following developments in this catalytic episode in our history as a nation, it is a chance to actively participate in building a nation of informed, conscientious and discerning citizens. The Internet has also provided a vast universe of information that can be accessed at lightning speed, allowing even the most ordinary citizen to cross-reference facts and other data needed to make an intelligent assessment on their own.

    It is under the above premises that I offer to my fellow CPM’ers my humble views on how the Tuesday drama will unfold.

    1. Corona or his lawyers will attempt to show that the 82 accounts are normal in the course of doing investment transactions with banks.

    They may succeed in doing this, as Tiglao had shown in his column in PDI. Those familiar with banking practices will also agree with this position. They will attempt to whittle down the account to a few “mother accounts” and the rest shall be declared as either settlement accounts (transit accounts where proceeds from a closed investment account are deposited prior to being withdrawn again for placement to a new investment account) or investment accounts (unique accounts that are created for purposes of investing a depositor’s fund in an interest-bearing instrument). In so doing, they will attempt to prove that Corona’s dollar fund does not approximate the $10 – $12 million alleged by the Ombudsman.

    As Tiglao also insinuated in his column, Corona will attempt to establish that the actual amount of $700,000++ that he keeps in his accounts is more or less equal to the P34 million belonging to BGEI. This will justify the source of those dollar funds. However, in attempting to deconstruct the arguments put forward by the Ombudsman, Corona will implicitly acknowledge the existence of the dollar accounts. Furthermore, if it is established that the dollar deposit that he is acknowledging ($700K) co-existed with the peso account for the P34 million of BGEI, it will demolish his justification for the sources of the dollar accounts.

    Given the above, the only way to establish the real value of the dollar funds is for him to act on his earlier promise of opening his dollar accounts “in due time”. This time around, this promise would have to extend beyond the accounts kept in PSBank, as the AMLC report showed substantial dollar movements in other banks as well. A blanket waiver no less should be insisted by the prosecution.

    2. Corona will invoke the confidentiality clause of the Foreign Currency Deposit Act to justify either or both his refusal to open his dollar accounts for scrutiny and/or the need to declare his dollar accounts in his SALN.

    In a paper titled “Bank Secrecy Law: A Historical and Economic Analysis”, Francis David Ong Lim traces the progeny of bank secrecy laws (Republic Act 1405) and practices in the Philippines and how out-dated laws can create more problems than solutions based on historical and economic contexts. Republic Act 6426 or more commonly known as the “Foreign Currency Deposit Act” is actually a Presidential Decree issued by then President Ferdinand Marcos on April 4, 1974. As in RA 1405, this was issued in response to the prevailing economic, security and social issues at that time.

    It must be noted, however, that subsequent developments both in local and global contexts necessitated updates in the aforementioned laws. The global financial crisis and the rise of terrorism provided the impetus for a concerted effort among nations to curb abuses on financial systems. Thus, the Philippines passed RA 9160, later on amended by RA 9194, also commonly known as the “Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2001”. This law mandates banks and other financial and quasi-financial institutions to report to the AMLC any and all transactions that fall under prescribed criteria (“covered” transactions) of suspicious transactions.

    The same law explicitly defines as part of covered transactions those that are pertinent to RA 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) and RA 7080 (Plunder). On the other hand, RA 6770 (Ombudsman Act), and even the Philippine Constitution of 1987, provides the Ombudsman the power to enlist the help of government agencies and institutions to aid its investigations. This is the basis for the AMLC to declare that the request for the transaction records, and its subsequent release to the Ombudsman, was done within the legal framework. Note as well that all these laws include a repealing provision that automatically supersedes any and all contrary provisions of earlier laws. Thus, any contradicting provisions of both the Bank Secrecy Law and the FDCA are deemed repealed by provisions in the AMLA, RA 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees), Ombudsman Act and related laws on illegal wealth and other corrupt practices.

    In Philippine National Bank versus Gancayco, the Supreme Court wrote in reference to the conflicting provisions on confidentiality of bank deposits in the Bank Secrecy Law and the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, “Indeed, it is said that if the new law is inconsistent with or repugnant to the old law, the presumption against the intent to repeal by implication is overthrown because of the inconsistency or repugnancy reveals an intent to repeal the existing law.”

    3. In the absence of any evidence denying the legality, authenticity and accuracy of the AMLC report submitted to the Ombudsman, and if the Senate will take the view of Enrile that dollar accounts must be declared in the SALN, Corona will have no other choice but to stonewall and invoke his right against self-incrimination.

    This will be a no-win situation for Corona. If he cannot demolish the credibility of the AMLC report, it will clearly establish that he had actively acquired and invested on dollar funds that are not proportional to his lawful income. If assuming that he admits to those accounts, albeit insisting on a much lesser value than what is alleged, and points to BGEI as the source of the money, he will open an even bigger can of worms. It will open an opportunity for the prosecution to dig into the circumstances of how the BGEI money found its way into his peso and dollar accounts when it is supposed to be held in trust by Cristina Corona, or by Carla Corona-Castillo if she is indeed the new majority owner of BGEI. It will be very interesting to know how that money changed custody from BGEI to Cristina, then possibly to Carla and ultimately to Renato.

    Far more damaging than the failure to declare truthfully his assets and liabilities in his SALN, Corona will be exposed as a man of dubious character and integrity. He will be laid bare as a High Magistrate who hands down decisions with hands that have been dirtied by his own unscrupulous actions. Far from painting himself as a devoted family man protecting his wife and children, the BGEI saga and the money trail on his properties and bank accounts will show an entire family conniving and conspiring to circumvent laws either to avoid paying correct taxes or to hide unexplained wealth.

    On the witness stand, he will stand before the nation:

    … as a man who had no qualms about enjoying the perks of public office (“isang tawag lang…”);

    … as a man who is brazen enough to exert undue pressure on judges and justices handling cases filed by his court-hopping wife (he is seen in courts where cases involving his wife were heard even if he was already an associate justice in the SC);

    … as a man whose naked ambition culminated in his coveting and ultimately accepting the position of Chief Justice even if it could very well result in a constitutional crisis:

    … as a man who would cut short his overseas vacation in order to participate in deliberations involving the former official from whom he owes his midnight appointment and deliberately changing an en banc decision to favor his own view (Midas Marquez was also accused of lying when he claimed that GMA had complied with the conditions of the TRO);

    … as a man who cannot be decent enough to go on official leave so as to spare the Judiciary from any partisan activity while his impeachment trial is on-going, thus endangering the integrity of the entire judicial system.

    Renato Corona is a farce, an aberration brought about by a culture of impunity in our government and society. He will stand before the Senate sitting as Impeachment Court representing the sovereign will of the people. A vote of acquittal or abstention is a vote for Impunity. A vote for conviction is to serve notice that there is hope for this country – that yes, a clean government is possible.

    • 430.1
      Rene-Ipil says:

      Den@430

      This is in regard to the $700K mentioned by Tiglao purportedly corresponding to the 34M pesos of BGEI. In addition to the 37M pesos withdrawn from and redeposited by Corona on December 12, 2011 with PSBANK, there is another amount of 26M coming from the sale of la vista and Ayala heights lots in QC in 2010. Corona falsely declared in his 2010 SALN that he used said 26M pesos to buy the Bonifacio and Bellagio condos in 2010. But the said condos had been fully paid already in 2005 and 2009, respectively. So the 26M pesos was unspent in 2010 and should have been declared as cash in Corona’s 2010 SALN.

    • 430.2
      keanleogo says:

      @Den,

      I concur.
      A vote of acquittal or abstention is a vote for impunity in this Corona impeachment trial.

    • 430.3

      Coronarroyo is not only “a farce, an aberration”; he is an abomination, nay, an obscenity.

  15. 429
    rafael l. vidal says:

    @mel 424

    The OMB is an independent gov’t entity created by Sec. 5, Art. X1, of the 1987 Constitution, which states, in full, “There is hereby the independent office of the Ombudsman composed of the Ombudsman to be known as Tanodbayan, one overall deputy and at least one deputy each for Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao.”

    The OMB enjoys fiscal autonomy and its annual appropriations shall be automatically and regularly released (Sec. 14)

    • 429.1
      Mel says:

      @rafael

      Thanks for the reply.

      As per your input on the independence of the OMB, point well taken.

      In reference (see #424) to my open clarification before the CPMs, the first page of the document (see comment #420 of @keanleogo’s link to rappler’s) written in the Agency to the Supreme Court Taft Ave., Manila.

      Since the OMB, as you narrated, is an independent body – what is the relevance of stating the Agency for the Supreme Court with address at Taft ave. Manila in that first docu ‘Memorandum’ Page. (btw, the Phils’. Supreme Court is at Padre Faura Street and Taft Avenue in Manila).

      On that same docu page, the ‘Special Panel of Investigators’ belong to the OMB – right?)

      For some reason, Agency Supreme Court shouldn’t have been noted or written if the OMB or its ‘Special Panel of Investigators’ doesn’t have to furnish or to account (e.g. submit CC) it’s report to the SC. It just raises a question of relevance to the Special Panel of Investigators’ report FOR the OMB.

  16. 428
    madflip says:

    1,000+ comments, I’m not too sure if somebody has already mentioned this here but Mr. Macasaet’s column in Malaya says that in 2004, the thief justice bragged to 2 fellow SC jurists that he was holding money for then-president GMA. Here’s the link:

    http://www.malaya.com.ph/index.php/opinion/3750-whose-dollars-are-those

  17. 427
    Mel says:

    Hi Raïssa

    Are you going to write an article about this document purportedly an Investigation Report by a ‘Special Panel of Investigators’ under the OMB?

    This material was in a Rappler link, supplied by commenter @keanleogo (#420)

    I. One item under the ‘Investigative Activities’ table column head:
    - AMLC = AMLC requires additional requirements.

    II. One item under the ‘Matters investigated’

    26. In relation to the Banck Accounts of Subject Corona, this Office sought the assistance of the Anti-Money Laudnering Council (AMLC). Per reply-letter dated 07 March 2012 and per subsequent discussion with the AMLC officials, they require further information and supporting documents showing the commission of any underlying unlawful activity by Subject Corona to warrant the filing of an application for bank inquiry with the Regional Trial Court pursuant to Section 11 of RA9160 (Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2001).

    ——–

    The world knows by now that the OMB have already produced her department’s investigative report using the AMLC’s reports in reference to R Corona’s FCDs. With the help of the COA, they did produce an analysis which were presented to the Senate Impeachment last week.

    Is OMB’s senate impeachment report thesame as the rappler’s docus?

    Yet in the two items I wrote as above, taken from the rappler links ‘reports’, they seem to be contradictory.

    nakuryente kaya ang sambayanang Pilipino dito, o ang rappler about this documents.
    or a false or fake investigations’ report released by parties favoring the defense of R Corona?

    IF THE AMLC, as one item to begin with, did cooperate. Why wasn’t it rated as ‘Complied’ in the rappler supplied documents – Special Panel of Investigators report for the OMB.

    BTW, in the written Memo on the main page, is the OMB under the Supreme Court?

    CPMers, anyone?

    • 427.1
      Rene-Ipil says:

      Mel@424

      The information in the documents personally handed by ALMC Executive Director Vicente Aquino to OMB. Morales was given in a “need to know basis”. The panel of investigators cannot access it from ALMC. It is only for the eyes of OMB. Morales who has the option to dispose of such info. In this case it was OMB. Morales who informed her subordinates about the ALMC info.

      Please see my post @298 for more.

      • 427.1.1
        Mel says:

        @Rene

        You wrote in your comment #298;

        In this case, the AMLC report is an official report made in the performance of the AMLC’s duty under law, specifically Republic Act No. 9160, as amended by Republic Act No. 9194 (Anti-Money Laundering Act). In fact, the Ombudsman even testified that the same was given to her personally by AMLC Executive Director Vicente Aquino.

        Based on what you quoted (Reference news link? please), this docu (see comment #420 of @keanleogo’s link to rappler’s) is only the ‘Special Panel of Investigators” report not including the AMLC official’s 17-page report which it had furnished ‘directly’ to the Ombudsman.

        That is more plausible then. I missed your Comment @ #298.

        Hence, the rappler’s 20 page docu is part and parcel of the OMB’s materials. In that document – III Investigative Activities, Table 1. The only reference to AMLC is at Page 4 of 20.

        DOCUMENT REQUIRED = Bank Records

        OFFICE/DEPT = Anti-Money Laudnering Council

        STATUS = AMLC requires additional requirements

        In the ‘Special Panel of Investigators’ report, the AMLC didn’t supply the group info as per their request.

        Thanks. @Rene

    • 427.2
      baycas says:

      @Mel,

      On your two points:

      As stated in your comment above and located on Page 4/20 and Page 13/20 in the rappler Scribd documents…

      I DON’T SEE ANYTHING WRONG THERE.

      AMLC didn’t further investigate as the transaction records were already with them when the OMB requested for assistance. Covered institutions (banks) MUST submit transactions above the threshold for the transactions to remain SECRET with the banks.

      Going deeper, would mean the necessity for AMLC to file for a court order to sift through SECRET bank records.

      —–

      baycas says:
      May 16, 2012 at 8:42 am

      Banks report transactions exceeding threshold value to AMLC by default.

      AMLC logs all reports. Any anomalous or suspicious accounts merit AMLC investigation for possible money laundering. No such investigation occurred, I believe (I wonder why?).

      Here comes OMB for the case build-up…

      OMB sought assistance from AMLC because complaints of unexplained/Ill-gotten wealth were lodged to OMB.

      AMLC responded with the gathered list of transactions.

      Note that communications were confidential until the Ombudsman testified in the Senate Impeachment Court [sic].

      Note that presumption of regularity exists.

      Note that all testimonies are under oath.

      Note that, as expected, Cuevas tried to impugn malice on the part of OMB. He tried to impeach the spotless 40 years of service of the Ombudsman.

      • 427.2.1
        Mel says:

        @baycas

        Thanks for the reply.

        Medyo na-claro na (ng kaunti).

        @Rene’s reply (see #424.1) provided a clearer picture why the ‘Special Panel of Investigators’ didn’t receive the AMLC documents at their request (Note. III Investigative Activities, Table 1. Page 4 of 20.).

        THE AMLC provided a report directly to the OMB CCM.

        The OMB used the AMLC’s official report. I guess, the powerpoint of ‘lantern’ of lies/deceit illustrating R Coron’as web of FCDs were an analysis worked on with COA. Which was scratched Off later due to illegality – technically it was the COA official who spoke, and it was not OMB CCM.

        In effect, the OMB’s ‘Special Panel of Investigators’ on their request to AMLC was stated as ‘Bank Records’. Hence it points number 26 (Page 13 of 20). “In relation to the Banck Accounts of Subject Corona, this Office sought the assistance of the Anti-Money Laudnering Council (AMLC). Per reply-letter dated 07 March 2012 …”

        The AMLC can not comply without a court order. AT Item point 27 (Page 13 of 20) did state;

        27. However, based on information obtained by the Honorable Ombudsman, it appears that there are several dollar and peso bank transactions in the name of Subject Corona. The aggregate value…

        As a result, the AMLC used the automated, compliant reports from banks whereby client’s account with transactions for or over PHP500K are regularly reported to them.

        In the above quotation, there is a footnote reference 37. Annex A. But not available from rappler’s.

        Thanks.

    • 427.3
      Leona says:

      OMB = Office of Management and Budget? No. This is under the Executive Department. Kay PNoy opisina ito! Correct me if you are right.

      • 427.3.1
        Mel says:

        @Leona

        duon sa OMB #427. acronym used for Ombudsman.

        as for your query ‘OMB = Office of Management and Budget?’

        Sa pinas, it is -

        The Department of Budget and Management of the Republic of the Philippines (DBM) (Filipino: Kagawaran ng Pagbabadyet at Pamamahala) is an executive body under the Office of the President of the Philippines. It is responsible for the sound and efficient use of government resources for national development and also as an instrument for the meeting of national socio-economic and political development goals.

        The current Secretary of Budget and Management appointed by President Benigno Aquino III is Florencio Abad. The department has four Undersecretaries and four assistant secretaries.

  18. 426
    Bonifaciokatipunero says:

    Mga kababayan, mag noise barrage po kayo sa Tuesday sa labs ng senate… Let them hear our cry for good governance! Let the senate knows na Hindi po natutulog ang mga Pilipino! Let Corona knows na Dapat na syan MAHIY sa Sobrang kapal ng mukha Nya!
    Tama na ang pangloloko ng mga pulitikong yan! Tama na ang pagnanakaw! Linisin ang Judiciary, paalisin ang mga magnanakaw!

  19. 425
  20. 424
    Minda Nao says:

    A PRAYER TO GOD

    Dear Lord, as I got to sleep tonight my mind is filled with great concern on my beloved
    Philippines.

    Please Lord send your Holy Spirit to all those whom you want to use to
    change the Philippine society especially our President. Turn your attention O Lord to the Judiciary and the Senate. For too long, our country has been under the grip of corruption and persecution by the powers that be. Today we have the Judiciary seemingly detached from the suffering nation they serve. We have those in the Senate whose sole objective is personal gain and not public service. To the wicked in their ranks, weaken their hold on our country O Lord, confound them and scatter them to oblivion.

    Bless O Lord those who take the stand for what is just and for what is favorable in your sight. Bless especially O Lord the CPM group and the couple Raissa and Allan and their family, always send your protective angels on them.

    Thanks O Lord for giving us this rare chance for standing up and making known to everyone that the Filipinos deserve a better country. In Jesus name, amen.

  21. 423
    J.A. says:

    Hey gang… Haven’t heard from Raissa for a while now. Hope she is okay and just working on another pasabog?

  22. 422
  23. 421
    max says:

    My connection is getting spastic. I am re-sending my comments.
    @Leona # 388, kalakala

    AMLA HAUNTING GLORIA ARROYO, SAYS JOKER
    “When this (AMLA) was being discussed in 2001, we warned President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo: ‘This will haunt you.
    I am confused why would Joker warn Gloria? Was he aware of any irregular/illegal activities by Gloria that he warned her about AMLA? I’d like to hold on to Joker’s image of a decent people power man and would like to think that he will never be a party to any illegal or criminal acts.
    “But she ignored (our warnings). Look, she is now being prosecuted partly because and substantially because of the reports of the (Anti-Money Laundering Council against Chief Justice Renato Corona),” Arroyo said.
    I tried to follow the IC trial but I must be missing something. I don’t know how Joker was able to state above claim.
    *************************
    After the tragic 911 event, AMLA has been viewed as a tool to curb illegal financial transactions and control terroristic activities. AMLA is not an exclusive Philippine legislation but a global regulatory system that many countries adhere to as responsible global citizens – to make the world a little safer.

