On May 17, 2010, a little over a month and a half before the new government was to be sworn in,

Respondent Renato Corona was appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to protect, aid, and abet
Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo in her efforts to escape accountability for her acts as President of the
Philippines. His appointment was made in violation of the Constitution and by overturning longestablished ethical and legal principles forbidding presidents from making midnight appointments. His
assumption of the position of Chief Justice was thus made possible by a combination of violating the
Constitution, and then finding ways to justify it, while ignoring examples of honourable and ethical
behavior that should have made it impossible to accept, much less assume, office under such dubious
and dishonorable circumstances.
Therefore, this action for impeachment is brought against Chief Justice Renato C. Corona in
accordance with the provisions of Section 2, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution, on the grounds of: (a)
Betrayal of Public Trust; (b) Culpable Violation of the Constitution; and (c) Graft and Corruption.
ARTICLE I
RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST THROUGH HIS TRACK RECORD MARKED BY PARTIALITY
AND SUBSERVIENCE IN CASES INVOLVING THE ARROYO ADMINISTRATION FROM THE TIME OF HIS
APPOINTMENT AS SUPREME COURT JUSTICE AND UNTIL HIS DUBIOUS APPOINTMENT AS A MIDNIGHT
CHIEF JUSTICE TO THE PRESENT.
ARTICLE II
RESPONDENT COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION AND/OR BETRAYED THE
PUBLIC TRUST WHEN HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE TO THE PUBLIC HIS STATEMENT OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES,
AND NET WORTH AS REQUIRED UNDER SEC. 17, ART. XI OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION.
ARTICLE III
RESPONDENT COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION AND BETRAYED THE PUBLIC
TRUST BY FAILING TO MEET AND OBSERVE THE STRINGENT STANDARDS UNDER ART. VIII, SECTION 7
(3) OF THE CONSTITUTION THAT PROVIDES THAT [A] MEMBER OF THE JUDICIARY MUST BE A PERSON
OF PROVEN COMPETENCE, INTEGRITY, PROBITY, AND INDEPENDENCE IN ALLOWING THE SUPREME
COURT TO ACT ON MERE LETTERS FILED BY A COUNSEL WHICH CAUSED THE ISSUANCE OF FLIPFLOPPING DECISIONS IN FINAL AND EXECUTORY CASES; IN CREATING AN EXCESSIVE ENTANGLEMENT
WITH MRS. ARROYO THROUGH HER APPOINTMENT OF HIS WIFE TO OFFICE; AND IN DISCUSSING WITH
LITIGANTS REGARDING CASES PENDING BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT.
ARTICLE IV
RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST AND/OR COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATION OF THE
CONSTITUTION WHEN HE BLATANTLY DISREGARDED THE PRINCIPLE OF SEPARATION OF POWERS BY
ISSUING A STATUS QUO ANTE ORDER AGAINST THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN THE CASE
CONCERNING THE IMPEACHMENT OF THEN OMBUDSMAN MERCEDITAS NAVARRO-GUTIERREZ.
ARTICLE V
RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST THROUGH WANTON ARBITRARINESS AND PARTIALITY IN
CONSISTENTLY DISREGARDING THE PRINCIPLE OF RES JUDICATA IN THE CASES INVOLVING THE 16
NEWLY-CREATED CITIES, AND THE PROMOTION OF DINAGAT ISLAND INTO A PROVINCE.
ARTICLE VI
RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST BY ARROGATING UNTO HIMSELF, AND TO A COMMITTEE
HE CREATED, THE AUTHORITY AND JURISDICTION TO IMPROPERLY INVESTIGATE A JUSTICE OF THE
SUPREME COURT FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXCULPATING HIM. SUCH AUTHORITY AND JURISDICTION IS
PROPERLY REPOSED BY THE CONSTITUTION IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES VIA IMPEACHMENT.
ARTICLE VII

RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST THROUGH HIS PARTIALITY IN GRANTING A TEMPORARY
RESTRAINING ORDER (TRO) IN FAVOR OF FORMER PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO AND HER
HUSBAND JOSE MIGUEL ARROYO IN ORDER TO GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO ESCAPE PROSECUTION
AND TO FRUSTRATE THE ENDS OF JUSTICE, AND IN DISTORTING THE SUPREME COURT DECISION ON
THE EFFECTIVITY OF THE TRO IN VIEW OF A CLEAR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE CONDITIONS OF
THE SUPREME COURTS OWN TRO.
ARTICLE VIII
RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST AND/OR COMMITTED GRAFT AND CORRUPTION WHEN HE
FAILED AND REFUSED TO ACCOUNT FOR THE JUDICIARY DEVELOPMENT FUND (JDF) AND SPECIAL
ALLOWANCE FOR THE JUDICIARY (SAJ) COLLECTIONS.
The Senate is being attacked. The House is being attacked. The Palace is being attacked. Why cant
the Supreme Court be attacked? No one is above the law, Estrada pointed out.
Prosecution
The prosecution team includes the members of the House of Representatives, who are all members of
the majority bloc, with several private prosecutors. Niel Tupas, Jr. is the chief of the prosecution team.
Raul Daza; Liberal; Northern Samar1st

Giorgidi Aggabao; NPC; Isabela4th

Niel Tupas, Jr.; Liberal; Iloilo5th

Kaka Bag-ao; Akbayan; Sectoral

Neri Colmenares; Bayan Muna

Reynaldo Umali; Liberal; Oriental Mindoro2nd

Marilyn Primicias-Agabas; NPC; Pangasinan6th

Rodolfo Farias; Nacionalista; Ilocos Norte1st

Elpidio Barzaga; NUP; Dasmarias

Sherwin Tugna; CIBAC

The prosecutors from the House of Representatives enlisted the help of private practitioners to assist
them; this was opposed by the defense, saying that only the prosecutors from the House of
Representatives are the "sole prosecutors". The Senate allowed the existence of the private
prosecutors citing "matter of rule and precedence". The private prosecutors who are allowed to assist
the public prosecutors in impeachment proceedings are:
Mario Bautista

Ernesto Viovicente

Arthur Lim

Frederick Vallestero

Clarence Jandoc

Winston Ginez

The prosecution also named representatives Miro Quimbo, Lorenzo Taada III and Juan Edgardo
Angara as their spokespersons.
Defense
Supreme Court spokesperson Jose Midas Marquez described Corona's defense team as a "powerhouse
legal team".
Serafin Cuevas, former Supreme Court
associate justice

German Lichauco II, partner of the Siguion

Reyna, Montecillo, Ongsiako law firm

Jacinto Jimenez, professor at the Ateneo Law

School

Dennis Manalo, partner of the Siguion Reyna,

Montecillo, Ongsiako law firm

Jose Roy III, former dean and president of the

Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila

Ramon Esguerra, general counsel of the

Integrated Bar of the Philippines

Eduardo delos Angeles, former dean of the

Ateneo Law School

Tranquil G.S. Salvador III, former dean of the

Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Pasay

Karen Jimeno, formerly of the Quisumbing,

Torres, Evangelista firm
Ernesto "Jun" Francisco, Jr. quit the defense team for he feared that his previous dealings with Manny
Villar will be a reason to question his loyalty to the cause.
Speaking of incompetence, the prosecution team is justifying their incompetence by saying that they
are underdogs compared to the defense team. They said that despite having ABS-CBN private lawyer
Mario Bautista and a total of 59 private lawyers who are said to have volunteered to help. Its a bit
weird that they admit being the underdog because being an underdog means one who is expecting
to lose or struggle. The question is, where did their confidence to file the impeachment case come
from? They shouldnt be struggling now if they had a solid case to begin with.
It is beginning to appear like the prosecutions main reason for filing for impeachment was merely to
humiliate CJ Corona into resigning. It probably didnt occur to them that they would have to present
the so-called compelling evidence they spoke of with the media in court. They are certainly learning
the hard way that the due process involves dealing with facts and not fiction.
Given the interesting circumstances surrounding Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Coronas very
controversial impeachment trial, it is only normal that countless philosophical debates have been
raised regarding this issue; the credibility of the courts, the efficacy of the Constitution, the morality of
the defense and the prosecution, President Noynoy Aquinos (PNoys) sincerity, and of course, the
defendants guilt or innocence.
However, over the course of the trial, countless times have I frowned upon Filipino romanticists who
view this legal battle as some sort of a telenovela, where PNoy and the prosecution play as the
stalwart protectors of morality and justice, while Corona and the defense play the role of the immoral
villains. Indeed, the impeachment trial has been distorted to look like some sort of a macabre drama
for a number of Filipinos.
Needless to say, a discussion of something more important is only rational; something that transcends
the clichd good versus evil scenario of the Filipino society. A discussion of justice is only fitting.
What is justice? And more importantly, is justice being served in Coronas impeachment trial?
Here is my personal take on the concept of justice. While I intend to say many things, for the sake of
brevity, I shall provide a transcript of my most succinct argument, which I have conceived under the
name Axiom in this article:
Note: This post is aimed towards those who claim that the will of the people is with the prosecution,
that the prosecution has the higher moral ground, etc.
Hahaha, morality, legality, impeachment
Who says your view of morality is whats absolutely moral? Who says you can punish someone, not
with solid evidence but with your egos? Have you ever sat down and pondered on why there are so
many views on morality throughout the ages?
Thats because morality as perceived by humanity is subjective. Morality differs from person to
person. Two people involved in a fight will surely have different moral perspectives; conflicting moral
perspectives, specifically.
Now, if you are the mediator, which moral perspective will you use? Do you honestly think you can
produce a sound judgment by doing just that?
How has civilization overridden the emotional dilemma in the search for justice? They used a medium
thats devoid of any human bias. They used a medium that everyone can use without incriminating
another or oneself unfairly. They used a medium where only the mind is the judge. They used logic,
which in this case, is also called law.
Do you understand where Im coming from? The only way we can achieve justice is to abolish every
preconceived notion brought about by our personal prejudices. The only way justice is served is

