'Prosecution should limit witnesses, focus on more powerful testimonies'

MANILA, Philippines - Some legal analysts believe, gains made by the prosecution in Article 2 of the Corona impeachment complaint were lost on Tuesday, after the witness from Megaworld, Noli Hernandez, demolished claims the discount granted to Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona was a payback from the property developer.

On "ANC Presents: Chief Justice on Trial," Tony La Viña, dean of the Ateneo School of Government, said the prosecution can still recover lost ground.
   
"I felt they should've ended with Article 2... but all of that gone," La Viña said.  "It's not the end of the case for the prosecution... You don't have to prove there was a favor done here, just say there was a misdeclaration, that's enough to prove Article 2.2 and 2.3."

Article 2.2 and 2.3 cover Corona's alleged failure to truthfully disclose his Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net worth (SALN). 

Instead of being saddled by the sheer volume of witnesses and evidence, legal analysts also believe the prosecution team should be more calculated and strategic in choosing witnesses, and on drawing out the more compelling testimonies. 

"Here was a witness who never got to speak to counsels, presumably never rehearsed.  But he still spoke the whole truth that the Corona's SALN was grossly underdeclared," noted UP College of Law Prof. Raul Pangalagan.

'Overkill' of witnesses

"If they overkill with evidence, this will happen again. If they call 100 witnesses, I bet you 20 or 30 of them will be like this witness, completely a surprise, they won't know if they're on their side or not and the defense will be jumping with joy realizing they don't have to present witnesses to refute the theory," La Viña added.
   
"Reserve testimonial evidence only to the most important points, points where there is a Clarissa Ocampo type of witness who would have a good impact on the public," Pangalangan added."That would serve two purposes: to hasten the proceedings, and meet the goal of convincing senators about their cause."
   
La Viña said the prosecution can provide more clarity to their case by focusing on proving the misdeclaration in Corona's SALN and how the Chief Justice is morally unfit to serve the post.
   
"The more important thing here is not the discount, but the appropriateness of what the Chief Justice did in these transactions..., that there are discrepancies and that Corona met with Megaworld people... that is an important fact if they can show if those meetings have happened," he explained. "There are certain uncontroverted facts here that is about that and there's enough for Senators to make the decision."

Senator-judges expressed frustration on Tuesday, as the prosecution spent too much time on points unnecessary to Article 2.

Speedy trial

For La Viña and Pangalangan, less witnesses will also mean a more speedy trial, and this would also help restore public interest in the proceedings.
   
They also urged senator-Judges to cut the time spent on impeachment hearings to get to the more important matters of legislation done.
   
"Every week now, they lose part of the audience and if this is going to last a long time...We would like the Senate to go back to its work also [and] do this once a week, maybe. You can't do a continuous trial... it's unfair to the Filipino people," La Viña said.
   
The prosecution plans to trim down the number of witnesses it will call to the stand, amid concerns by senator-judges the impeachment trial could drag on needlessly.
   
"We will not present all of the witnesses," said Lead Prosecutor Iloilo Representative Niel Tupas Jr, on ANC's Headstart. "We will shorten the list, consistent with our manifestation that we will present a very strong solid case within a reasonable period of time. Congress adjourns March 23.  We hope the Senate can decide before adjournment of Congress."
   
"We can practically reduce our witnesses by at least 40 witnesses if we can have stipulations on certain documents... That's a 40% discount, just like Bellagio," said Marikina Representative  Miro Quimbo, spokesperson for the Prosecution team on "ANC Presents: Chief Justice on Trial."

SC justices

Quimbo said they still plan to call in several witnesses, including Supreme Court justices, to testify in the hearings.
   
"It's necessitated by the fact that the defense has repeatedly been resisting our evidence even on matters that should be subject to a judicial notice," he said. "We don't cast this net of subpoenas on the SC so recklessly. We want to do it in the most surgical possible way so we don't harm the institution which we are seeking to strengthen."
   
But Pangalangan said it isn't necessary.
   
"Whatever fact or truth can be extracted from them is already part of the record of the SC.  It is an unnecessary strain on the separation of powers that that kind of truth has to be known thru testimonial evidence when it is  already available in SC decisions and dissenting opinions," he explained.
   
Satisfied with what he calls the fair conduct of the hearings this far, La Viña said he is convinced that whether Corona is convicted or acquitted, the public will accept the decision of the senator-judges.    

"I think the prosecution has already won the public very overwhelmingly and therefore it's not the public but the senators, and because the senators have done it so well, you can't turn the public against the senators even if they vote against what the public wants," La Viña said.
   
"I think the Senate will behave in such a way that they will be  able to get off with any decision they make here as long as they do it deliberately.  I don't think the Supreme Court can intervene."