    If this PDI item is true, why would Joker choose GMA’s and other future leaders’ welfare to take precedence above all others.

    We have our own share of Abu Sayyaf, suspected Al Qaeda operations and other elements threatening the safety of our society. Drug trafficking is not undeniable as well. We have to ensure that their funding is cut off and not funnelled through our banking system.

    What alternative would have Joker advised GMA to ditch these AMLA measures. (I must give credit to GMA for not listening to Joker’s advice.) Besides, GMA would be truly ill-advised to think that she has the option not to cooperate with the rest of the world.

    North American, European and Asian countries have adopted AMLA. Can Joker please cite any ex-leader who was unjustifiably crushed because of AMLA. Bush is still out. Sotto’s fear of having a governor “durog” because of AMLA is unjustified. US Libertarians would not have allowed implementation of this AMLA if Joker’s and Tito’s thinking have valid points.

    Other countries’ banking systems and practices are more rigid in enforcing their AMLA measures. E.g., needs two pieces of good photo id’s before he can open an account. One known as Joseph cannot open an account as Pedro. Documentations have to be presented establishing the sources of funds when transmitting and receiving amounts in accordance with AMLA rules. If any, AMLA should have more teeth and more diligent in implementing its rules.

    I have also included the link re some info on AMLA outside the Philippine vista.

    http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/195955/amla-haunting-gloria-arroyo-says-joker-arroyo

    http://www.fintrac-canafe.gc.ca/publications/guide/Guide2/2-eng.asp#s2-1

    ***********
    Additional issues (Sotto) —
    “If the Ombudsman would write a letter and the AMLC acts on it, any governor or candidate for that matter would be crushed (“durog”) by information about his alleged bank accounts or any other allegation, especially before an election,” Sotto said.

    • 421.1
      Leona says:

      “Any governor xxx about his alleged bank accounts xxx” dugtong “that contains huge money deposit beyond his salary and ordinary means of living style!”… si Sen. Sotto always “incomplete” ang salita niya! He makes remarks that are “kulang kulang” parang may “sirang bigote” sa bibig! Does he remember his chief of staff, a PNP officer with P2M deposit in the bank? How did that guy get such money? What happened to the investigation of that? Fizzled out!

      Walang kuwenta ang sinasabi nito. “There is an announcement before you go.” Yan lang.

  24. 420
    keanleogo says:

    @ Raissa,

    This is the link for 20 pages of AMLC report to Ombudswoman from Rappler.com

    http://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/5626-copy-of-ombudsman-s-report-on-cj-corona

    • 420.1
      Mel says:

      correction.

      This link supplied does not refer to the ‘AMLC report to Ombudswoman’.

      WRONG.

      Rather, it is a panel of investigators’ report FOR the Ombudsman CCM in reference to 3 lodged complaints made on Feb 7, 01 Mar, 28 Mar, 2012.

      IT IS NOT THE AMLC report for the OMB. Its the other way around, the AMLC was to be given a copy of the panel of investigators’ report.

      LOL!

      • 420.1.1
        keanleogo says:

        @Mel,

        My mistake. You are right.
        Thanks for the correction.

        • 420.1.1.1
          Mel says:

          No worries @keanleogo.

          I have a lot of mistakes also in this blogsite

          But thanks for the link BTW..

    • 420.2
      Mel says:

      please refer to my comment #424.

      documents in the rappler link MAY NOT HAVE BEEN VERIFIED AS GENUINE by the rappler blogsite.

      i may be wrong.

      but read the complete 20 pages at your pleasure.

  25. 419
    max says:

    @Leona # 388
    AMLA HAUNTING GLORIA ARROYO, SAYS JOKER

    “When this (AMLA) was being discussed in 2001, we warned President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo: ‘This will haunt you.

    I am confused why would Joker warn Gloria? We need to know particularly what item was he particularly concerned about that will haunt Gloria.

    Was Joker aware of any irregular/illegal activities by Gloria that he warned her about AMLA? I hold on to Joker’s image of a decent people power man and would like to think that he will never be a party to any illegal or criminal acts.

    “But she ignored (our warnings). Look, she is now being prosecuted partly because and substantially because of the reports of the (Anti-Money Laundering Council against Chief Justice Renato Corona),” Arroyo said.

    I tried to follow the IC trial but I must be missing something. I don’t know how Joker was able to state above claim.

    *************************
    After the tragic 911 event, AMLA has been viewed as a tool that will help curb illegal financial transactions and control terroristic activities. AMLA is not an exclusive Philippine legislation but a global regulatory system that many countries adhere to as responsible global citizens – to make the world a little safer.

    If this PDI item is true, why would Joker choose GMA’s and other future leaders’ welfare to take precedence above all others.

    It is an established fact that we have our own share of Abu Sayyaf, suspected Al Qaeda operations and other elements that threaten the safety of our society. Drug trafficking is not undeniable as well. We have to ensure that their funding is cut off and not funnelled through our banking system. At least, make it as hard as possible for them.

    I wonder what Joker would have suggested as an alternative for him to advise GMA to ditch these AMLA measures. (I must give credit to GMA for not listening to Joker’s advice.) Besides, GMA would be truly ill-advised to think that she has the option not to cooperate with the rest of the world.

    North American, European and Asian countries have adopted AMLA. Can Joker please cite any ex-leader who was unjustifiably crushed because of AMLA. Bush is still out. Sotto’s fear of having a governor “durog” because of AMLA is unjustified, unless that person has committed illegal acts. Libertarians in the US would not have allowed implementation of this AMLA if Joker’s and Tito’s thinking have valid points.

    In other countries, banks are more rigid in enforcing their AMLA measures. One has to have two pieces of good photo IDs before he can open an account. Documentations have to be presented establishing the sources of funds when transmitting and receiving amounts in accordance with AMLA rules. One known as Joseph cannot open an account as Pedro. If any, AMLA should have more teeth and more diligent in implementing its rules.

    Enclosed is the article regarding Joker’s warning to GMA. I have also included the link to provide some info on AMLA outside the Philippine vista.

    http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/195955/amla-haunting-gloria-arroyo-says-joker-arroyo

    http://www.fintrac-canafe.gc.ca/publications/guide/Guide2/2-eng.asp#s2-1

    **********
    Some major points, from PDI article
    PDI cited that Sen. Joker Arroyo warned GMA about AMLA – that it could be used against her and the other future leaders, once they are no longer in power.

    - He personally warned Mrs. Arroyo of the dangers of an Anti-Money Laundering Law (Amla)

    “I foresee an impact. If the Ombudsman would write a letter and the AMLC acts on it, any governor or candidate for that matter would be crushed (“durog”) by information about his alleged bank accounts or any other allegation, especially before an election,” Sotto said.

  26. 418
    max says:

    INC lobbying for Corona

    Whether true or not, the senate, particularly JPE and MDS – should have given a reminder – Sub Judice.

    JPE said has made his stance clear that they cannot be swayed.
    However, if it were other groups or individuals, MDS would have waaaaahed out
    Sub-Judice

  27. 417
    baycas says:

    MDS going gaga over court order

    AMLC does NOT need court order to get information from the covered institutions (banks).

    The banks MUST report to AMLC the transactions whose amounts went beyond the threshold for them to remain secret with the banks.

    AMLC reported the transactions to the OMB when the latter asked for assistance on Corona’s case.

    All information were confidential UNTIL the Corona camp put Ombudsman Carpio-Morales on the stand as hostile witness.

    Corona just got what’s coming to him.

    Lady Gaga just arrived but the Gaga arrived a long time ago on the Senate floor.

    • 417.1
      baycas says:

      Ombudsman Carpio-Morales’ testimony can only be controverted by another witness testimony.

      Hostile witness against a true witness for the defense.

      This is none other than the impeached head of the Judiciary, RENATO CORONADO CORONA.

      Let us hear his testimony. Let us watch his demeanor. Let us witness how he will squirm his way out of his self-imposed dilemma.

      Let us see if he will enjoy the presumption of regularity when he will be able to explain that wealth secrecy is part of the Chief Justice’s OFFICIAL function.

    • 417.2
      jun 2 says:

      AHAHAHAHA, me punch line!!

  28. 416
    Mel says:

    Basa-Guidote: A story of betrayal in the family
    By Ana Basa

    Philippine Daily Inquirer
    1:36 am | Sunday, May 20th, 2012

    (Editor’s Note: Las Vegas-based Ana Basa issued this statement through Inquirer senior reporter Cynthia Balana.)

    It all started when Cristina Roco-Corona entered the picture at Basa-Guidote Enterprises Inc. (BGEI). Since 1963, her father, Vicente Roco, served as BGEI president and her mother, Asuncion Basa, was board secretary. The stockholders never questioned the propriety of the actions of Cristina’s parents. For over two decades, everything was silent on the BGEI front. It turned out that it was only the lull before the storm.

    The first hint of trouble came in 1989 when the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a preliminary injunction against the majority stockholders when my father, Jose Ma. Basa III, called for a meeting to elect new officers because of his apprehension over the management of the corporation when tenants started to file lawsuits against the corporation for various reasons.

    Vicente Roco casually delegated his responsibility and functions to his daughter, Cristina. There was no board resolution to support that action as the rest of the board was completely ignorant of it. Cristina did not waste any time. As if making up for the decades of tranquility at BGEI, she went on to run the corporation according to her whims. She effectively kept the majority stockholders in the dark, completely unaware of the company’s operations and even more, of its financial status.

    Stockholders kept in dark

    Cristina never seemed to notice and certainly showed little concern about corporate laws. She went about running the business like she was the sole owner despite her mother, Asuncion, owning only 10 percent of the corporation, neither informing the majority stockholders nor accounting for whatever income it generated.

    Despite the legal steps taken by the majority stockholders, the SEC saw nothing wrong with Cristina’s actions. It made no attempt to resolve the legal conflicts in the corporation. It did not even see anything wrong with Cristina’s failure to report the death of her father in 1993, as provided by law. The SEC did not care that it took two years, only in 1995, to report the death. The law of the jungle had taken over the corporation.

    Cristina, along with her husband, Renato Corona, negotiated the sale of the BGEI’s centerpiece property, which was sold for P34.7 million to the City of Manila, with the check made out to Cristina Corona, in trust for BGEI. Like all the other transactions, the documents accompanying the sale were at best questionable and at worst dubious. Stockholders were never notified of the negotiations, sale and the proceeds from the payment.

    New revelations

    It was not until the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona that the remaining stockholders learned of the P11-million cash advance from BGEI that Renato Corona reported in his statement of assets, liabilities and net worh (SALN). And with the revelations in the testimony last week of Sheriff Joseph Bisnar, Cristina pulled off the biggest caper yet in the corporation!

    Apparently, 4,839 shares representing 90.7 percent of BGEI were auctioned off and sold to the Coronas’ daughter, Carla Corona-Castillo, in 2003 for an unconscionable amount of P28,000, to satisfy the P500,000 in damages that the court awarded to Cristina who won the libel suits she filed against my father and several BGEI stockholders and employees.

    How could Cristina, as the supposed administrator and caretaker of BGEI, have allowed the sale when she knew how much money the corporation’s centerpiece property was sold for in 2001 to the City of Manila?

    Cristina, through her lawyers, also notified the courts of my father’s death on Aug. 29, 2002. Under the Revised Penal Code, the criminal and administrative liability of an accused is extinguished once he dies. There was actual notice given and we are wondering how the court could have enforced the writ of execution against my father in 2003 and how the two libel cases filed by Cristina against my father became final on Oct. 12, 2002, months after he died.

    Nearly all of those who came across the BGEI story and testimonies at the impeachment trial just couldn’t believe this could happen in a civilized country like the Philippines. And yet, it was there for all to see. A classic lecture on how to violate corporate laws, it stands out as one of the all-time wonders in Philippine business history. To the people who believe they live in a country governed by laws, these would seem outrageous, and yet, as outrageous, unjust, insane and unkind as it is, that is exactly what is happening to us, and it is not just Cristina’s doing.

    Rape of BGEI

    It is mind-boggling to think how Cristina was able to pull all of these off by herself. Renato Corona has been saying that ordinaryong tao lang din sila (they are just ordinary people). How then can Cristina as an ordinary wife wield so much power? Far more powerful than moneyed business corporations which, even if they tried, could not approximate what she was able to accomplish in over two decades.

    The answer comes in the form of Renato Corona. He happened to be at the right place at the right time when Cristina got away with the rape of BGEI. With his powerful position and connections, he could obviously be the brain that pulled the strings so that Cristina would be able to accomplish what she did. There were some obvious manipulating and maneuvering of the cases. Considering the network of influence Renato Corona has cultivated over all those years, and with his present position as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court making him more powerful than ever, it does not take much to arrive at the conclusion that we were in the fight of our lives.

    Lawyers were confused as to how one case (probate, which Cristina filed) was being tried in one court while another (determining the ownership of stockholders) was being heard in a different court. As if acting in obedience to an invisible hand, both courts raised legal issues that in effect meant one would not make a decision unless the other first resolves the case before it. Of course, each one could also be acting independently, prompted to have the other court resolve its case first for convenience. Let’s not even mention the SEC that is mandated to give a financial report on the status of the business but has been dragging its feet from the start.

    My father used to say “justice delayed is justice denied.” My father, after years of struggling and fighting for justice, died heartbroken, drained emotionally and psychologically. From what he shared with us during the closing moments of his life, he was still in search of justice. With his passing, we have carried on with the legal battles that exacted so much from him and from all of us as well. Left with this responsibility to continue his fight for justice, we have picked up the torch to move ahead. Somehow, we believe that God believes in us, not only to trust us with these problems, but also for us to make a positive contribution by taking on and eventually overcoming a silent but very crooked thorn in the country’s judicial system. Some would have simply raised their hands in surrender but not my father. This is not surprising given his heroic bloodline.

    Today, nothing much remains of BGEI. Cristina made sure of that, with the thorough cleansing of the stockholders as she has effected the transfer of whatever resources the BGEI had. The remaining stockholders of BGEI cannot be faulted for their pessimism because true to form, Renato Corona was in the right place at the right time.

    God’s approval

    Considering that we are fighting a just cause not only for our family but also for the good of the country and to save the integrity of the Supreme Court, we are now optimistic that Renato Corona is willing to take the witness stand at the impeachment trial. He knows the truth and that’s all we ask, for him to come out and tell the truth. Anyway, it all boils down to one fact, God’s approval. If He rules that it is time for this, no force on earth can prevent the outcome of the fate of Chief Justice Renato Corona from happening. There is nothing more reassuring in this world than the thought that while we cannot understand many things, we have a God who is in control.

    First posted 12:36 am | Sunday, May 20th, 2012

  29. 415
    baycas says:

    1/2

    Presumption of regularity in the performance of official duty

    a. How the House of Representatives transmitted the AOIs to the Senate

    b. How the Senate is trying the impeachment case now

    c. All the witnesses from government, so far, on the side of the prosecution and the defense UNLESS testimonies were crushed on cross-examination

    d. For brevity, as well as my instant recall now, highlighted witnesses are:

    - LRA’s Diaz testimony; but his evidence-gathering technique did not use a fine-tooth comb, nonetheless, some pieces are still pertinent, relevant, and material to the prosecution case

    - Atienza “brokered” the sale of BGEI property which is beyond his official duty

    • 415.1
      baycas says:

      2/2

      - Bisnar’s testimony; crushed by its unrealistic and unbelievable account of his whole story AND the fact that the negative character of the Renato-Cristina-Carla team was exposed

      - Ombudsman Carpio-Morales’ testimony is the embodiment of the “presumption of regularity”; the defense was not able to crush her testimony…

      - A witness-in-waiting who once said…

      AKO LANG ANG PWEDENG MAGPALIWANAG NUN.

      - Renato Coronado Corona, 6 March 2012

      Let us hear his testimony. Let us watch his demeanor. Let us witness how he will squirm his way out of his self-imposed dilemma.

      Let us see if he will enjoy the presumption of regularity when he will able to explain that wealth secrecy is part of the Chief Justice’s OFFICIAL function.

      • 415.1.1
        Mel says:

        “Let us see if he will enjoy the presumption of regularity when he will able to explain that wealth secrecy is part of the Chief Justice’s OFFICIAL function.”

        LOL!

        Let’s all wait and see…

        suspense, mayruong din kayang ‘Thrilla in the Senate?’

        baka mamaya, sabihin niyang, ‘I am god, above the rule of law, above all men – I am the Chief, chief of lies.’.

    • 415.2
      baycas says:

      (…sorry, the second part of the above comment won’t appear. WordPress is probably “censoring” it…)

      • 415.2.1
        Mel says:

        same on my end.

        RR might have something to release soon.

        That will be good. Hopefully her latest article is before Tuesday.

        —————–

        Will R Corona’s hubris be tamed? To naught?

        One of R Corona’s highlights. “My dollar sources are private. I exercise my right against self-incrimination not to divulge my FCD bank statements/balances.” Or “I have a written agreement, arrangement with Jane Doe (e.g. Carpa) as it’s trustee to those FCDs.”

        And why not 82 accounts? “unit investments when matured are merged with x, y, z accounts into a new dummy withholding account”. old accounts are closed. some or many of the 82 accounts are dormant, inactive or closed in lieu of created (replacement) accounts for different ‘products or services’ arranged with the bank and others.

        R Corona doesn’t have to present evidences to prove his general statements. It’s his word, tale, spin, strategy to evade admissions to culpability to crime(s). He’ll deal with it in the Ombudsman’s turf.

        R Corona has resigned himself that he will be found guilty. He’s just looking for opportunities for the other investigative bodies (i.e. OMB) to breach applicable laws, and how far their ‘goods’ on him are discovered. It’s a play man’s fool game.

        • 415.2.1.1
          Mel says:

          He will not have documents and he will not have the banks to back up his claims. It will be his word against the official records of the Ombudsman. Mahirap mapaniwala,” Rep. Neri Colmenares said.

          CJ refusal to summon banks telling: prosecutor

          By David Dizon, ABS-CBNnews.com
          Posted at 05/21/2012 10:52 AM
          Updated as of 05/21/2012 12:28 PM

          MANILA, Philippines – Chief Justice Renato Corona’s refusal to summon bank managers to testify in his impeachment trial is very telling since there will be no one to support his claims on his dollar accounts, a member of the House prosecution panel said Monday.

          Bayan Muna party-list Rep. Neri Colmenares said Corona’s refusal to summon bank managers to his trial will mean that his defense will rely only on his testimony and possible other evidence to explain his dollar accounts.