through a medium where facts and logic are the only things that matter, so that no one can put
another in a moral disadvantage.
Therefore, I say this to you; stop the ad misericordiam arguments. The sorry state of our fellowmen,
while undeniable, does not by any means give the lousy prosecution any merit. Stop associating the
people with the prosecution and start listening to reason.
I am on neither side of this problem. However, this one thing I want; I want the rule of law. I want
Corona to be convicted, or acquitted, with the use of evidence and logic. I want objectivity, for this is
fairness; fairness, for nobody can muddle the problem with their one-sided emotional outbursts.
Justice cannot be served by transcending the law. You cant obtain justice by being unfair yourself.
Recognize everyones rights. Everyone has the right to be presumed guilty until proven otherwise.
Everyone has the right to avoid testimony to avoid self-incrimination. Everyone has the right to fair
trial. Everyone has the right to freedom within the rule of law.
Until the yellow zealots realize the true concept of freedom and equality which they claim to
understand, they will never comprehend how the ideal legal system works, let alone justice.
Indeed, the need to understand what justice really means is in order, especially in our increasingly
dysfunctional society.
A lot of people are baffled by how the prosecutors are getting frustrated with having to follow the rules
of the court. The prosecution folk are probably the sort of people who are so used to cutting others off
in traffic or disobeying rules in general. It seems like following procedures is a totally alien concept to
them. Indeed, like what I had said before, there is very little evidence that most Filipinos are capable
of living by the rule of law. This is because each individual harbors this baseless sense of being more
important than everybody else and they tend to put their own interest first before other people. In a
nutshell, feeling more important than everybody else is how the prosecutors come across. They
probably think that since PNoy is behind them, they should be given more leeway more special
treatment.
Filipinos in general do not appreciate the value of following the law. In a country where everyone
seems to think they are always right, it is very important that we treat our constitution as sacred. It
should stand out amidst the sea of incoherence. We need to strengthen our institutions because these
are our only check and balance against our world-renowned padrino system. A weak leader
presiding over weak institutions is a bad combination because such a leader will mask his weakness or
understanding of the law by acting like he is above the law.
It is wrong for the prosecution team to keep stressing that rules should be more relaxed just to suit
them. In fact, in a serious proceeding such as the impeachment of the highest member of the
Supreme Court, we need to adhere to the rules as much as possible. The professionalism and
perfectionist personalities such as those exhibited by the defense team particularly by Serafin Cuevas,
is the correct recipe to applying real justice with regard to the accused.
Justice cannot be for one side alone, but must be for both - Eleanor Roosevelt
Justice is always violent to the party offending, for every man is innocent in his own eyes - Daniel
Defoe
It's time for greatness -- not for greed. It's a time for idealism -- not ideology. It is a time not just for
compassionate words, but compassionate action Marian Wright Edelman
Yes. We want change. We want to go to the straight path. We want to eliminate the bad things in our
lives. But, all these things wont happen if we will not move. We cannot do everything, but we could
do something.

The Philippines is now faced with a new challenge and issue, the impeachment case of Chief Justice
Renato Corona. The complaint has been filed on the grounds of Betrayal of Public Trust, Culpable
Violation of the Constitution, and Graft and Corruption.
*midnight appointee
*not declaring all properties in SALN
*protecting arroyo
Neil Tupas prosecution
Serafin Cuevas defense