PNoy, hinamon si Corona na ilabas ang dollar account
Noong una'y pasaring lang ang binitiwan ni Pangulong Aquino kay Chief Justice Renato Corona.
"Palagay ko maaasahan pa nating magbabayad kayo ng tamang buwis, at hindi niyo kailangan ng dollar account," sabi ni Aquino, "dahil sa Pilipinas na kayo nagtatrabaho.”
Pero sa interview, deretsahan nang hinamon ng Pangulo si Corona na ilabas ang kanyang dollar account.
"Public servant tayo, may public trust na kasama doon. Maganda sana magboluntaryo na 'yung nasasakdal. [Kung] walang tinatago, 'Buksan niyo para makita niyo na wala akong kasalanan.'"
Hindi raw dapat gamitin ang batas na proteksyon para itago ang kinukuwestyong pera.
"Pag ikaw ay magnanakaw -- hindi ko sinasabi 'yong nasasakdal ay nagnakaw -- pero kung nagnakaw ka, ilagay mo sa isang foreign currency, puwede mo nang itago sa pag-iimbestiga?"
Nahinto kahapon ang pagbulatlat ng impeachment court sa dollar account ni Corona matapos maglabas ng temporary restraining order ang Korte Suprema matapos itong hilingin ng PSBank.
Una nang isinumite ng prosekusyon sa impeachment court ang photocopy ng isang bank document kung saan nakasaad ang pangalan at pirma ni Corona at dollar deposit na '700K.'
Ibig daw sabihin nito, may $700,000 na deposito ang punong mahistrado sa nasabing banko.
Pero nanindigan ang depensa at maging ilang senador na iligal ang pagpapalabas ng nasabing dokumento.
Pero ipinahiwatig ng pangulo na may remedyo para maisapubliko ang dollar account ni Corona.
"'Yong mga dalubhasa nating abogado, iniisip nila mag-apila or nandoon din naman 'yung nasa Constitution, at may pananaw na hindi sila puwedeng panghimasukan ng ibang branches of government."
Hindi pa masabi ng pangulo kung ano ang gagawin sakaling tuluyan nang mag-umpugan ang mga sangay ng gobyerno. Aabangan muna raw kung paano tutugon ang Senado. Willard Cheng, Patrol ng Pilipino
02/10/2012 10:40 PM
Share your views
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
the house prosecution panel claimed major victory as the senate impeachment court decided to accept evidences, testimonies and documents submitted by PS bank officials. but what could be the repercussions of such decision by the senate impeachment court to our judicial system, to the impeachment court, and to the entire proceeding?
sec. 2 of article 3 (bill of rights) provides protection to citizens for unreasonable searches and seizures by the government or its agent. apparently, the senate committee on banks is conducting an investigation regarding the alleged "leaked bank" document of CJ corona. all evidences and testimonies so far points to BSP's Jerry Leal. in case senate committee on banks concludes and say that jerry leal of BSP is the source of the leaked bank document, then it is evident that this government is violating the constitutional right of the accuse (section 2 of Art. 3 BR).
and what if the defense panel decides to bring the issue to SC and SC's decision contradicts the senate ruling? it will erode further the credibility of the impeachment court to try and hear the case. if the senate committee on banks says that leal was the source of the leaked bank document, then it would clearly contradict the decision of the senate impeachment court to accept evidences and testimonies from PS Bank. this would mean that the senate impeachment court condones an illegal and despicable act of BSP, leal and and this government. it will cause an irreparable injury to the defendant.
is JPE willing to sacrifice the constitutional right of the accuse and the credibility of the impeachment court in exercise of liberality pending an investigation of the senate committee on banks?
if this can happen to the chief justice, then it could happen to you, to me or to any person for that matter if so and when the emperor in the palace decides you're one of his political foes!
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
the house prosecution panel claimed major victory as the senate impeachment court decided to accept evidences, testimonies and documents submitted by PS bank officials. but what could be the repercussions of such decision by the senate impeachment court to our judicial system, to the impeachment court, and to the entire proceeding?
sec. 2 of article 3 (bill of rights) provides protection to citizens for unreasonable searches and seizures by the government or its agent. apparently, the senate committee on banks is conducting an investigation regarding the alleged "leaked bank" document of CJ corona. all evidences and testimonies so far points to BSP's Jerry Leal. in case senate committee on banks concludes and say that jerry leal of BSP is the source of the leaked bank document, then it is evident that this government is violating the constitutional right of the accuse (section 2 of Art. 3 BR).
and what if the defense panel decides to bring the issue to SC and SC's decision contradicts the senate ruling? it will erode further the credibility of the impeachment court to try and hear the case. if the senate committee on banks says that leal was the source of the leaked bank document, then it would clearly contradict the decision of the senate impeachment court to accept evidences and testimonies from PS Bank. this would mean that the senate impeachment court condones an illegal and despicable act of BSP, leal and and this government. it will cause an irreparable injury to the defendant.
is JPE willing to sacrifice the constitutional right of the accuse and the credibility of the impeachment court in exercise of liberality pending an investigation of the senate committee on banks?
if this can happen to the chief justice, then it could happen to you, to me or to any person for that matter if so and when the emperor in the palace decides you're one of his political foes!
CORONA
KAPAG HINDI MABOKSAN ANG DALAR ACCOUNTS NA YAN SO ANG LAHAT NA MGA PULITIKO POYDING MANGULIMBAT SA PIRA NG TAONG BAYAN? PAGKATAPOS IDIPOSITO SA BANK IN DOLLAR ACCOUNT,LIGTAS NA SILA....MAGANDANG HALIMBAWA ITO PARA SA LAHAT NG GUSTONG MAGNAKAW SA KABAN NG BAYAN DIBA? YAN ANG POSIBLING MANGYAYARI SA BANSANG PILIPINAS......
i dont think individual right
i dont think individual right of the cj should be subordinated in this case. first, who is going to say objectively that there is paramount interest of the public involved in this case? if we try to be sensible about all these things, it all started with a very selfish motive of some personalities to control every branch of the government, that's why, they took advantage of the media, the ill-informed, confused and vulnerable public to jump into this bandwagon of witch hunting. the real and ultimate purpose is to create a sc that will be easy beast of burden and subservient to their whims. we cannot allow this to happen. we have to fight for individual right as enshrined in the constitution. if we allow this oppressive, vindictive, irrational, selfish, arrogant people to treat us this way, stripping us of the only remaining sovereignty in us, then i think, that is the paramount public interest that we have given up.
scatterbrains
in long line of sc decisions, phils and abroad, public interest is paramount over individual rights, even rights conferred under the law. the strict bank secrecy laws should be suject to the impeachment process provided for in the consti because it concerns the greater good. corona's rights under banking laws should be subjugated to the need to find out if he is fit to hold the position of cj, which is undeniably of supreme public interest.