          “If they had summoned the banks, the question would be simple: did Ombudsman [Conchita Carpio Morales] give correct information? If the banks say Corona has no accounts, then the Ombudsman’s testimony will be put under question. The problem is Corona did not summon the banks. We are surprised by that. Anything he says will be just his word,” Colmenares told ABS-CBN’s “Umagang Kay Ganda.”

          “He will not have documents and he will not have the banks to back up his claims. It will be his word against the official records of the Ombudsman. Mahirap mapaniwala,” he added.

          The Ombudsman earlier revealed that Corona had 82 accounts containing at least $10 million in “transactional balances” from 2003 to 2011. She said the information came from the Anti-Money Laundering Council based on reports from at least 5 local banks.

          Corona lawyer Karen Jimeno said the defense team decided against calling both the branch managers and AMLC personnel to the impeachment trial since they would be accused of delaying the trial.

          She said the senator-judges are eagerly awaiting Corona’s testimony.

          READ THE REST AT ABS-CBNnews dot com

  30. 414
    johnny Lin says:

    Show of force or Corruption galore?

    Court employees will gather their supporters to accompany Corona.Public employees who will certainly collect their daily wage by not working. Zenith of corruption common to govt employees exemplified by court workers. Getting paid without working. Very simple to understand why Philippines lag behind other third world countries. Public employees follow corrupt examples of their boss.

    Mga magnanakaw ng Bayan, pinangungunahan ngayon ng Supreme Court employees karamihan ay 15-30 types sa panahon ni Corona. Daig pa ang public works noon sa dami ng ghost employees.

    Noon kapag sinabi empleyado sa Customs tingin ng mga tao Corrupt
    ngayon kapag sinabi empleyado ng korte sigurado Corrupt.
    Weder weder talaga.

    • 414.1
      Leona says:

      I never could imagine, and I am still very surprised that a person of his stature can allow “propanganda style” of Minister Goebbels of Hitler to try saying “the more people coming out to support you means you are right in our cause.” What happened to Germany and the German people? Destructions all over that country was accomplished!

      A justice of the SC on this kind of march? Shameful really. Court employees pa! More shame on him and to the employees. And an insult to our honored belief on the rule of law.

      Never read or heard another justice in the SC condeming this kind of march for the CJ. What happened to them? Did they cut their tongues? Lost their mind? Is this how our judges think and conduct their lives of right thinking?

      Not even our own IBP, a national association of lawyers, played neutral on this issue.. Some of the officials resorted instead to politicized and misuse the organization without clear authority from the members. A shame indeed! Misuse I say because members’ “yearly dues” to the IBP is exposed to be spent for something not in the By-Laws,etc. of this body, or for some officials “to ride” on to mislead the members and the public that such is the stand of body when it is not.

      Reports that some officials of the INC is lobbying for Corona is another shame to us and the Nation. I am glad that the officials of the Catholic Church has not (yet) done the same.

      When such propaganda movement such as this for Corona is happening, a message is sent to disregard the rule of law! All other things counts but not the rule.

      Truth will always be revealed. Many are just stubborn and ignorant to fight the truth.

    • 414.2
      Springwoodman says:

      Now, in the time of Corona’s court, the Lady Justice is wearing a blindfold, not for objectivity, but because she is ashamed to see the depths that the court has fallen into.

      The scales of justice in her right hand are no longer used to measure the rights or wrongs of a case, but to weigh the gold that each litigant brings. Whoever brings more, wins.

      The double-edged sword in her left hand no longer symbolizes Reason and Justice. Rather it symbolizes the Insanity of Greed and the Cancer of Corruption. It is now a weapon used by thieving jurists for their own protection against the Constitution and the laws of the land.

      Under Corona, SC no longer means Supreme Court. It stands for Stupendous Corruption.

      • 414.2.1
        Anton Mendoza says:

        I agree 100%! Very well said. ’tis “see no evil hear no evil ” amongst SC employees.

  31. 413
    junjune says:

    If the senator judges elect for secret balloting, this means a thief justice acquital. However, should they decide for open voting, the possibility of conviction is high. Nonetheless, we should not be caught off-guard. If the tj supporters will have a motorcade, let’s block their way, occupy Roxas Blvd leading to the Senate.

  32. 412
    baycas says:

    Comment testing…1…2…

  33. 411
  34. 410
    Anton Mendoza says:

    PAGING CHAIRMAN DUQUE!, ang mga SC employees ay magsasagawa daw ng motorcade sa martes . Dapat mag file sila ng one day leave of absence.

    • 410.1
      junjune says:

      At sana tingnan din ng COA resident auditor nila kung gagamitan ng pera ng bayan ang motorcade nila. Ito ay kung hindi kasama sa payroll ni thief justice ang auditor nila.

  35. 409
    baycas says:

    Presumption of regularity in the performance of official duty

    a. How the House of Representatives transmitted the AOIs to the Senate

    b. How the Senate now is trying the impeachment case

    c. All the witnesses from government, so far, on the side of the prosecution and the defense UNLESS testimonies were crushed on cross-examination

    d. For brevity, as well as my instant recall now, highlighted witnesses are:

    - LRA’s Diaz testimony; but his evidence-gathering technique did not use a fine-tooth comb, nonetheless, some pieces are still pertinent, relevant, and material to the prosecution case

    - Atienza “brokered” the sale of BGEI property which is beyond his official duty

    - Bisnar’s testimony; crushed by its unrealistic and unbelievable account of his whole story AND the fact that the negative character of the Renato-Cristina-Carla was exposed

    - Ombudsman Carpio-Morales’ testimony is the embodiment of the “presumption of regularity”; the defense was not able to crush her testimony.

    - A witness-in-waiting once said…

    AKO LANG ANG PWEDENG MAGPALIWANAG NUN.

    - Renato Coronado Corona, 6 March 2012

    Let us hear his testimony. Let us watch his demeanor. Let us witness how he will squirm his way out of his self-imposed dilemma.

    Let us see if he will enjoy the presumption of regularity when he will able to explain that amassing wealth is part of the Chief Justice’s OFFICIAL function.

  36. 408
    max says:

    prosecution team to cross Corona

    I am sure that we have excellent cross-team against Corona. Nothing personal, while Tupas may be good, I simply think that for this situation, Farinas has greater gravitas. At least, MDS doesn’t readily bark on him. I think they should choose who is more effective and greater impact on this specific audience – the senator judges.

    Jinggoy is one to be watched closely. For whatever reason, Jinggoy seems to be one of JPE’s proteges.

    IMHO, we have to be astute in “fighting” for our cause. Causes are not fought on the streets but thru little meetings and “friendly, strategic persuasions.” – ie transactions. As we noted, they have no permanent friends, only permanent interests.

    Personally, if Corona is convicted, that would be good. If not, at least this trial has opened a can of worms. It is not the end of it.

    Corona has to be careful though in using his family’s name, if he cares enough for his daughters. Hopefully he doesn’t insult the Filipino people more callously. “Isang tawag lang” puwedeng i-report ang kanyang anak sa IRS – there are even rewards at stake. Next thing he has to prepare for, if he pushes the patience of many Filipino people – a tax lawyer to defend his daughters in the US. Some may do it for rewards, some may do it just to wake them up, or simple inis.

    • 408.1
      Deng says:

      @Max,

      I fully agree, the weapon that we have now in our hands is the power of public opinion aside, of course, of legal options. People Power maybe, just maybe, will only be our last recourse.

    • 408.2
      Rolly says:

      @ max

      If Corona gets away this time, never in hundred years he would be convicted. No impeachment proceedings will ever be successful.

      PEOPLE POWER is the only rationale and sensible option.

      • 408.2.1
        techburns says:

        @rolly.

        i totally agree. this is in my thoughts too. wala nang saysay ang IC kung pwede lang din makalusot dahil sa technicalities. inutil!!!

      • 408.2.2
        max says:

        @Rolly 401.2 and Leona 383

        We have the same goal – to oust checkmate Corona.

        I am not referring to another impeachment processes. What I have in mind is chasing him in another arena: different legal processes and different venue.

        1) Kim Henares and her team are right on Corona and his family’s tax issues
        2) Money laundering
        3) Basa Guidote issues
        4) 99.9% potential for IRS to “investigate” Corona’s daughters
        5) Money laundering?

        • 408.2.2.1
          Deng says:

          You’ve got a good point there @max but, you have to respect also others opinion with regards to other forms of struggle against Corona. IMHO

          • 408.2.2.1.1
            max says:

            I do respect others’ opinion. I’m only saying that aside from that course of action there are other actions that we can do as well. Having plan A and alternative plans B and C won’t hurt our cause.

            I am just as feisty if called upon but being strategic won’t hurt anyone. Remember, we are dealing with a devious man and equally “fluid” members of the IC senator judges at the same time.

  37. 407
    max says:

    RE: JOKER WARNING GLORIA ABOUT AMLA

    I am confused why Joker would warn Gloria.

    Was Joker aware of any irregular/illegal activities by Gloria that he warned her about AMLA? I’d like to hold on to Joker’s image of a decent people power man and would like to think that he will never be a party to any illegal or criminal acts.

    “But she ignored (our warnings). Look, she is now being prosecuted partly because and substantially because of the reports of the (Anti-Money Laundering Council against Chief Justice Renato Corona),” Arroyo said.

    I tried to follow the IC trial but I must be missing something. I don’t know how Joker was able to state above claim.
    **************************
    After the tragic 911 event, AMLA has been viewed as a tool that will further help curb illegal financial transactions and control terroristic activities. AMLA is not an exclusive Philippine legislation but a global regulatory system that many countries adhere to as responsible global citizens – to make the world a little safer.

    If this PDI item is true, it is beyond my comprehension why Joker would choose GMA’s and other future leaders’ welfare to take precedence above all others.

    It is an established fact that we have our own share of Abu Sayyaf and suspected Al Qaeda operations and other elements that threaten the safety of our society. Drug trafficking is not undeniable as well. We have to ensure that their funding is cut off and not funnelled through our banking system. At least, make it as hard as possible for them.

    I wonder what Joker would have suggested as an alternative for him to advise GMA to ditch these AMLA measures. (I must give credit to GMA for not listening to Joker’s advice.) Besides, GMA would be truly ill-advised to think that she has the option not to cooperate with the rest of the world.

    North American, European and Asian countries have adopted AMLA. Can Joker please cite any ex-leader who was unjustifiably crushed because of AMLA. Bush is still out. Sotto’s fear of having a governor “durog” because of AMLA is unjustified, unless that person has committed illegal acts. Libertarians in the US would not have allowed implementation of this AMLA if Joker’s and Tito’s thinking have valid points.

    In other countries, their banking system is more rigid in enforcing their AMLA measures. For example, one has to have two pieces of good photo id’s before he can open an account. Documentations have to be presented establishing the sources of funds when transmitting and receiving amounts in accordance with AMLA rules. One known as Joseph cannot open an account as Pedro. If any, AMLA should have more teeth and more diligent in implementing its rules.

    Enclosed is the article regarding Joker’s warning to GMA. I have also included the link to provide some info on AMLA outside the Philippine vista.

    http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/195955/amla-haunting-gloria-arroyo-says-joker-arroyo

    http://www.fintrac-canafe.gc.ca/publications/guide/Guide2/2-eng.asp#s2-1

    ******************
    AMLA HAUNTING GLORIA ARROYO, SAYS JOKER
    - He personally warned Mrs. Arroyo of the dangers of an Anti-Money Laundering Law (Amla) that she had wanted in place as a precaution against global terrorism.
    Arroyo recalled that it was right after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks in the United States when Malacañang asked Congress to fast track a bill that would penalize money laundering efforts meant to finance terrorist activities.

    “This bill will be the scourge of future officialS.”

    - This will haunt you. This is the bill that will haunt you.’
    - “When you are in power, it is OK. But for the enemies of those who are…in power, this is a very dangerous bill…”

    Look, she is now being prosecuted partly because and substantially because of the reports of the (Anti-Money Laundering Council against Chief Justice Renato Corona)”

    “I foresee an impact. If the Ombudsman would write a letter and the AMLC acts on it, any governor or candidate for that matter would be crushed (“durog”) by information about his alleged bank accounts or any other allegation, especially before an election,” Sotto said.

  38. 406
    eestaana says:

    BATTLECRY

    I propose this BATTLECRY for those senators who will abstain or acquit Thief Justice Corona and WHO WILL JOIN BINAY’S PARTY UNA.

    “PARTIDO UNA – UNA SA CORRUPTION
    MGA KAMPONG NI CORONAPTION’

    Maganda ito at madaling tantadaan……di ba?

  39. 405
    anonymous_coward says:

    CPM’er Re-Occupy Fadre Faura Street project

    The most cost-efective for the “ISANG TAWAG KO LANG” campaign is to use YOUTUBE.

    Like for example the Juana Change youtube.

    We will make it million views to increase world-wide awareness what happenning in the Philippine Senate and the Philipppine Supreme Court.

  40. 404
    pinoy_overseas says:

    Mga kagalang-galang na mga Senador:

    Learn from the lesson of history. Look outside of the Philippines, look to our Asian neighbors.

    Ang Pilipinas ay napag-iwanan na naman tayo ng Vietnam at Sri Lanka na dumaan sa mga ilan dekadang gyerya.

    Baka sa Burma or Myanmar maiiwanan na naman tayo.

    Maawa naman kayo sa mga sambayanan Filipino.

  41. 403
    jun 2 says:

    eto pa sa BGEI naman!!! ang lufhet talaga ng mag-asawa, gravehhh!!!! http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/196441/basa-guidote-a-story-of-betrayal-in-the-family

  42. 402
    jun 2 says:

    frm ex justice Atemio Panganiban ……… http://opinion.inquirer.net/29033/will-corona-testify

  43. 401
    Elenita Fashionista says:

    OUR WINDOW OF CHANGE IS TWO DAYS REMAINING, MONDAY AND TUESDAY WHAT CAN WE DO TO LET THEM FEEL OUR INDIGNATION

    3 SUGGESTIONS:
    1. ON ANY PAPER WRITE “END ISANG TAWAG KO LANG” BY PENTEL PEN, BALLPEN, PAINT ETC AND POST ON ANY PUBLIC WALL.
    2. PRINT POSTER ” TAMA NA SOBRA NA CORONA ICONVICT NA” AND PASTE ON ANY WALL
    3 ON TUESDAY, BE PRESENT IN THE TRIAL TAKE VIDEO AND DOWNLOAD TO YOUTUBE

    KUNG HINDI NGAYON KAILAN PA, KUNG HINDI TAYO SINO PA?

  44. Minda Nao says:

    NATIONAL NEWS AND BANK ACTIVITIES, COINCIDENCE?
    GLORIA’S MR BAGMAN? BRING ME MY BAG (TO THE TUNE OF MR SANDMAN)

    2004
    NEWS:Presidential Election campaign Arroyo vs Fernando Poe
    Bank activities:
    4/1/ 2004 $ $215,788.00
    4/2/ 2004 $315,788.00
    5/11/04 $409,188.00
    5/12/04 ($90,812.00)
    5/14/04 $409,188.00
    5/14/04 ($90,812.00)

    2007
    NEWS: April 21: ZTE-NBN telecommunications project contract signed.
    NEWS May 2007 Philippines general elections New Senate in place, -
    Minor news first recorded series of My Way karaoke bars killings
    Bank activities
    5/29/07 $208,730.22

    NEWS: Week of 7/19/07 Nationwide barangay elections registrations, newly elected Senators start work
    Bank activities
    7/19/07 $221,430.22

    NEWS: Arroyo declared July 27 as iglesia ni cristo day
    NEWS: Mining industry transferred to office of President
    Bank activities
    7/27/07 $321,430.22

    NEWS Week of Erap Verdict plunder
    Bank activities
    9/3/07 $341,430.22

    NEWS: Impeachment news in the house / cash gift charges on congressmen Villarosa
    Bank activities
    12/21/07 $391,430.22

    2008
    NEWS: Joint Seismic Undertaking on Spratlys /JDV lost position Merging of Lakas CMD and KAMPI
    Bank activities
    3/5/08 $421,730.22

    NEWS: joint seismic undertaking, senators questioning legality
    Bank activities
    4/17/08 $445,730.22

    2010
    NEWS: national elections, Imelda and arroyo runs for congress
    Bank activities
    3/12/10 $764,152.46

    NEWS: Week of Corona oath taking (may 17 2010)
    Bank activities
    5/25/10 $728,968.21

    NEWS: SC decides Cityhood laws unconstitutional reversed (aug 23)
    Bank activities
    8/27/10 $798,468.21

    NEWS: Week of SC oral arguments on Truth Commission
    Bank activity
    8/31/10 $764,603.33

    NEWS: Week of Mercedita Gutierrez Impeachment
    NEWS:9/24/2010 Start of impeachment Mercedita Gutierrez in House
    NEWS 9/27/2010 New SC en banc clerk of court custodian Enriqueta Vidal
    NEWS 9/21/2010 SC starts oral arguments on Mercedita Gutierrez impeachment petition
    NEWS 10/06/2010 final oral arguments Mercedita Gutierrez case
    Bank activity
    9/23/10 $721,312.08

    NEWS 12/09/2010 SC rules Truth Commission unconstitutional
    NEWS 12/14/2010 SC affirms return of Leyte Marcos mansion
    NEWS 12/15/2010 SC affirms acquittal of Hubert Webb
    Bank Activities:
    12/22/10 $736,612.08

    NEWS: 1/11/2011 SC rejects oral arguments for MR for Hubert Webb acquittal
    Bank Activities:
    1/2011 $716,733.33

    NEWS: Ampatuan massacre, comptroller Garcia/Ligot, PNoy criticizing SC decisions on Truth Commission
    Bank activities
    1/19/11 $746,733.33
    1/19/11 $1,005,930.89
    1/20/11 $1,178,967.96
    1/21/11 $1,190,667.96

    NEWS: 2/08/2011 Ex AFP chief Angelo Reyes commits suicide
    NEWS: 2/27/2011 SC OK’s Mikey Arroyo to represent security guard group in congress
    NEWS: 03/22/11 Mercedita Gutierrez impeached by congress
    Bank activities
    3/31/11 $1,202,667.96

    NEWS: 7/25/11 President Aquino State of the Nation address
    Bank activities:
    7/27/11 $1,267,167.96

    NEWS: 10/11/2011 Philippine 2007 Poll fraud continues
    NEWS 10/16/11 Aquino ratings increase
    NEWS 11/09/11 Arroyo medical trip denied
    Bank activities
    11/16/11 $1,306,167.96

    NEWS: 11/18/11 Arroyo arrested for Electoral sabotage
    Bank activities
    11/24/11 $1,133,558.38

    NEWS: 12/09/11 Arroyo detained at Veterans Memorial Hospital
    NEWS: 12/12/11 Corona impeached by House of Representatives
    Bank activities
    12/12/11 $998,199.37
    12/13/11 $609,428.15
    12/15/11 $1,585,626.23
    12/15/11 $1,120,626.23
    12/15/11 $777,433.61
    12/15/11 $705,404.28
    12/15/11 $355,404.28
    12/19/11 ($132,593.81)
    12/20/11 ($820,242.36)

    • raissa says:

      Interesting.

      The depositors to his bank accounts will have to be matched.

      • jun 2 says:

        Kaya nga maraming sa kabila ng mga katotohanan, they need this man in 2013! kaya dito kitang kita natin ang kanilang pag hahanda, again para i blackmail ang buong bansa at mag patuloy sila sa pag gahasa sa kaban ng bayan. Sa pag upo ng OMB, very candid ang ilang senator, takot na takot sa naging hakbang ng ombudsman at ang naging reply ng AMLC. We need to work more, as we can see it, pospos ang kanilang pag kilos, na dapat sana tayong taong bayan ay ganon din!

        • Eber Redi says:

          @jun 2

          tama ka pare, mukhang siya ang puntahan pag may election….lalo na siguro pag may electoral protest na maaring umakyat sa SC…. hindi malayong sila Bongbong nagbigay rin tsaka si MDS and those Senators na halos makipagbuntalan sa mga witness na laban kay Corona na nagkamali lang umupo sa witness…….sisiw lang pala yung Basa guidote compared to this..hindi malayong pagbintangan niya rin si Pnoy an me patago..sabi nya siya lang ang nakaka alam tulad ng 100 million bribe nila….
          baka pati si Pope sabihin nya may patago…

          mabagsik pala pag pinagsama ang gahamang economist at gahang seraniko ng transistor..wasak ang bayan…

      • pelang says:

        wow! Minda Nao, kuha mo talaga! ang galing! dapat kasama ka sa prosecution taga imbestiga. kaya naman pala kating-kati na si Goyang na makatakas at kung anu-anong sakit na naman ang nararamdaman. malapit nang mabisto ng husto.

    • Deng says:

      @Minda Nao,

      Wow ! Nice presentation, man. Too much activities, too much money, can he be the bagman of the GMA mafia? Could it be a conspiracy?

      • Eber Redi says:

        @Deng

        The evil genius of their partnership is the employment of a constitutional principle: JUDICIARY INDEPENDENCE.

        This they implemented by the non accountability of their financial activities and expenses as well as non transparency and nondisclosure of SALNs.

        So Corona was the perfect conduits of their groups’ funds as well as bribes and
        other illegal funds that Corona himself receive from cases he is involved in. No wonder as reported here, this caught the attention of international anti money laundering organizations monitoring money trail of terrorists organizations and alerted our own AMLC.

        Perfect crime until….

    • Ella Tovara says:

      very nice presentation. grabe talaga everytime merong mga political happenings sa bansa, big as in big amounts of money is moved from one place to another. grabe talagang pagnanakaw at pangungurakot.

      sana po makita ito at mabasa tapos maintindihan ng mga senador-judges para patalsikin na po ang kumag na kurakot na corona.

    • Leona says:

      Very interesting! But are the “transactions” withdrawals or deposits on each date? I guess the one for “12/12/11 to 12/20/11″ are indeed WITHDRAWALS amounting to
      $7, 105, 008. 32.

      Seven Million One Hundred Five Thousands and Thirty Eight/32 !!! In PESOS my comput is P305, 555, 344.00+ . CORONA “withdrew”

      THREE HUNDRED FIVE MILLION FIVE HUNDRED FIFTY FIVE THOUSAND and THREE HUNDRED FORTY-FOUR pesos on those dates? What bank is this?

      That’s a lot of money! My wishful thinking blurs me!

      • JiroArturo says:

        @Leona
        Withdrawals on said dates Dec 2011 total $6,103,880.11. Pesos withdrawal = P161,151,897.64

        • Leona says:

          I may have to “change” my cell phn’s ‘calculator’ then…mas grabi pala itong calculator ko kaysa akin!

    • simon olivares says:

      isama mo na 10/ 4/ 2011 FASAP decision reversal. Teka, kelan ba pumasok yung Allied bank account nya? Nakareflect ba sa records?

  45. Sam says:

    something from rappler
    ——————————
    Is Corona’s defense team ‘sinking’?

    According to Ronny Roy, the dad of Judd “Judd is fed up. He never wanted [Ombudsman Conchita] Morales to testify, at least he wud’ve wanted her LAST after Risa [Hontiveros], [Harvey Keh], etc.but was overruled by [defense team lead counsel Serafin] Cuevas.”
    (text message send to Harry Roque)

    ——————————————-

    kaya pala wala si Roy that day when the Ombudsman took the witness stand.

    • Leona says:

      Ohhhh…how Cuevas cried a lot for approving to present Ombudsman Morales and first among those witnesses! He must have had a horrible nightmare the following the night in bed!

      What caused this blunder? Over confident sila! Never never make that mistake in trial. Why they thought that Ombuds Morales had nothing to give?

      The defense is now showing fatigue. Tired. Cannot think and focus. They’re going to have a long rest after this proceedings is over.

      • Sam says:

        @Leona

        Tama ka dyan, actually also in the article, Roy was so fed up daw due to corona won’t do a rehearsal before taking the witness stand.

          • duquemarino says:

            @baycas

            I saw this movie and liked it, but will cuevas do a turn-around? Maybe, if his vertigo attacks when he is presenting the summation. Just a wishful thinking, he he he. Gandang twist nito pag nangyari.

            • Leona says:

              Mr. Cuevas “doing a turn-around?” I doubt it very much. One real good lawyer will be praying for guts to that! But Artur Kirkland’s situation is that he believes his clients are innocent. Does Mr. Cuevas have the same belief?
              That is a big Q.

              I’ve not seen the movie; just read what that website gave about it. Thanks.

        • netty says:

          Maybe he is also weary that he would end it all, baka nasa magic brown envelope ang WMD. beware!!

        • Leona says:

          Taking the witness stand, I gave my piece on the ENGLISH RULE in contrast to the AMERICAN RULE. What our courts adopts or follows is the ENGLISH RULE. It is somewhere here down. I just hope this point will not be a long debate/argument between the defense and the prosecution; might also be with the Senate or with Hon. Enrile.

  46. Renato Pinokyo says:

    THE POLITICS OF ARROYO AND CORONA

    NEWS:Election campaign Arroyo vs Fernando Poe
    Bank activities:
    4/1/ 2004 $ $215,788.00
    4/2/ 2004 $315,788.00
    5/11/04 $409,188.00
    5/12/04 ($90,812.00)
    5/14/04 $409,188.00
    5/14/04 ($90,812.00)

    From the above revealed bank activities by TJ, I thought of going over some news items at that time and I came to this item which displayed the sheer gall of this partnership to cheat their way to power. No direct link to Corona but the money angle and the date is interesting.It is thus important that TJ be out of this axis of corruption, otherwise his acquittal will be a perpetuation of the politics that enslaved the Philippines for a long long time..

    Source:
    http://web.archive.org/web/20060101120753/http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/topofthehour.aspx?StoryId=10350

    Yung dagdag, yung dagdag’
    The Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism granted permission to abs-cbnNEWS.com to publish this entry from PCIJ’s blog. For other stories visit http://www.pcij.org/blog/
    By Sheila Coronel, Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism

    THE president’s voice sounded urgent. She was muttering under her breath. [On Wednesday] morning, using sound enhancement, we listened again to the “Hello, Garci” recording and heard clearly for the first time what Mrs. Arroyo told election commissioner Virgilio Garcillano in a conversation that took place at 11:17 p.m. on May 31, 2004.
    That phone call began with the President relaying to Garcillano the information that the opposition was trying to get Namfrel (National Citizens Movement for Free Elections) copies of municipal certificates of canvass. Garcillano reassured her that Namfrel is “now sympathetic to us.”
    The president’s reply is garbled in the recording, as she lowered her voice and muttered. We asked a sound engineer to enhance the sound for us. We listened again and this is what we heard her telling Garcilliano: “… Namfrel does not tally…pero yun nga, yung dagdag, yung dagdag (but you know, the padding, the padding).”
    [PCIJ didn’t put this in earlier versions of the transcript because we were not sure until now.]
    This is the only time in all the 15 phone calls that Mrs. Arroyo made to Garcillano between May 26 and June 10 that she actually used the word, dagdag.
    Some of the president’s calls dealt with her anxiety about the count and her winning margin (“Will I still get more than 1 M?” she famously asked “Garci” at 9:23 a.m. on May 29).
    The May 31 phone call was more direct. She actually referred to votes being padded. While she did not directly say that she had directed the padding or that she knew her votes had been padded, the purpose of the conversation appears to be to assuage her worry that the padding would not discovered if the Namfrel documents did not tally with the certificates of canvass.
    Many of the presidential calls in the Hello Garci tapes dealt with Mrs. Arroyo’s concern that the count reflected in various election documents — statements of votes and certificates of canvass — did not match. She expressed this worry about the documents from Basilan, Lanao del Sur and Sulu. She was worried because the mismatch in the figures might be seen by the opposition and used by them in alleging fraud by the ruling party.
    The particular conversation where she talked about dagdag seems to be along the same lines. She was fretting about the possibility that the opposition would get hold of Namfrel documents (Namfrel gets the sixth copy of the precinct-level election returns) and discover that these do not match with the certificates of canvass, which contain the aggregated counts of all the precincts in a municipality, city or province.
    This is why Garcillano had to reassure the president that Namfrel is “now sympathetic to us.”
    In her reply, she wanted more reassurance. “Pero yun nga, yung dagdag, yung dagdag,” she said.
    When this call was made on May 31, most of the certificates of canvass had already been submitted to Congress. It would have meant trouble if the count reflected in these certificates were questioned either by Namfrel or the opposition, based on their own copies of the election returns. At this point, the president seemed to be concerned about two things: 1) that the spurious documents would not be discovered; and 2) that the counts in the places where special elections were held and the counting delayed would show her as the winner.
    Special elections were conducted in late May in some towns and barangay in Basilan, Lanao del Sur, Lanao del Norte, Maguindanao, Sulu and Tawi-Tawi. Some of the president’s phone calls dealt with the counting in these places.
    The content of those phone calls was previously reported in this blog. Here are the transcript and enhanced audio of the “dagdag” phone call.
    Conversation between Gary (V. Garcillano) and an unidentified female believed to be GMA (Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo) on 31 23:17 hotel May 2004
    Garcillano: Hello, ma’am.
    GMA: Hello, tsaka ano yung kabila, they’re trying to get the Namfrel copies of the Municipal COCs.
    Garcillano: Namfrel copies ho?
    GMA: Uhm-um.
    Garcillano: Ay wala naman, ok naman ang Namfrel sa atin. They are now sympathetic to us.
    GMA (mumbling): Oo, oo … (garbled) …Namfrel does not tally. Pero yun nga, yung dagdag, yung dagdag.
    Garcillano: Oho, we will get an advance copy ho natin kung anong hong kwan nila.
    GMA: Oo, oo.
    Garcillano: Sige po.

    Source:
    http://web.archive.org/web/20060101120753/http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/topofthehour.aspx?StoryId=10350

  47. Sam says:

    another big problem for the corona
    ———————————————

    from inquirer (a portion of the article)
    —————————————————
    Ana Basa: We will get back what is rightfully ours

    Guilty or not in the impeachment trial, Chief Justice Renato Corona, along with his wife, Cristina, and daughter Carla, will have to pay for their “illegal takeover” of the Basa-Guidote Enterprises Inc. (BGEI) from its stockholders and for “squandering” its finances.
    Thus said an heir of the corporation’s majority stockholders, Ana Basa.

    “We will not let this go away. We will get back what is rightfully ours,” declared Basa, the second of nine children of Jose Maria Basa III, one of the original stockholders of BGEI. Ana called up this reporter, who is on an East-West Center fellowship grant, from Las Vegas, Nevada, where she has been in the casino business for over 20 years, to talk about the Basa family’s course of action against the Coronas in light of revelations about the company in the Corona impeachment trial.

    Basa said the Coronas probably did not expect the Basa family and their relatives to unite and shoot back considering the Chief Justice’s position in the judiciary following their “long years of persecution and prosecution.

    • Sam says:

      Lagot na ang mga Corona … galit na ang mga BASA

    • Sam says:

      @Raissa

      nag double post hehehe paki delete na lang itong na post ko. someone has post the same article na .. sorry

  48. kalakala says:

    CORONA IMPEACHMENT TRIAL
    Ana Basa: We will get back what is rightfully ours
    By Cynthia D. Balana
    Philippine Daily Inquirer

    HONOLULU—Guilty or not in the impeachment trial, Chief Justice Renato Corona, along with his wife, Cristina, and daughter Carla, will have to pay for their “illegal takeover” of the Basa-Guidote Enterprises Inc. (BGEI) from its stockholders and for “squandering” its finances, an heir of the corporation’s majority stockholders said.

    ‘All liable’

    According to Ana, their lawyers said all three Coronas, as well as the regional trial judge and the sheriff that executed the auction of her family’s majority shares in the corporation were all liable under the law.

    http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/196853/ana-basa-we-will-get-back-what-is-rightfully-ours

  49. Pedro says:

    Ana Basa Says ” We will get back what is rightfully ours :- ( Per Inquirer)

    HONOLULU—Guilty or not in the impeachment trial, Chief Justice Renato Corona, along with his wife, Cristina, and daughter Carla, will have to pay for their “illegal takeover” of the Basa-Guidote Enterprises Inc. (BGEI) from its stockholders and for “squandering” its finances, an heir of the corporation’s majority stockholders said.
    “We will not let this go away. We will get back what is rightfully ours,” declared Ana Basa, the second of nine children of Jose Maria Basa III, one of the original stockholders of BGEI. Ana called up this reporter, who is on an East-West Center fellowship grant, from Las Vegas, Nevada, where she has been in the casino business for over 20 years, to talk about the Basa family’s course of action against the Coronas in light of revelations about the company in the Corona impeachment trial.
    Basa said the Coronas probably did not expect the Basa family and their relatives to unite and shoot back considering the Chief Justice’s position in the judiciary following their “long years of persecution and prosecution.
    The US-based Basa family has been meeting with their lawyers in the United States and in the Philippines about their course of action against the Coronas to challenge in court the “illegal” transfer of BGEI ownership to her niece Carla for a measly sum of P28,000, as well as the sale of a BGEI property worth millions of pesos to Carla for also the measly sum of P28,000 through an auction.
    Ana said her family was relieved by the fact that the truth about Corona and Cristina, who is Ana’s cousin, had finally come out.
    ‘All liable’
    According to Ana, their lawyers said all three Coronas, as well as the regional trial judge and the sheriff that executed the auction of her family’s majority shares in the corporation were all liable under the law.
    During the impeachment trial, court Sheriff Bisnar testified under oath that he delivered both the writ of execution and garnishment of the Basa shares on the same day at an address given to him by Cristina, which was actually the address of the latter.
    “That address was Asuncion’s address. Bahay naman nila Cristina iyon (Cristina also stayed in that house). She grew up there. Hindi namin bahay iyon (That is not our house),” Ana said.
    “My parents never received any type of notice. My dad would have never allowed BGEI shares to be auctioned off because that was his promise to his mother. He would have figured out another way to pay it. Remember the court issue of writ of execution and garnishment eight months after my dad passed away.”
    Ana believed they now have a fighting chance to pursue their cases in court against the Coronas “without obstruction and harassment,” unlike before when Renato enjoyed the confidence of two former presidents—Fidel Ramos and Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.
    “We were told by the lawyers that they are all liable to the stockholders, especially Cristina, for gross negligence and bad faith in directing the affairs of BGEI for allowing the shares to go for a mere P28,000. They said she is also guilty of acquiring personal or pecuniary interest in conflict with her duty as a trustee,” Basa said.
    ‘Highly questionable’
    She said the sale itself of the BGEI property in Sampaloc was highly questionable since up to now, there was still no decision in the probate case, which Cristina herself filed against them.
    She said other BGEI properties in the same area, which were levied by the Coronas, were actually in the name of her father, Jose Maria III, up to now, that was why the Coronas could not sell it.
    Ana expressed the belief that her cousin could have not done all of the abuses and manipulations “without the backing of the Chief Justice.”
    This, she said, was precisely the reason why her aunts and uncle decided to sell their shares to her father, the most successful businessman among the five children of Rosario Basa. Sister Concepcion and Sister Flory lived in the convents, Asuncion was a housewife, while Mario Basa had a bonzai business and supplied bonzai at the Atrium in Makati.
    “Dad’s siblings said they did not want headaches because magulo si Cristina (Cristina was troublesome), tenants were complaining, so they decided to go sell their shares and Dad bought them because Lola’s wish was for the Basa family to continue to own and control the corporation that’s why our family became the majority stockholders,” Ana said.
    ‘A gift to Dad’
    Ana also addressed the claim of Corona’s defense lawyers that her father removed Asuncion’s name from the title of a property in Libis (Eastwood), Quezon City.
    “What title is she talking about? That property in Libis was a gift by my lola to Dad when he graduated with a degree in animal husbandry from the University of California in Davis. But that property in Libis, binayaran din ng Dad sa Lola over the years kaya nakapangalan lang sa kaniya (But Dad paid Lola for that property in Libis over the years, that’s why it is in his name). Dad was able to pay because we had a farm, we had poultry, piggery and he was very successful. My dad was an amazing man, you would have liked him,” she said.
    On the Chief Justice’s reported multiple dollar accounts as revealed by the Ombudsman and the Anti-Money Laundering Council, Basa said they were just as shocked as the rest of the country upon learning this.
    “The defense is simply doing damage control by deflecting the focus away from Rene Corona, They’ve blamed black propaganda, the President, Carpio, Ombdusman, etc.,” she added.

    • Kim says:

      ……“My parents never received any type of notice. …” the magical notice.

    • Sam says:

      lagot ang mga corona, galit na ang mga BASA.

    • Leona says:

      Throw the heavy wrench at them!

      Turn the tables around!

      Go, give ‘em some real headaches this time!

      File the complaint and attach the properties!

      And hang ‘em high!

  50. Chavydada says:

    A MESSAGE FOR CJ CORONA ON THE EVE OF HIS SENATE APPEARANCE

    I have three words for you, CJ Corona. “REMEMBER THE ALAMO” (Battlecry of US Troops under Gen. Houston).

    ALAM MO namang mai-impeach ka pag tinanggap mo ang ‘midnight appointment”. No less than Fr. Bernas cautioned.

    ALAM MO namang ang SALN ay sinumpaang dokumento kaya’t dapat ay wasto, tapat, sapat, at makatotohanan ang paglalahad nito.

    ALAM MO namang pag ginamit mo ang Basa-Guidote Enterprises, Inc. sa iyong depensa ay malalahad kung paano ito nabili ng iyong anak sa ‘irregular’ na pamamaraan.

    ALAM MO namang highly intelligent witness si Ombudsman Morales, ay bakit mo ipinatawag bilang defense witness.

    ALAM MO namang maraming lawyers ang nagpakadalubhasa sa Constitution, Corporation Law, Bank Secrecy Law, Anti-Money Laundering Law, Ombudsman Law, at iba pang law, bukod kay Miriam at Atty Cuevas.

    ALAM MO namang walang lihim na di nabubunyag sa takdang panahon.

    ALAM MO namang public office is a public trust, kaya dapat ay walang pagdududa sa sinumang nakaupong opisyal, lalo na ang Chief Justice ng Supreme Court.

    ALAM MO namang pag-upo mo sa witness stand ay maaari ka nang matanong ng mga Senador, kahit na sa mga bagay na wala sa impeachment complaint.

    ALAM MO rin kayang beyond technicalities, alam na nang marami ang katotohanan, subalit naghihintay lamang ng iyong sasabihin.

    YES, CJ, “REMEMBER THE ALAMO”. Alam na alam mo ang pinapasukan mo.

    • amante_rador says:

      @chavvydada,
      alamo ba? alam ni corona na mailulusot nya ang kaso nya. gaya nang mga palusot nila nung panahon nila ni gma. hanggang ngayon ay iyon ang paniwala nya…

    • Rene-Ipil says:

      Chavydada @436

      At the Alamo, the last man standing was the legendary Davy Crocket , an excellent shooter and a Texas Congressman. While he was about to be executed by General Sta Ana, he was asked to say his last statement. Davy Crocket told the general to surrender, lay down their arms and go back to Mexico. He also warned the Mexicans that he was a loud screamer. That was when the Mexicans riddled him with bullets. In the end, General Sta Ana surrendered Texas to General Houston.

      At the senate, Corona will be the lone man at the witness stand. He will make a statement first before testifying. He will ask the senators to surrender their power to try him or else he will scream loud and squeal all the names of the senators and their business partners or protégées who deposited the dollars indicated in the AMLC report to Ombudsman.

      Will the senate convict and execute Corona or surrender and capitulate to his demand for acquittal?

    • Springwoodman says:

      Therefore he cannot be forgiven for he knows what he is doing.

  51. Sam says:

    Question

    Defense lawyer Rico Quicho said the supposed records of Corona’s dollar accounts as bared by Ombudsman Conchita Morales have not been accepted yet as evidence by the impeachment court.
    ————————-
    Since Ombudsman Conchita Morales is defense’s witness, should her testimony and documents presented be formally offered to be considered “accepted”?

    • baycas says:

      Despite Cuevas’ difficulty of ascertaining Carpio-Morales as hostile witness, Presiding Officer Enrile LIBERALLY ruled that she be declared “hostile” witness in order NOT to belabor the issue. (She actually didn’t pass as such if Cuevas’ reasoning is to be considered.)

      The prosecution will offer the Ombudsman’s revelations inasmuch as her testimony will strengthen the case of the accusers, the Filipino people, as represented by the 188+ Congressmen.

    • Leona says:

      After the Defense rest their case, the prosecution having marked the documents presented during Defense’s in-chief and the testimony of defense witnesses, will of course be offered by prosecution as “additional evidence” or Exhibits for the Prosecution. Mr. Rico Quicho’s statement is correct, “not accepted yet” but it will be later on. So, there is nothing to be apprehensive about. He is the one apprehensive about it because it is going to be accepted as evidence by the impeachment court.

    • Rene-Ipil says:

      Sam@435

      Testimonies are offered and admitted as evidence during their presentation unless ruled as inadmissible or excluded by the rules and our laws. For example: hearsay evidence and products of illegal search.

      • Rene-Ipil says:

        Documentary exhibits are formally offered as evidence after completion of the testimonies in chief or in rebuttal, if any.

  52. Aussiebeck says:

    http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/05/20/12/luisita-farmers-give-all-out-support-cj

    Oh my GOD! Pati ba naman Luisita Farmers nagpa-uto at nag-pagamit na rin kay THIEF JUSTICE CORONA!!!

  53. johnny Lin says:

    Reasons Corona lawyers did not subpoena bank officials to testify and Corona will instead.

    The mock trials Defense had been conducting for the past 3 days resulted to the following:

    1. Corona will admit to bank accounts provided by PSB but not to all tose reported by Morales claiming as either one original account ending to multiple accounts after repeated reinvestment. Figures coming as deposit from unknown source were not his, could be bank errors. Claiming some to be entrusted accounts from family members or friends might open more questions.

    2. Many accounts revealed by Morales were fictitious and questionable like those withdrawals and deposits amounting to less tha $10,000 that are not covered by AMLA reporting so these reportsdid not comefrom AMLA but definitely fictionalized by Morales and she obviously violated RA 6426 confidentiality.

    3. By not calling bank officials to testify they would be preserving SC TRO on FCD and if Prosecution will call them on rebuttal, they would manifest the TRO ruling. Reversal of Senate on their vote on SC TRO to subpoena bank officials on FCD willresult to confrontation between Senate and SC.

    4. Corona will not sign a waiver on his FCD. He will confront the Senators to revote on their acceptance of SC TRO confronting the issue thereby forcing the Impeachment Court on a collision course with SC decision on Constitutional grounds.

    5.Corona will ask the court for him to allow reading a prepared speech before the trial. The draft of this speech corrected many times has been finalized dealing mainly on attacks on Aquino and conspiracy to persecute Corona. His lawyers will insist that it is the right of the Respondent to make such opening statement from a question from his lawyer. How the rest of the Senators will respond is still a gamble but they have gathered the consent of 5-7 senators to this cause already. THIS IS A TEST ON THE JUDGMENT OF ENRILE AS PRESIDING OFFICER

    6. Lawyers will manifest the testimony of Morales was uncorroborated evidence and should not be accepted despite her being their hostile witness because the source of the documents was not certified.

    • Kabalyero01 says:

      @JL

      appreciate the way you discern issues of concern and sharing with us your wisdom on how best we can rationally keep abreast of the day to day development on R Corona’s case – with your indulgence sir if you can comment on below analysis translated into laymans term since we are not so familiar with the banking and financial lingo. thanks
      ————————————–
      Comments from Mr. ABC, a finance-oriented professional:

      “What they should have done is to ‘net out’ the deposits and the withdrawals, rather than add them all up,” said the banker, who heads a commercial bank.

      “Netting out” is financial industry jargon for determining the difference between two values, usually the result of a purchase vis-a-vis a sale, or a deposit vis-a-vis a withdrawal.

      COA Commissioner Heidi Mendoza knew what was a most crucial revelation that can be extracted from the 17-page AMLC report testified to by Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales–and that was what the quoted BANKER supposedly suggested: the net result of dollar deposits vs. dollar withdrawals over the period covered by the report–April 2003 to early 2012. Thus, the amounts (total dollar deposits vs. total dollar withdrawals) that should be “netted” out were what she precisely stated as her opening statement when she was allowed to briefly take over from the Ombudsman.

      According to Commissioner Heidi Mendoza, the total deposit/inflow was $28.7 MILLION while the total withdrawal/outflow was $30.7 MILLION (Cathy Yamsuan and Christian Esguerra, “CJ keeping $12M in 5 banks–Ombudsman,” Philippine Daily Inquirer, May 15, 2012, page A6), or an excess of withdrawals–or NET OUTFLOW–in the amount of $2.0 MILLION, which could have come from the balance of CJ Corona’s dollar accounts as of April 2003, the beginning of the AMLC reporting period. This means that there was a beginning balance of at least $2.0 MILLION in CJ Corona’s dollar accounts that was not shown in the AMLC report of CJ Corona’s dollar transactions–not balances.

      Translated to PESOS, CJ Corona’s $2.0 MILLION beginning dollar-account balance as of April 2003 was at least P86 MILLION, which cannot be fully explained by the P34.7 MILLION sales proceeds of the Basa-guidote property sold in 2001. It was not shown in CJ Corona’s SALNs. It was also way above the P50 million threshold for the crime of plunder.

      Further, the alleged 82 accounts might have been opened and used during the AMLC reporting period (spanning roughly nine years), but 78 accounts of which were eventually closed, thereby leaving only four dollar accounts opened at present.
      ———————

      Bankers find columnist’s explanation of Corona dollar accounts ‘plausible’

      By Daxim L. Lucas
      Philippine Daily Inquirer
      12:45 am | Friday, May 18th, 2012

      Bankers Thursday described as “plausible” the explanation posited by Inquirer columnist Rigoberto Tiglao who defended Chief Justice Renato Corona from allegations of having amassed some $12 million in as many as 82 bank accounts.

      The bankers—speaking to the Inquirer on condition that they don’t be identified because of the political nature of the topic—uniformly said that an estimate of the Supreme Court chief’s bank account balances made by adding up all transaction values over time would be incorrect.

      More importantly, the columnist’s explanation for Corona’s bank transactions may be a preview of the line of defense that the Chief Justice may put forward when he testifies before the Senate impeachment court on Tuesday, the bankers said.

      “What they should have done is to ‘net out’ the deposits and the withdrawals, rather than add them all up,” said the banker, who heads a commercial bank.

      “Netting out” is financial industry jargon for determining the difference between two values, usually the result of a purchase vis-a-vis a sale, or a deposit vis-a-vis a withdrawal.

      Transactions not balances

      Though he could not say so conclusively, the banker said it would be possible for each transaction to represent the same funds moving into and out of an account multiple times. One example, he said, is for the funds to be withdrawn by the account holder to be used to fund an investment in bonds, then returned to the account after it matures, having earned interest.

      Another bank president who spoke to the Inquirer agreed that the contents of the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) report presented by Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales recently represented “transactions” that “do not necessarily represent balances.”

      “I don’t know how they came up with the balances, but if they just summed up the transactions, then it wouldn’t be accurate,” he added.

      One ranking bank official also stressed that, in banking parlance, the term “account balance” is not synonymous with “transaction balance,” the latter having been used by the Ombudsman to describe the amounts allegedly belonging to Corona.

      Where’s money from?

      When viewed in this context, the banker said the contents of the bank accounts in question may turn out to be significantly lower than the $12 million initially suggested by the Ombudsman.

      “Maybe the question should be where those funds came from, regardless of how much they were,” he said.

      Thursday, the Inquirer spoke to an official of the AMLC, the agency that prepared the report on Corona’s transactions.

      To recall, the law allows the AMLC, traditionally with the benefit of a court order, to look into suspicious bank “transactions”—meaning the movement of funds into and out of accounts—but not the account balances themselves.

      This fine but key distinction may be one reason for the confusion as to exactly how much Corona has in his bank accounts.

      The AMLC official, on condition of anonymity, described Tiglao’s column published Thursday as being “on the correct track.”

      • johnny Lin says:

        Importante sa accounts bank numbered account o kahit anong account yung beginnjng balance lalo na kung malaki ang beginning deposit. Pag malaki tatlo lamang ang nakakaalam, yung depositor, ang bangko at ang AMLA dahil nareport yun.

        Hindi ako accountant pero bigyan natin ng comparison sa mga high rollers ng casino sa Vegas Pero pareho dinang suma kasi kapag more than $10000.00 ang transaction reportable din sa AMLA yun ng mga casino.

        Sa Casino ang high roller meron siyang account number din kahit na cash ang dala niyang pera o “marker” and gamit niya. Marker ay parang beinning loan account ng gambler nagumpisa na siyang magsugal.

        Kunwari meron high roller nagpapalit ng $10000 cash sa table #1. Nilista kaagad yun ng casino pit. Kapag nanalo siya ng $5000 pinalit iya ang pera niya na $15,000 at bumalik sa ibang table para maglaro ulit at nagpapalit ng $10,000 ulit? Bagong lista sa table #2 yun na $10,000 pero sa master list ng casino account meron na siya 15,000. Kung tumayo siya at meron pa rin 10,000 pinacash niya ulit yung chips niya at pumunta sa table #3 nagpalit na naman ng $10,000 alam ng master account 15,000 pa rin ang pera niya. Pagtapos tumayo siya nanalo ng 5000 ulit at pinalit 15,000 alam ng master account meron siyang 20,000 yung original niyang 10,000 at dalawang panalo ng 5,000 so total 20,000.

        Pero tingnan mo ang suma. Tatlo ang table nagpalit o nagdeposit ng 10,000 each so 30,000 ang pinalit na cash pero sa tatlong times pagtayo o nagwithdraw, ang total niya $40,000. Netting out nito ay $10,000 at yung original niya na $10,000 so tama yung master account $20,000 ang net perang chips sa bulsa ng high roller.

        Ngayun yung chip niya ng $20000 hindi niya pinapalit at pumunta sa table #4 at nagpapalit ng bagong cash na $5000, nakalista sa master account yun na meron siyang originl chips na 20,000 at bagong cash account na $5,000. Tumayo siya natalo ng 2000 at inuwi 3000 So ang total na chips na pera niya ay. 23,000. Hindi niya pinacash ang chips at kinabukasan nagpalit siya ng cash money totalling 20,00 at nanalo ng 15,000 so panibagong account 2nd day account niya meron siyang 35,000 at alam nila meron na siyang total money on hand at least 60,000 after 2days.
        Ganyan din sa bangko na mayroon bagong deposit account ginawa si Corona na galing kunwari sa ibang bangko. Madaling itrace sa bangko dahil may paper documents.Madaling itrace yung mga accounts kahit ilan pang accounts pinagbabaligtad ni Corona.

        Dahil nnirereport sa AMLA ang casino transaction more than $10,000 tatlo din ang nakakaalam sa transaction, gambler o depositor, casino master account o bank master account at AMLA.

        Parehong pareho, ang bangko at casino tracking, di ba? Kaya yung withdrawal at deposit ginawa frequently ni Corona akala niya hindi matrace nagkamali siya. Kung sa casino na tra track nila na walang paper documents e di lalo na sa bangko madaling itrace dahil may paper trail documents.

        Noon pa sinabi ko na yung “Kristo” lang sa sabong kayang saluksukin ang mga pera ni Corona, lalo na yung batikang auditor kagaya ng galing sa Commission on Audit. Kaya yung forensic accountant ni Corona ayaw magtestigo dahil magmumukha siyang moron sa pagexplain na walang katotohanan at malulusutan.

    • chit navarro says:

      iN 2004, EXCHANGE RATE IS $56.314 TO a USD
      hence, $9,340.00 deposited on Nove. 5 is equivalent to P525,972.80.

    • baycas says:

      Corona will ask the court for him to allow reading a prepared speech before the trial. The draft of this speech corrected many times has been finalized dealing mainly on attacks on Aquino and conspiracy to persecute Corona. His lawyers will insist that it is the right of the Respondent to make such opening statement from a question from his lawyer. How the rest of the Senators will respond is still a gamble but they have gathered the consent of 5-7 senators to this cause already. THIS IS A TEST ON THE JUDGMENT OF ENRILE AS PRESIDING OFFICER

      LIBERALITY will supervene…no question about it. He must be allowed…

      • baycas says:

        I remember that former SolGen Frank Chavez said in December, I believe, that impeachment is all about propaganda on either side.

        “Hearts and minds” of ALL Filipinos are involved here. Impeachment cases is POLITICAL.

        He who WINS the hearts and minds of the people, as represented by Senate now, WINS.

        At best, his prepared speech is an APPEAL TO EMOTION.

        However, his appeal to emotion does not make HIDDEN WEALTH a regular part of his official function as Chief Justice…

        Appeal to emotion, as experts say, is one of the logical fallacies.

        At best…for the prosecution, as well as The Filipino People as accusers…

        His prepared speech is a FALLACY that will eventually merit a conviction!

      • raissa says:

        Of course.

    • Leona says:

      To read a prepared speech as part of his testimony after a question is asked of him so as to read that speech is not authorized under the Rules of Evidence and Procedure because we follow the ENGLISH RULE that answers of a witness must be upon questions propounded by counsel for every answer. The AMERICAN RULE allows a witness to “tell a story” without question and answer method.

      So, if that is how the defense will present the CJ, the Senate presiding officer should not allow that even as an exception under no ground(s) at all! The CJ must give answer only after every question and not to read any prepared speech or “tell a long story.” Why is it not allowed. Because by reading a prepared speech or telling a story, many “inadmissible items” as evidence cannot be “Objected to” by the other party for being immaterial, irrelevant, impertinent, hearsay atbpa under the rules on evidence. It is unfair to the other side. The prosecution never adopted such method even with Ombudsman Morales or any of their witnesses during their evidence in-chief.

      His prepared speech if any, should be read at the balcony of the SC building when he gets back from the Senate! There, nobody will object to his reading it. But not at the Senate during his testimony.

      Again, if that is the “plan” of the Defense to allow the CJ to read a speech, what does it show? Guess…they want to put into record for evidentiary purposes or whatever, anything inadmissible without the prosecution being able to make objections. Their suspicion is that the defense of the CJ is altogether without any merits, it is weak and the odds as against whatever the prosecution has presented is 95% vs 5% against the CJ.

      Defense is showing this because of that situation. A fear they have now. A real fear at that.

      They will try anything desperate. Hon. Enrile should throw the book at them! if they ask for any reading of a speech.

      Hon. Enrile has never been a judge before but this time since he is and as presiding officer, he should know the reasons why allowing a witness and respondent to read a speech rather than give answer to every question is and has never been allowed in the courts or anywhere except when appearing for “confirmation” before a legislative body like Commission on Appointments, etc., as an appointee for a position in the gov’t.

      Never in court proceedings or Impeachment court. No. The CJ should be denied that chance. Just answer the question if he wants to testify. No reading of a speech!

  54. rafael l. vidal says:

    TIME IS RUNNING OUT

    Judgment day is just a week or two and the corona camp is literally moving heaven and earth to ensure his acquittal.

    It was reported that the INC has started a high-powered lobby in the senate while the thief’s media group composed of tatad/maceda/tiglao/magno/jurado,etc is pretty busy crafting their lantern of lies.

    PNoy has already started his DAANG MATUWID drive and will not culminate even if the thief is acquitted, which is very likely as of this moment.

    However, our group has still ample time to drive home our point to the senator-judges, especially those on the UNA senatorial ticket – A VOTE FOR ACQUITTAL/ABSTENTION IS A POLITICAL SUICIDE. Let us remind them always what happened to those senators who voted not to open the 2nd envelope during Erap’s impeachment trial in 2001, as mentioned by a fellow commenter yesterday.

    The infamy list I made (# 379), was culled from the comments of our fellow CPMERS whenever the subject of senator-judges’ voting inclination came out in this Blog during the long impeachment trial.

    The list may always be modified considering that Lapid is a creation of GMA and he is politically beholden to her, while Allan Cayetano is an enigma – he being fiercely anti-corruption and a very principled man.

    The others are “givens” unless they see the light at the end of the tunnel.

    CPMERS – CONTINUE THE FIRE BURNING, FOREVER

    • Rene-Ipil says:

      Rafael@426

      Let us employ block voting in the coming election/s. Zero vote for a political party which includes a senator who abstained or voted for acquittal of Corona or such senator’s son, relative, protege, or friend.

    • Leona says:

      All fears of lobbying will not “kindle” yet any fires for the CJ until he has testified! If at all he will.

      Many things can happen when he testifies. He may be denied to “read his prepared speech” by Hon. Enrile. That will be very embarrassing!

      Next, he may not be able to give good answers even on his direct examination. Worst on the cross-examination stage. How he will fair at all during his testimony is now in his hands. He has never been a good witness on the witness stand. Tuesday will prove how it will be for him. If and when he starts showing to “shift away” from answering directly the questions asked, he will start fidgetting, perspiring and be making many “abnormal” body English, a sign of not telling the truth or what?

      So, Tuesday is his D Day. He knows “the beaches” are well entrenched and well defended. Where will he attempt to land? He doesn’t know that. With the best battery of lawyers he has he cannot claim his case was railroaded. But if he is really innocent even with just a country lawyer he will be exonerated and proven innocent of the charges.

      There is no DNA testing here to prove he is innocent. Only his SALNs documents have been the source of his problem. The case against him is what we call airtight! Or he is in a vise grip. A lock has been put on him. Only the truth is the key to unlock it.

      There is no other way. May God have mercy on him!

  55. johnny Lin says:

    Answer to #399.6

    Public officials have the ethical responsibility, truthfulness, morality of reporting ASSETS without divulging where they are stashed, meaning despite listing the dollar oasset in equivalent pesos the confidentiality of the FCD accounts remained confidential.

    Those reported large ASSETS become a problem when the amount is massive requiring investigation on their source. Therefore, NON DISCLOSURE is hiding unexplained wealth with the intention to avoid further investigation. Simple, which Corona was very much aware based alone on his Marcos Ponencia.

    If the ASSETS are explainable in terms of source, the public employee does not have to be worried, ethically and morally.

    The mere fact an ASSET is not revealed, the employee is presumed to be hiding wealth, how small or big, unless it is an inadvertent error which according to law could be corrected with the year the SALN was filed. Leaving it unreported the following year or many years is no longer considered an error but a pattern of NON DISCLOSURE. This is where Corona committed his impeachable offense.

    RAs 6426 and 6713 are not in conflict with each other, nor one takes precedence over the other. For a Filipino public official, rules in reporting SALN is crystal clear muddled only by corrupt people hiding behind RA 6426 in which Corona is GUILTY. His impending testimony will dwell only on:
    1. how to further meddle the issue by refusing to give waiver on investigating his FCD accounts and keep pounding the confidentiality of RA 6426 including denying some accounts reported by AMLA.
    2. resorting to technicalities by saying for example that he had one original account but by repeated withdrawal and reinvestment of the same original money, it was given multiple account numbers by the bank so Morales was wrong. Ingenous but understandable only to morons like Corona lawyers and followers but never to well informed CPMers and Netizens.
    3. Demonizing Pres Aquino, Omb. Morales and justice Carpio as conspirators against him, as well as keeping Hacienda Luisita issue alive and appealing to farmers that he is their protector from oppression by the rich like the Cojuangcos.
    4. Preaching that his fight is about Court Independence but, actually, it is a warning to court employees that with his departure their corrupt activities will be curtailed so if they want to continue earning extra money thru illegal means, court employees must side with him. It is his CALL TO CONTINUE THEIR CORRUPTION.

    Very simple way to be ethically and morally right to follow by public officials which Corona intentionally violated because immorality is ingrained in his body and soul, shared by his wife and genetically inherited by their children. Publicly receiving holy communion by entire family while stolen BGE money is still kept by them is beyond reprehensible. Only devils possess such character.

    Mag-asawang Corona at mga anak, Ginagamit ang ngalan ng Diyos habang nakatampisaw at nakalubog sa kasalanan ng pagnanakaw.

    Walang budhi mga Corona, he he he.

  56. Den says:

    Two days before embattled Renato Corona takes the witness stand in defence of himself, there is a wealth of information on Sunday’s newspapers. For people who are keenly following developments in this catalytic episode in our history as a nation, it is a chance to actively participate in building a nation of informed, conscientious and discerning citizens. The Internet has also provided a vast universe of information that can be accessed at lightning speed, allowing even the most ordinary citizen to cross-reference facts and other data needed to make an intelligent assessment on their own.

    It is under the above premises that I offer to my fellow CPM’ers my humble views on how the Tuesday drama will unfold.

    1. Corona or his lawyers will attempt to show that the 82 accounts are normal in the course of doing investment transactions with banks.

    They may succeed in doing this, as Tiglao had shown in his column in PDI. Those familiar with banking practices will also agree with this position. They will attempt to whittle down the account to a few “mother accounts” and the rest shall be declared as either settlement accounts (transit accounts where proceeds from a closed investment account are deposited prior to being withdrawn again for placement to a new investment account) or investment accounts (unique accounts that are created for purposes of investing a depositor’s fund in an interest-bearing instrument). In so doing, they will attempt to prove that Corona’s dollar fund does not approximate the $10 – $12 million alleged by the Ombudsman.

    As Tiglao also insinuated in his column, Corona will attempt to establish that the actual amount of $700,000++ that he keeps in his accounts is more or less equal to the P34 million belonging to BGEI. This will justify the source of those dollar funds. However, in attempting to deconstruct the arguments put forward by the Ombudsman, Corona will implicitly acknowledge the existence of the dollar accounts. Furthermore, if it is established that the dollar deposit that he is acknowledging ($700K) co-existed with the peso account for the P34 million of BGEI, it will demolish his justification for the sources of the dollar accounts.

    Given the above, the only way to establish the real value of the dollar funds is for him to act on his earlier promise of opening his dollar accounts “in due time”. This time around, this promise would have to extend beyond the accounts kept in PSBank, as the AMLC report showed substantial dollar movements in other banks as well. A blanket waiver no less should be insisted by the prosecution.

    2. Corona will invoke the confidentiality clause of the Foreign Currency Deposit Act to justify either or both his refusal to open his dollar accounts for scrutiny and/or the need to declare his dollar accounts in his SALN.

    In a paper titled “Bank Secrecy Law: A Historical and Economic Analysis”, Francis David Ong Lim traces the progeny of bank secrecy laws (Republic Act 1405) and practices in the Philippines and how out-dated laws can create more problems than solutions based on historical and economic contexts. Republic Act 6426 or more commonly known as the “Foreign Currency Deposit Act” is actually a Presidential Decree issued by then President Ferdinand Marcos on April 4, 1974. As in RA 1405, this was issued in response to the prevailing economic, security and social issues at that time.

    It must be noted, however, that subsequent developments both in local and global contexts necessitated updates in the aforementioned laws. The global financial crisis and the rise of terrorism provided the impetus for a concerted effort among nations to curb abuses on financial systems. Thus, the Philippines passed RA 9160, later on amended by RA 9194, also commonly known as the “Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2001”. This law mandates banks and other financial and quasi-financial institutions to report to the AMLC any and all transactions that fall under prescribed criteria (“covered” transactions) of suspicious transactions.

    The same law explicitly defines as part of covered transactions those that are pertinent to RA 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) and RA 7080 (Plunder). On the other hand, RA 6770 (Ombudsman Act), and even the Philippine Constitution of 1987, provides the Ombudsman the power to enlist the help of government agencies and institutions to aid its investigations. This is the basis for the AMLC to declare that the request for the transaction records, and its subsequent release to the Ombudsman, was done within the legal framework. Note as well that all these laws include a repealing provision that automatically supersedes any and all contrary provisions of earlier laws. Thus, any contradicting provisions of both the Bank Secrecy Law and the FDCA are deemed repealed by provisions in the AMLA, RA 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees), Ombudsman Act and related laws on illegal wealth and other corrupt practices.

    In Philippine National Bank versus Gancayco, the Supreme Court wrote in reference to the conflicting provisions on confidentiality of bank deposits in the Bank Secrecy Law and the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, “Indeed, it is said that if the new law is inconsistent with or repugnant to the old law, the presumption against the intent to repeal by implication is overthrown because of the inconsistency or repugnancy reveals an intent to repeal the existing law.”

    3. In the absence of any evidence denying the legality, authenticity and accuracy of the AMLC report submitted to the Ombudsman, and if the Senate will take the view of Enrile that dollar accounts must be declared in the SALN, Corona will have no other choice but to stonewall and invoke his right against self-incrimination.

    This will be a no-win situation for Corona. If he cannot demolish the credibility of the AMLC report, it will clearly establish that he had actively acquired and invested on dollar funds that are not proportional to his lawful income. If assuming that he admits to those accounts, albeit insisting on a much lesser value than what is alleged, and points to BGEI as the source of the money, he will open an even bigger can of worms. It will open an opportunity for the prosecution to dig into the circumstances of how the BGEI money found its way into his peso and dollar accounts when it is supposed to be held in trust by Cristina Corona, or by Carla Corona-Castillo if she is indeed the new majority owner of BGEI. It will be very interesting to know how that money changed custody from BGEI to Cristina, then possibly to Carla and ultimately to Renato.

    Far more damaging than the failure to declare truthfully his assets and liabilities in his SALN, Corona will be exposed as a man of dubious character and integrity. He will be laid bare as a High Magistrate who hands down decisions with hands that have been dirtied by his own unscrupulous actions. Far from painting himself as a devoted family man protecting his wife and children, the BGEI saga and the money trail on his properties and bank accounts will show an entire family conniving and conspiring to circumvent laws either to avoid paying correct taxes or to hide unexplained wealth.

    On the witness stand, he will stand before the nation:

    … as a man who had no qualms about enjoying the perks of public office (“isang tawag lang…”);

    … as a man who is brazen enough to exert undue pressure on judges and justices handling cases filed by his court-hopping wife (he is seen in courts where cases involving his wife were heard even if he was already an associate justice in the SC);

    … as a man whose naked ambition culminated in his coveting and ultimately accepting the position of Chief Justice even if it could very well result in a constitutional crisis:

    … as a man who would cut short his overseas vacation in order to participate in deliberations involving the former official from whom he owes his midnight appointment and deliberately changing an en banc decision to favor his own view (Midas Marquez was also accused of lying when he claimed that GMA had complied with the conditions of the TRO);

    … as a man who cannot be decent enough to go on official leave so as to spare the Judiciary from any partisan activity while his impeachment trial is on-going, thus endangering the integrity of the entire judicial system.

    Renato Corona is a farce, an aberration brought about by a culture of impunity in our government and society. He will stand before the Senate sitting as Impeachment Court representing the sovereign will of the people. A vote of acquittal or abstention is a vote for Impunity. A vote for conviction is to serve notice that there is hope for this country – that yes, a clean government is possible.

    • Rene-Ipil says:

      Den@430

      This is in regard to the $700K mentioned by Tiglao purportedly corresponding to the 34M pesos of BGEI. In addition to the 37M pesos withdrawn from and redeposited by Corona on December 12, 2011 with PSBANK, there is another amount of 26M coming from the sale of la vista and Ayala heights lots in QC in 2010. Corona falsely declared in his 2010 SALN that he used said 26M pesos to buy the Bonifacio and Bellagio condos in 2010. But the said condos had been fully paid already in 2005 and 2009, respectively. So the 26M pesos was unspent in 2010 and should have been declared as cash in Corona’s 2010 SALN.

    • keanleogo says:

      @Den,

      I concur.
      A vote of acquittal or abstention is a vote for impunity in this Corona impeachment trial.

    • Coronarroyo is not only “a farce, an aberration”; he is an abomination, nay, an obscenity.

  57. rafael l. vidal says:

    @mel 424

    The OMB is an independent gov’t entity created by Sec. 5, Art. X1, of the 1987 Constitution, which states, in full, “There is hereby the independent office of the Ombudsman composed of the Ombudsman to be known as Tanodbayan, one overall deputy and at least one deputy each for Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao.”

    The OMB enjoys fiscal autonomy and its annual appropriations shall be automatically and regularly released (Sec. 14)

    • Mel says:

      @rafael

      Thanks for the reply.

      As per your input on the independence of the OMB, point well taken.

      In reference (see #424) to my open clarification before the CPMs, the first page of the document (see comment #420 of @keanleogo’s link to rappler’s) written in the Agency to the Supreme Court Taft Ave., Manila.

      Since the OMB, as you narrated, is an independent body – what is the relevance of stating the Agency for the Supreme Court with address at Taft ave. Manila in that first docu ‘Memorandum’ Page. (btw, the Phils’. Supreme Court is at Padre Faura Street and Taft Avenue in Manila).

      On that same docu page, the ‘Special Panel of Investigators’ belong to the OMB – right?)

      For some reason, Agency Supreme Court shouldn’t have been noted or written if the OMB or its ‘Special Panel of Investigators’ doesn’t have to furnish or to account (e.g. submit CC) it’s report to the SC. It just raises a question of relevance to the Special Panel of Investigators’ report FOR the OMB.

  58. madflip says:

    1,000+ comments, I’m not too sure if somebody has already mentioned this here but Mr. Macasaet’s column in Malaya says that in 2004, the thief justice bragged to 2 fellow SC jurists that he was holding money for then-president GMA. Here’s the link:

    http://www.malaya.com.ph/index.php/opinion/3750-whose-dollars-are-those

  59. Mel says:

    Hi Raïssa

    Are you going to write an article about this document purportedly an Investigation Report by a ‘Special Panel of Investigators’ under the OMB?

    This material was in a Rappler link, supplied by commenter @keanleogo (#420)

    I. One item under the ‘Investigative Activities’ table column head:
    - AMLC = AMLC requires additional requirements.

    II. One item under the ‘Matters investigated’

    26. In relation to the Banck Accounts of Subject Corona, this Office sought the assistance of the Anti-Money Laudnering Council (AMLC). Per reply-letter dated 07 March 2012 and per subsequent discussion with the AMLC officials, they require further information and supporting documents showing the commission of any underlying unlawful activity by Subject Corona to warrant the filing of an application for bank inquiry with the Regional Trial Court pursuant to Section 11 of RA9160 (Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2001).

    ——–

    The world knows by now that the OMB have already produced her department’s investigative report using the AMLC’s reports in reference to R Corona’s FCDs. With the help of the COA, they did produce an analysis which were presented to the Senate Impeachment last week.

    Is OMB’s senate impeachment report thesame as the rappler’s docus?

    Yet in the two items I wrote as above, taken from the rappler links ‘reports’, they seem to be contradictory.

    nakuryente kaya ang sambayanang Pilipino dito, o ang rappler about this documents.
    or a false or fake investigations’ report released by parties favoring the defense of R Corona?

    IF THE AMLC, as one item to begin with, did cooperate. Why wasn’t it rated as ‘Complied’ in the rappler supplied documents – Special Panel of Investigators report for the OMB.

    BTW, in the written Memo on the main page, is the OMB under the Supreme Court?

    CPMers, anyone?

    • Rene-Ipil says:

      Mel@424

      The information in the documents personally handed by ALMC Executive Director Vicente Aquino to OMB. Morales was given in a “need to know basis”. The panel of investigators cannot access it from ALMC. It is only for the eyes of OMB. Morales who has the option to dispose of such info. In this case it was OMB. Morales who informed her subordinates about the ALMC info.

      Please see my post @298 for more.

      • Mel says:

        @Rene

        You wrote in your comment #298;

        In this case, the AMLC report is an official report made in the performance of the AMLC’s duty under law, specifically Republic Act No. 9160, as amended by Republic Act No. 9194 (Anti-Money Laundering Act). In fact, the Ombudsman even testified that the same was given to her personally by AMLC Executive Director Vicente Aquino.

        Based on what you quoted (Reference news link? please), this docu (see comment #420 of @keanleogo’s link to rappler’s) is only the ‘Special Panel of Investigators” report not including the AMLC official’s 17-page report which it had furnished ‘directly’ to the Ombudsman.

        That is more plausible then. I missed your Comment @ #298.

        Hence, the rappler’s 20 page docu is part and parcel of the OMB’s materials. In that document – III Investigative Activities, Table 1. The only reference to AMLC is at Page 4 of 20.

        DOCUMENT REQUIRED = Bank Records

        OFFICE/DEPT = Anti-Money Laudnering Council

        STATUS = AMLC requires additional requirements

        In the ‘Special Panel of Investigators’ report, the AMLC didn’t supply the group info as per their request.

        Thanks. @Rene

    • baycas says:

      @Mel,

      On your two points:

      As stated in your comment above and located on Page 4/20 and Page 13/20 in the rappler Scribd documents…

      I DON’T SEE ANYTHING WRONG THERE.

      AMLC didn’t further investigate as the transaction records were already with them when the OMB requested for assistance. Covered institutions (banks) MUST submit transactions above the threshold for the transactions to remain SECRET with the banks.

      Going deeper, would mean the necessity for AMLC to file for a court order to sift through SECRET bank records.

      —–

      baycas says:
      May 16, 2012 at 8:42 am

      Banks report transactions exceeding threshold value to AMLC by default.

      AMLC logs all reports. Any anomalous or suspicious accounts merit AMLC investigation for possible money laundering. No such investigation occurred, I believe (I wonder why?).

      Here comes OMB for the case build-up…

      OMB sought assistance from AMLC because complaints of unexplained/Ill-gotten wealth were lodged to OMB.

      AMLC responded with the gathered list of transactions.

      Note that communications were confidential until the Ombudsman testified in the Senate Impeachment Court [sic].

      Note that presumption of regularity exists.

      Note that all testimonies are under oath.

      Note that, as expected, Cuevas tried to impugn malice on the part of OMB. He tried to impeach the spotless 40 years of service of the Ombudsman.

      • Mel says:

        @baycas

        Thanks for the reply.

        Medyo na-claro na (ng kaunti).

        @Rene’s reply (see #424.1) provided a clearer picture why the ‘Special Panel of Investigators’ didn’t receive the AMLC documents at their request (Note. III Investigative Activities, Table 1. Page 4 of 20.).

        THE AMLC provided a report directly to the OMB CCM.

        The OMB used the AMLC’s official report. I guess, the powerpoint of ‘lantern’ of lies/deceit illustrating R Coron’as web of FCDs were an analysis worked on with COA. Which was scratched Off later due to illegality – technically it was the COA official who spoke, and it was not OMB CCM.

        In effect, the OMB’s ‘Special Panel of Investigators’ on their request to AMLC was stated as ‘Bank Records’. Hence it points number 26 (Page 13 of 20). “In relation to the Banck Accounts of Subject Corona, this Office sought the assistance of the Anti-Money Laudnering Council (AMLC). Per reply-letter dated 07 March 2012 …”

        The AMLC can not comply without a court order. AT Item point 27 (Page 13 of 20) did state;

        27. However, based on information obtained by the Honorable Ombudsman, it appears that there are several dollar and peso bank transactions in the name of Subject Corona. The aggregate value…

        As a result, the AMLC used the automated, compliant reports from banks whereby client’s account with transactions for or over PHP500K are regularly reported to them.

        In the above quotation, there is a footnote reference 37. Annex A. But not available from rappler’s.

        Thanks.

    • Leona says:

      OMB = Office of Management and Budget? No. This is under the Executive Department. Kay PNoy opisina ito! Correct me if you are right.

      • Mel says:

        @Leona

        duon sa OMB #427. acronym used for Ombudsman.

        as for your query ‘OMB = Office of Management and Budget?’

        Sa pinas, it is -

        The Department of Budget and Management of the Republic of the Philippines (DBM) (Filipino: Kagawaran ng Pagbabadyet at Pamamahala) is an executive body under the Office of the President of the Philippines. It is responsible for the sound and efficient use of government resources for national development and also as an instrument for the meeting of national socio-economic and political development goals.

        The current Secretary of Budget and Management appointed by President Benigno Aquino III is Florencio Abad. The department has four Undersecretaries and four assistant secretaries.

  60. Bonifaciokatipunero says:

    Mga kababayan, mag noise barrage po kayo sa Tuesday sa labs ng senate… Let them hear our cry for good governance! Let the senate knows na Hindi po natutulog ang mga Pilipino! Let Corona knows na Dapat na syan MAHIY sa Sobrang kapal ng mukha Nya!
    Tama na ang pangloloko ng mga pulitikong yan! Tama na ang pagnanakaw! Linisin ang Judiciary, paalisin ang mga magnanakaw!

  61. Minda Nao says:

    A PRAYER TO GOD

    Dear Lord, as I got to sleep tonight my mind is filled with great concern on my beloved
    Philippines.

    Please Lord send your Holy Spirit to all those whom you want to use to
    change the Philippine society especially our President. Turn your attention O Lord to the Judiciary and the Senate. For too long, our country has been under the grip of corruption and persecution by the powers that be. Today we have the Judiciary seemingly detached from the suffering nation they serve. We have those in the Senate whose sole objective is personal gain and not public service. To the wicked in their ranks, weaken their hold on our country O Lord, confound them and scatter them to oblivion.

    Bless O Lord those who take the stand for what is just and for what is favorable in your sight. Bless especially O Lord the CPM group and the couple Raissa and Allan and their family, always send your protective angels on them.

    Thanks O Lord for giving us this rare chance for standing up and making known to everyone that the Filipinos deserve a better country. In Jesus name, amen.

  62. J.A. says:

    Hey gang… Haven’t heard from Raissa for a while now. Hope she is okay and just working on another pasabog?

  63. max says:

    My connection is getting spastic. I am re-sending my comments.
    @Leona # 388, kalakala

    AMLA HAUNTING GLORIA ARROYO, SAYS JOKER
    “When this (AMLA) was being discussed in 2001, we warned President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo: ‘This will haunt you.
    I am confused why would Joker warn Gloria? Was he aware of any irregular/illegal activities by Gloria that he warned her about AMLA? I’d like to hold on to Joker’s image of a decent people power man and would like to think that he will never be a party to any illegal or criminal acts.
    “But she ignored (our warnings). Look, she is now being prosecuted partly because and substantially because of the reports of the (Anti-Money Laundering Council against Chief Justice Renato Corona),” Arroyo said.
    I tried to follow the IC trial but I must be missing something. I don’t know how Joker was able to state above claim.
    *************************
    After the tragic 911 event, AMLA has been viewed as a tool to curb illegal financial transactions and control terroristic activities. AMLA is not an exclusive Philippine legislation but a global regulatory system that many countries adhere to as responsible global citizens – to make the world a little safer.

    If this PDI item is true, why would Joker choose GMA’s and other future leaders’ welfare to take precedence above all others.

    We have our own share of Abu Sayyaf, suspected Al Qaeda operations and other elements threatening the safety of our society. Drug trafficking is not undeniable as well. We have to ensure that their funding is cut off and not funnelled through our banking system.

    What alternative would have Joker advised GMA to ditch these AMLA measures. (I must give credit to GMA for not listening to Joker’s advice.) Besides, GMA would be truly ill-advised to think that she has the option not to cooperate with the rest of the world.

    North American, European and Asian countries have adopted AMLA. Can Joker please cite any ex-leader who was unjustifiably crushed because of AMLA. Bush is still out. Sotto’s fear of having a governor “durog” because of AMLA is unjustified. US Libertarians would not have allowed implementation of this AMLA if Joker’s and Tito’s thinking have valid points.

    Other countries’ banking systems and practices are more rigid in enforcing their AMLA measures. E.g., needs two pieces of good photo id’s before he can open an account. One known as Joseph cannot open an account as Pedro. Documentations have to be presented establishing the sources of funds when transmitting and receiving amounts in accordance with AMLA rules. If any, AMLA should have more teeth and more diligent in implementing its rules.

    I have also included the link re some info on AMLA outside the Philippine vista.

    http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/195955/amla-haunting-gloria-arroyo-says-joker-arroyo

    http://www.fintrac-canafe.gc.ca/publications/guide/Guide2/2-eng.asp#s2-1

    ***********
    Additional issues (Sotto) —
    “If the Ombudsman would write a letter and the AMLC acts on it, any governor or candidate for that matter would be crushed (“durog”) by information about his alleged bank accounts or any other allegation, especially before an election,” Sotto said.

    • Leona says:

      “Any governor xxx about his alleged bank accounts xxx” dugtong “that contains huge money deposit beyond his salary and ordinary means of living style!”… si Sen. Sotto always “incomplete” ang salita niya! He makes remarks that are “kulang kulang” parang may “sirang bigote” sa bibig! Does he remember his chief of staff, a PNP officer with P2M deposit in the bank? How did that guy get such money? What happened to the investigation of that? Fizzled out!

      Walang kuwenta ang sinasabi nito. “There is an announcement before you go.” Yan lang.

  64. keanleogo says:

    @ Raissa,

    This is the link for 20 pages of AMLC report to Ombudswoman from Rappler.com

    http://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/5626-copy-of-ombudsman-s-report-on-cj-corona

    • Mel says:

      correction.

      This link supplied does not refer to the ‘AMLC report to Ombudswoman’.

      WRONG.

      Rather, it is a panel of investigators’ report FOR the Ombudsman CCM in reference to 3 lodged complaints made on Feb 7, 01 Mar, 28 Mar, 2012.

      IT IS NOT THE AMLC report for the OMB. Its the other way around, the AMLC was to be given a copy of the panel of investigators’ report.

      LOL!

      • keanleogo says:

        @Mel,

        My mistake. You are right.
        Thanks for the correction.

        • Mel says:

          No worries @keanleogo.

          I have a lot of mistakes also in this blogsite

          But thanks for the link BTW..

    • Mel says:

      please refer to my comment #424.

      documents in the rappler link MAY NOT HAVE BEEN VERIFIED AS GENUINE by the rappler blogsite.

      i may be wrong.

      but read the complete 20 pages at your pleasure.

  65. max says:

    @Leona # 388
    AMLA HAUNTING GLORIA ARROYO, SAYS JOKER

    “When this (AMLA) was being discussed in 2001, we warned President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo: ‘This will haunt you.

    I am confused why would Joker warn Gloria? We need to know particularly what item was he particularly concerned about that will haunt Gloria.

    Was Joker aware of any irregular/illegal activities by Gloria that he warned her about AMLA? I hold on to Joker’s image of a decent people power man and would like to think that he will never be a party to any illegal or criminal acts.

    “But she ignored (our warnings). Look, she is now being prosecuted partly because and substantially because of the reports of the (Anti-Money Laundering Council against Chief Justice Renato Corona),” Arroyo said.

    I tried to follow the IC trial but I must be missing something. I don’t know how Joker was able to state above claim.

    *************************
    After the tragic 911 event, AMLA has been viewed as a tool that will help curb illegal financial transactions and control terroristic activities. AMLA is not an exclusive Philippine legislation but a global regulatory system that many countries adhere to as responsible global citizens – to make the world a little safer.

    If this PDI item is true, why would Joker choose GMA’s and other future leaders’ welfare to take precedence above all others.

    It is an established fact that we have our own share of Abu Sayyaf, suspected Al Qaeda operations and other elements that threaten the safety of our society. Drug trafficking is not undeniable as well. We have to ensure that their funding is cut off and not funnelled through our banking system. At least, make it as hard as possible for them.

    I wonder what Joker would have suggested as an alternative for him to advise GMA to ditch these AMLA measures. (I must give credit to GMA for not listening to Joker’s advice.) Besides, GMA would be truly ill-advised to think that she has the option not to cooperate with the rest of the world.

    North American, European and Asian countries have adopted AMLA. Can Joker please cite any ex-leader who was unjustifiably crushed because of AMLA. Bush is still out. Sotto’s fear of having a governor “durog” because of AMLA is unjustified, unless that person has committed illegal acts. Libertarians in the US would not have allowed implementation of this AMLA if Joker’s and Tito’s thinking have valid points.

    In other countries, banks are more rigid in enforcing their AMLA measures. One has to have two pieces of good photo IDs before he can open an account. Documentations have to be presented establishing the sources of funds when transmitting and receiving amounts in accordance with AMLA rules. One known as Joseph cannot open an account as Pedro. If any, AMLA should have more teeth and more diligent in implementing its rules.

    Enclosed is the article regarding Joker’s warning to GMA. I have also included the link to provide some info on AMLA outside the Philippine vista.

    http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/195955/amla-haunting-gloria-arroyo-says-joker-arroyo

    http://www.fintrac-canafe.gc.ca/publications/guide/Guide2/2-eng.asp#s2-1

    **********
    Some major points, from PDI article
    PDI cited that Sen. Joker Arroyo warned GMA about AMLA – that it could be used against her and the other future leaders, once they are no longer in power.

    - He personally warned Mrs. Arroyo of the dangers of an Anti-Money Laundering Law (Amla)

    “I foresee an impact. If the Ombudsman would write a letter and the AMLC acts on it, any governor or candidate for that matter would be crushed (“durog”) by information about his alleged bank accounts or any other allegation, especially before an election,” Sotto said.

  66. max says:

    INC lobbying for Corona

    Whether true or not, the senate, particularly JPE and MDS – should have given a reminder – Sub Judice.

    JPE said has made his stance clear that they cannot be swayed.
    However, if it were other groups or individuals, MDS would have waaaaahed out
    Sub-Judice

  67. baycas says:

    MDS going gaga over court order

    AMLC does NOT need court order to get information from the covered institutions (banks).

    The banks MUST report to AMLC the transactions whose amounts went beyond the threshold for them to remain secret with the banks.

    AMLC reported the transactions to the OMB when the latter asked for assistance on Corona’s case.

    All information were confidential UNTIL the Corona camp put Ombudsman Carpio-Morales on the stand as hostile witness.

    Corona just got what’s coming to him.

    Lady Gaga just arrived but the Gaga arrived a long time ago on the Senate floor.

    • baycas says:

      Ombudsman Carpio-Morales’ testimony can only be controverted by another witness testimony.

      Hostile witness against a true witness for the defense.

      This is none other than the impeached head of the Judiciary, RENATO CORONADO CORONA.

      Let us hear his testimony. Let us watch his demeanor. Let us witness how he will squirm his way out of his self-imposed dilemma.

      Let us see if he will enjoy the presumption of regularity when he will be able to explain that wealth secrecy is part of the Chief Justice’s OFFICIAL function.

    • jun 2 says:

      AHAHAHAHA, me punch line!!

  68. Mel says:

    Basa-Guidote: A story of betrayal in the family
    By Ana Basa

    Philippine Daily Inquirer
    1:36 am | Sunday, May 20th, 2012

    (Editor’s Note: Las Vegas-based Ana Basa issued this statement through Inquirer senior reporter Cynthia Balana.)

    It all started when Cristina Roco-Corona entered the picture at Basa-Guidote Enterprises Inc. (BGEI). Since 1963, her father, Vicente Roco, served as BGEI president and her mother, Asuncion Basa, was board secretary. The stockholders never questioned the propriety of the actions of Cristina’s parents. For over two decades, everything was silent on the BGEI front. It turned out that it was only the lull before the storm.

    The first hint of trouble came in 1989 when the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a preliminary injunction against the majority stockholders when my father, Jose Ma. Basa III, called for a meeting to elect new officers because of his apprehension over the management of the corporation when tenants started to file lawsuits against the corporation for various reasons.

    Vicente Roco casually delegated his responsibility and functions to his daughter, Cristina. There was no board resolution to support that action as the rest of the board was completely ignorant of it. Cristina did not waste any time. As if making up for the decades of tranquility at BGEI, she went on to run the corporation according to her whims. She effectively kept the majority stockholders in the dark, completely unaware of the company’s operations and even more, of its financial status.

    Stockholders kept in dark

    Cristina never seemed to notice and certainly showed little concern about corporate laws. She went about running the business like she was the sole owner despite her mother, Asuncion, owning only 10 percent of the corporation, neither informing the majority stockholders nor accounting for whatever income it generated.

    Despite the legal steps taken by the majority stockholders, the SEC saw nothing wrong with Cristina’s actions. It made no attempt to resolve the legal conflicts in the corporation. It did not even see anything wrong with Cristina’s failure to report the death of her father in 1993, as provided by law. The SEC did not care that it took two years, only in 1995, to report the death. The law of the jungle had taken over the corporation.

    Cristina, along with her husband, Renato Corona, negotiated the sale of the BGEI’s centerpiece property, which was sold for P34.7 million to the City of Manila, with the check made out to Cristina Corona, in trust for BGEI. Like all the other transactions, the documents accompanying the sale were at best questionable and at worst dubious. Stockholders were never notified of the negotiations, sale and the proceeds from the payment.

    New revelations

    It was not until the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona that the remaining stockholders learned of the P11-million cash advance from BGEI that Renato Corona reported in his statement of assets, liabilities and net worh (SALN). And with the revelations in the testimony last week of Sheriff Joseph Bisnar, Cristina pulled off the biggest caper yet in the corporation!

    Apparently, 4,839 shares representing 90.7 percent of BGEI were auctioned off and sold to the Coronas’ daughter, Carla Corona-Castillo, in 2003 for an unconscionable amount of P28,000, to satisfy the P500,000 in damages that the court awarded to Cristina who won the libel suits she filed against my father and several BGEI stockholders and employees.

    How could Cristina, as the supposed administrator and caretaker of BGEI, have allowed the sale when she knew how much money the corporation’s centerpiece property was sold for in 2001 to the City of Manila?

    Cristina, through her lawyers, also notified the courts of my father’s death on Aug. 29, 2002. Under the Revised Penal Code, the criminal and administrative liability of an accused is extinguished once he dies. There was actual notice given and we are wondering how the court could have enforced the writ of execution against my father in 2003 and how the two libel cases filed by Cristina against my father became final on Oct. 12, 2002, months after he died.

    Nearly all of those who came across the BGEI story and testimonies at the impeachment trial just couldn’t believe this could happen in a civilized country like the Philippines. And yet, it was there for all to see. A classic lecture on how to violate corporate laws, it stands out as one of the all-time wonders in Philippine business history. To the people who believe they live in a country governed by laws, these would seem outrageous, and yet, as outrageous, unjust, insane and unkind as it is, that is exactly what is happening to us, and it is not just Cristina’s doing.

    Rape of BGEI

    It is mind-boggling to think how Cristina was able to pull all of these off by herself. Renato Corona has been saying that ordinaryong tao lang din sila (they are just ordinary people). How then can Cristina as an ordinary wife wield so much power? Far more powerful than moneyed business corporations which, even if they tried, could not approximate what she was able to accomplish in over two decades.

    The answer comes in the form of Renato Corona. He happened to be at the right place at the right time when Cristina got away with the rape of BGEI. With his powerful position and connections, he could obviously be the brain that pulled the strings so that Cristina would be able to accomplish what she did. There were some obvious manipulating and maneuvering of the cases. Considering the network of influence Renato Corona has cultivated over all those years, and with his present position as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court making him more powerful than ever, it does not take much to arrive at the conclusion that we were in the fight of our lives.

    Lawyers were confused as to how one case (probate, which Cristina filed) was being tried in one court while another (determining the ownership of stockholders) was being heard in a different court. As if acting in obedience to an invisible hand, both courts raised legal issues that in effect meant one would not make a decision unless the other first resolves the case before it. Of course, each one could also be acting independently, prompted to have the other court resolve its case first for convenience. Let’s not even mention the SEC that is mandated to give a financial report on the status of the business but has been dragging its feet from the start.

    My father used to say “justice delayed is justice denied.” My father, after years of struggling and fighting for justice, died heartbroken, drained emotionally and psychologically. From what he shared with us during the closing moments of his life, he was still in search of justice. With his passing, we have carried on with the legal battles that exacted so much from him and from all of us as well. Left with this responsibility to continue his fight for justice, we have picked up the torch to move ahead. Somehow, we believe that God believes in us, not only to trust us with these problems, but also for us to make a positive contribution by taking on and eventually overcoming a silent but very crooked thorn in the country’s judicial system. Some would have simply raised their hands in surrender but not my father. This is not surprising given his heroic bloodline.

    Today, nothing much remains of BGEI. Cristina made sure of that, with the thorough cleansing of the stockholders as she has effected the transfer of whatever resources the BGEI had. The remaining stockholders of BGEI cannot be faulted for their pessimism because true to form, Renato Corona was in the right place at the right time.

    God’s approval

    Considering that we are fighting a just cause not only for our family but also for the good of the country and to save the integrity of the Supreme Court, we are now optimistic that Renato Corona is willing to take the witness stand at the impeachment trial. He knows the truth and that’s all we ask, for him to come out and tell the truth. Anyway, it all boils down to one fact, God’s approval. If He rules that it is time for this, no force on earth can prevent the outcome of the fate of Chief Justice Renato Corona from happening. There is nothing more reassuring in this world than the thought that while we cannot understand many things, we have a God who is in control.

    First posted 12:36 am | Sunday, May 20th, 2012

  69. baycas says:

    1/2

    Presumption of regularity in the performance of official duty

    a. How the House of Representatives transmitted the AOIs to the Senate

    b. How the Senate is trying the impeachment case now

    c. All the witnesses from government, so far, on the side of the prosecution and the defense UNLESS testimonies were crushed on cross-examination

    d. For brevity, as well as my instant recall now, highlighted witnesses are:

    - LRA’s Diaz testimony; but his evidence-gathering technique did not use a fine-tooth comb, nonetheless, some pieces are still pertinent, relevant, and material to the prosecution case

    - Atienza “brokered” the sale of BGEI property which is beyond his official duty

    • baycas says:

      2/2

      - Bisnar’s testimony; crushed by its unrealistic and unbelievable account of his whole story AND the fact that the negative character of the Renato-Cristina-Carla team was exposed

      - Ombudsman Carpio-Morales’ testimony is the embodiment of the “presumption of regularity”; the defense was not able to crush her testimony…

      - A witness-in-waiting who once said…

      AKO LANG ANG PWEDENG MAGPALIWANAG NUN.

      - Renato Coronado Corona, 6 March 2012

      Let us hear his testimony. Let us watch his demeanor. Let us witness how he will squirm his way out of his self-imposed dilemma.

      Let us see if he will enjoy the presumption of regularity when he will able to explain that wealth secrecy is part of the Chief Justice’s OFFICIAL function.

      • Mel says:

        “Let us see if he will enjoy the presumption of regularity when he will able to explain that wealth secrecy is part of the Chief Justice’s OFFICIAL function.”

        LOL!

        Let’s all wait and see…

        suspense, mayruong din kayang ‘Thrilla in the Senate?’

        baka mamaya, sabihin niyang, ‘I am god, above the rule of law, above all men – I am the Chief, chief of lies.’.

    • baycas says:

      (…sorry, the second part of the above comment won’t appear. WordPress is probably “censoring” it…)

      • Mel says:

        same on my end.

        RR might have something to release soon.

        That will be good. Hopefully her latest article is before Tuesday.

        —————–

        Will R Corona’s hubris be tamed? To naught?

        One of R Corona’s highlights. “My dollar sources are private. I exercise my right against self-incrimination not to divulge my FCD bank statements/balances.” Or “I have a written agreement, arrangement with Jane Doe (e.g. Carpa) as it’s trustee to those FCDs.”

        And why not 82 accounts? “unit investments when matured are merged with x, y, z accounts into a new dummy withholding account”. old accounts are closed. some or many of the 82 accounts are dormant, inactive or closed in lieu of created (replacement) accounts for different ‘products or services’ arranged with the bank and others.

        R Corona doesn’t have to present evidences to prove his general statements. It’s his word, tale, spin, strategy to evade admissions to culpability to crime(s). He’ll deal with it in the Ombudsman’s turf.

        R Corona has resigned himself that he will be found guilty. He’s just looking for opportunities for the other investigative bodies (i.e. OMB) to breach applicable laws, and how far their ‘goods’ on him are discovered. It’s a play man’s fool game.

        • Mel says:

          He will not have documents and he will not have the banks to back up his claims. It will be his word against the official records of the Ombudsman. Mahirap mapaniwala,” Rep. Neri Colmenares said.

          CJ refusal to summon banks telling: prosecutor

          By David Dizon, ABS-CBNnews.com
          Posted at 05/21/2012 10:52 AM
          Updated as of 05/21/2012 12:28 PM

          MANILA, Philippines – Chief Justice Renato Corona’s refusal to summon bank managers to testify in his impeachment trial is very telling since there will be no one to support his claims on his dollar accounts, a member of the House prosecution panel said Monday.

          Bayan Muna party-list Rep. Neri Colmenares said Corona’s refusal to summon bank managers to his trial will mean that his defense will rely only on his testimony and possible other evidence to explain his dollar accounts.

          “If they had summoned the banks, the question would be simple: did Ombudsman [Conchita Carpio Morales] give correct information? If the banks say Corona has no accounts, then the Ombudsman’s testimony will be put under question. The problem is Corona did not summon the banks. We are surprised by that. Anything he says will be just his word,” Colmenares told ABS-CBN’s “Umagang Kay Ganda.”

          “He will not have documents and he will not have the banks to back up his claims. It will be his word against the official records of the Ombudsman. Mahirap mapaniwala,” he added.

          The Ombudsman earlier revealed that Corona had 82 accounts containing at least $10 million in “transactional balances” from 2003 to 2011. She said the information came from the Anti-Money Laundering Council based on reports from at least 5 local banks.

          Corona lawyer Karen Jimeno said the defense team decided against calling both the branch managers and AMLC personnel to the impeachment trial since they would be accused of delaying the trial.

          She said the senator-judges are eagerly awaiting Corona’s testimony.

          READ THE REST AT ABS-CBNnews dot com

  70. johnny Lin says:

    Show of force or Corruption galore?

    Court employees will gather their supporters to accompany Corona.Public employees who will certainly collect their daily wage by not working. Zenith of corruption common to govt employees exemplified by court workers. Getting paid without working. Very simple to understand why Philippines lag behind other third world countries. Public employees follow corrupt examples of their boss.

    Mga magnanakaw ng Bayan, pinangungunahan ngayon ng Supreme Court employees karamihan ay 15-30 types sa panahon ni Corona. Daig pa ang public works noon sa dami ng ghost employees.

    Noon kapag sinabi empleyado sa Customs tingin ng mga tao Corrupt
    ngayon kapag sinabi empleyado ng korte sigurado Corrupt.
    Weder weder talaga.

    • Leona says:

      I never could imagine, and I am still very surprised that a person of his stature can allow “propanganda style” of Minister Goebbels of Hitler to try saying “the more people coming out to support you means you are right in our cause.” What happened to Germany and the German people? Destructions all over that country was accomplished!

      A justice of the SC on this kind of march? Shameful really. Court employees pa! More shame on him and to the employees. And an insult to our honored belief on the rule of law.

      Never read or heard another justice in the SC condeming this kind of march for the CJ. What happened to them? Did they cut their tongues? Lost their mind? Is this how our judges think and conduct their lives of right thinking?

      Not even our own IBP, a national association of lawyers, played neutral on this issue.. Some of the officials resorted instead to politicized and misuse the organization without clear authority from the members. A shame indeed! Misuse I say because members’ “yearly dues” to the IBP is exposed to be spent for something not in the By-Laws,etc. of this body, or for some officials “to ride” on to mislead the members and the public that such is the stand of body when it is not.

      Reports that some officials of the INC is lobbying for Corona is another shame to us and the Nation. I am glad that the officials of the Catholic Church has not (yet) done the same.

      When such propaganda movement such as this for Corona is happening, a message is sent to disregard the rule of law! All other things counts but not the rule.

      Truth will always be revealed. Many are just stubborn and ignorant to fight the truth.

    • Springwoodman says:

      Now, in the time of Corona’s court, the Lady Justice is wearing a blindfold, not for objectivity, but because she is ashamed to see the depths that the court has fallen into.

      The scales of justice in her right hand are no longer used to measure the rights or wrongs of a case, but to weigh the gold that each litigant brings. Whoever brings more, wins.

      The double-edged sword in her left hand no longer symbolizes Reason and Justice. Rather it symbolizes the Insanity of Greed and the Cancer of Corruption. It is now a weapon used by thieving jurists for their own protection against the Constitution and the laws of the land.

      Under Corona, SC no longer means Supreme Court. It stands for Stupendous Corruption.

      • Anton Mendoza says:

        I agree 100%! Very well said. ’tis “see no evil hear no evil ” amongst SC employees.

  71. junjune says:

    If the senator judges elect for secret balloting, this means a thief justice acquital. However, should they decide for open voting, the possibility of conviction is high. Nonetheless, we should not be caught off-guard. If the tj supporters will have a motorcade, let’s block their way, occupy Roxas Blvd leading to the Senate.

  72. baycas says:

    Comment testing…1…2…

  73. Anton Mendoza says:

    PAGING CHAIRMAN DUQUE!, ang mga SC employees ay magsasagawa daw ng motorcade sa martes . Dapat mag file sila ng one day leave of absence.

    • junjune says:

      At sana tingnan din ng COA resident auditor nila kung gagamitan ng pera ng bayan ang motorcade nila. Ito ay kung hindi kasama sa payroll ni thief justice ang auditor nila.

  74. baycas says:

    Presumption of regularity in the performance of official duty

    a. How the House of Representatives transmitted the AOIs to the Senate

    b. How the Senate now is trying the impeachment case

    c. All the witnesses from government, so far, on the side of the prosecution and the defense UNLESS testimonies were crushed on cross-examination

    d. For brevity, as well as my instant recall now, highlighted witnesses are:

    - LRA’s Diaz testimony; but his evidence-gathering technique did not use a fine-tooth comb, nonetheless, some pieces are still pertinent, relevant, and material to the prosecution case

    - Atienza “brokered” the sale of BGEI property which is beyond his official duty

    - Bisnar’s testimony; crushed by its unrealistic and unbelievable account of his whole story AND the fact that the negative character of the Renato-Cristina-Carla was exposed

    - Ombudsman Carpio-Morales’ testimony is the embodiment of the “presumption of regularity”; the defense was not able to crush her testimony.

    - A witness-in-waiting once said…

    AKO LANG ANG PWEDENG MAGPALIWANAG NUN.

    - Renato Coronado Corona, 6 March 2012

    Let us hear his testimony. Let us watch his demeanor. Let us witness how he will squirm his way out of his self-imposed dilemma.

    Let us see if he will enjoy the presumption of regularity when he will able to explain that amassing wealth is part of the Chief Justice’s OFFICIAL function.

  75. max says:

    prosecution team to cross Corona

    I am sure that we have excellent cross-team against Corona. Nothing personal, while Tupas may be good, I simply think that for this situation, Farinas has greater gravitas. At least, MDS doesn’t readily bark on him. I think they should choose who is more effective and greater impact on this specific audience – the senator judges.

    Jinggoy is one to be watched closely. For whatever reason, Jinggoy seems to be one of JPE’s proteges.

    IMHO, we have to be astute in “fighting” for our cause. Causes are not fought on the streets but thru little meetings and “friendly, strategic persuasions.” – ie transactions. As we noted, they have no permanent friends, only permanent interests.

    Personally, if Corona is convicted, that would be good. If not, at least this trial has opened a can of worms. It is not the end of it.

    Corona has to be careful though in using his family’s name, if he cares enough for his daughters. Hopefully he doesn’t insult the Filipino people more callously. “Isang tawag lang” puwedeng i-report ang kanyang anak sa IRS – there are even rewards at stake. Next thing he has to prepare for, if he pushes the patience of many Filipino people – a tax lawyer to defend his daughters in the US. Some may do it for rewards, some may do it just to wake them up, or simple inis.

    • Deng says:

      @Max,

      I fully agree, the weapon that we have now in our hands is the power of public opinion aside, of course, of legal options. People Power maybe, just maybe, will only be our last recourse.

    • Rolly says:

      @ max

      If Corona gets away this time, never in hundred years he would be convicted. No impeachment proceedings will ever be successful.

      PEOPLE POWER is the only rationale and sensible option.

      • techburns says:

        @rolly.

        i totally agree. this is in my thoughts too. wala nang saysay ang IC kung pwede lang din makalusot dahil sa technicalities. inutil!!!

      • max says:

        @Rolly 401.2 and Leona 383

        We have the same goal – to oust checkmate Corona.

        I am not referring to another impeachment processes. What I have in mind is chasing him in another arena: different legal processes and different venue.

        1) Kim Henares and her team are right on Corona and his family’s tax issues
        2) Money laundering
        3) Basa Guidote issues
        4) 99.9% potential for IRS to “investigate” Corona’s daughters
        5) Money laundering?

        • Deng says:

          You’ve got a good point there @max but, you have to respect also others opinion with regards to other forms of struggle against Corona. IMHO

          • max says:

            I do respect others’ opinion. I’m only saying that aside from that course of action there are other actions that we can do as well. Having plan A and alternative plans B and C won’t hurt our cause.

            I am just as feisty if called upon but being strategic won’t hurt anyone. Remember, we are dealing with a devious man and equally “fluid” members of the IC senator judges at the same time.

  76. max says:

    RE: JOKER WARNING GLORIA ABOUT AMLA

    I am confused why Joker would warn Gloria.

    Was Joker aware of any irregular/illegal activities by Gloria that he warned her about AMLA? I’d like to hold on to Joker’s image of a decent people power man and would like to think that he will never be a party to any illegal or criminal acts.

    “But she ignored (our warnings). Look, she is now being prosecuted partly because and substantially because of the reports of the (Anti-Money Laundering Council against Chief Justice Renato Corona),” Arroyo said.

    I tried to follow the IC trial but I must be missing something. I don’t know how Joker was able to state above claim.
    **************************
    After the tragic 911 event, AMLA has been viewed as a tool that will further help curb illegal financial transactions and control terroristic activities. AMLA is not an exclusive Philippine legislation but a global regulatory system that many countries adhere to as responsible global citizens – to make the world a little safer.

    If this PDI item is true, it is beyond my comprehension why Joker would choose GMA’s and other future leaders’ welfare to take precedence above all others.

    It is an established fact that we have our own share of Abu Sayyaf and suspected Al Qaeda operations and other elements that threaten the safety of our society. Drug trafficking is not undeniable as well. We have to ensure that their funding is cut off and not funnelled through our banking system. At least, make it as hard as possible for them.

    I wonder what Joker would have suggested as an alternative for him to advise GMA to ditch these AMLA measures. (I must give credit to GMA for not listening to Joker’s advice.) Besides, GMA would be truly ill-advised to think that she has the option not to cooperate with the rest of the world.

    North American, European and Asian countries have adopted AMLA. Can Joker please cite any ex-leader who was unjustifiably crushed because of AMLA. Bush is still out. Sotto’s fear of having a governor “durog” because of AMLA is unjustified, unless that person has committed illegal acts. Libertarians in the US would not have allowed implementation of this AMLA if Joker’s and Tito’s thinking have valid points.

    In other countries, their banking system is more rigid in enforcing their AMLA measures. For example, one has to have two pieces of good photo id’s before he can open an account. Documentations have to be presented establishing the sources of funds when transmitting and receiving amounts in accordance with AMLA rules. One known as Joseph cannot open an account as Pedro. If any, AMLA should have more teeth and more diligent in implementing its rules.

    Enclosed is the article regarding Joker’s warning to GMA. I have also included the link to provide some info on AMLA outside the Philippine vista.

    http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/195955/amla-haunting-gloria-arroyo-says-joker-arroyo

    http://www.fintrac-canafe.gc.ca/publications/guide/Guide2/2-eng.asp#s2-1

    ******************
    AMLA HAUNTING GLORIA ARROYO, SAYS JOKER
    - He personally warned Mrs. Arroyo of the dangers of an Anti-Money Laundering Law (Amla) that she had wanted in place as a precaution against global terrorism.
    Arroyo recalled that it was right after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks in the United States when Malacañang asked Congress to fast track a bill that would penalize money laundering efforts meant to finance terrorist activities.

    “This bill will be the scourge of future officialS.”

    - This will haunt you. This is the bill that will haunt you.’
    - “When you are in power, it is OK. But for the enemies of those who are…in power, this is a very dangerous bill…”

    Look, she is now being prosecuted partly because and substantially because of the reports of the (Anti-Money Laundering Council against Chief Justice Renato Corona)”

    “I foresee an impact. If the Ombudsman would write a letter and the AMLC acts on it, any governor or candidate for that matter would be crushed (“durog”) by information about his alleged bank accounts or any other allegation, especially before an election,” Sotto said.

  77. eestaana says:

    BATTLECRY

    I propose this BATTLECRY for those senators who will abstain or acquit Thief Justice Corona and WHO WILL JOIN BINAY’S PARTY UNA.

    “PARTIDO UNA – UNA SA CORRUPTION
    MGA KAMPONG NI CORONAPTION’

    Maganda ito at madaling tantadaan……di ba?

  78. anonymous_coward says:

    CPM’er Re-Occupy Fadre Faura Street project

    The most cost-efective for the “ISANG TAWAG KO LANG” campaign is to use YOUTUBE.

    Like for example the Juana Change youtube.

    We will make it million views to increase world-wide awareness what happenning in the Philippine Senate and the Philipppine Supreme Court.

  79. pinoy_overseas says:

    Mga kagalang-galang na mga Senador:

    Learn from the lesson of history. Look outside of the Philippines, look to our Asian neighbors.

    Ang Pilipinas ay napag-iwanan na naman tayo ng Vietnam at Sri Lanka na dumaan sa mga ilan dekadang gyerya.

    Baka sa Burma or Myanmar maiiwanan na naman tayo.

    Maawa naman kayo sa mga sambayanan Filipino.

  80. jun 2 says:

    eto pa sa BGEI naman!!! ang lufhet talaga ng mag-asawa, gravehhh!!!! http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/196441/basa-guidote-a-story-of-betrayal-in-the-family

  81. jun 2 says:

    frm ex justice Atemio Panganiban ……… http://opinion.inquirer.net/29033/will-corona-testify

  82. Elenita Fashionista says:

    OUR WINDOW OF CHANGE IS TWO DAYS REMAINING, MONDAY AND TUESDAY WHAT CAN WE DO TO LET THEM FEEL OUR INDIGNATION

    3 SUGGESTIONS:
    1. ON ANY PAPER WRITE “END ISANG TAWAG KO LANG” BY PENTEL PEN, BALLPEN, PAINT ETC AND POST ON ANY PUBLIC WALL.
    2. PRINT POSTER ” TAMA NA SOBRA NA CORONA ICONVICT NA” AND PASTE ON ANY WALL
    3 ON TUESDAY, BE PRESENT IN THE TRIAL TAKE VIDEO AND DOWNLOAD TO YOUTUBE

    KUNG HINDI NGAYON KAILAN PA, KUNG HINDI TAYO SINO PA?

  83. -->

Trackbacks

  1. [...] CJ Corona’s P11 million cash advance (www.raissarobles.com) [...]