Prosecutors mull summoning again Coronas’ bank records
THE prosecution panel is studying the possibility of summoning bank records of Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona and wife Cristina on revelation that the couple acquired pieces of prop- erty declared in statements of assets, liabilities and net worth, or SALN, “on almost cash basis.”
Lead prosecutor Niel Tupas Jr. on Tuesday said that they are determining whether they would ask the Senate impeachment court to issue sub- poena duces tecum for the couple’s bank accounts.
“We are currently discussing the bank accounts of the Coronas. Although there is no decision yet, there is an inclination to request the Senate impeachment court to subpoena spe- cific bank accounts so we can comply with the directive of the Senate President,” Tupas said, referring to Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile, also the presiding officer of the impeachment court.
Earlier, the 11- man prosecution
panel from the House of Representatives sought the summoning of the bank documents of the Coronas from four local banks.
The impeachment court, however, set aside a motion for the subpoena until they can prove the charges relating to the chief magistrate’s wealth statements, thus the prosecutors’ withdrawal of their request for the bank records.
The prosecutors said that they “reserved the right to file the appropriate request for the specific bank accounts of Renato C. Corona and Cristina R. Corona at the proper time to prove the allegations… that respondent failed to truthfully, honestly and accurately disclose his personal assets, which include bank deposits, in his SALN.”
Deputy Speaker Lorenzo Tañada 3rd, a spokesman for the prosecution, noted that they would not be violating the Constitution if they pursued the summoning of the bank documents.
“If we are going to pursue the subpoena for the bank deposits it will not violate the law because this will be used in the impeachment court, and one of the exemptions [from] the bank secrecy law is when an account is subject to litigation,” Tañada explained.
According to Section 2 of Republic Act 1405, (Act Prohibiting Disclosure of or Inquiry into, Deposits With Any Banking Institution and Providing Penalty Therefor) of bank records could be disclosed in case of an impeachment hearing.
Earlier, Ayala Land vice president Aniceto Bisnar Jr. told the impeachment court that the 113-square-meter condominium unit of the Coronas at Bonifacio Ridge—acquired in 2004 but was declared in Corona’s 2010 wealth statements with a market value of P2.3 million— was “paid almost in full” in a month.
Corona did not indicate the acquisition cost in his declaration.
Bisnar said that the Chief Justice issued a P2.2- million check on March 31, 2004 and another P6.9 million check on April 30, 2004 under the name of his spouse to cover the P9.1-million unit.
“[I]n our term, it is considered cash payment term,” he told senator-judges.
On Monday, Megaworld finance director Giovanni Ng said that Corona purchased the 303-square-meter condominium at The Bellagio for P14.5 million in 2009 with three checks, two of which dated October 2008 and April 2009 worth P5 million apiece and another amounting to P4.5 million dated October 2009.
Rep. Miro Quimbo of Marikina City (Metro Manila), the prosecution team’s lead spokesman, accused the Chief Justice of lying.
“When Corona finally admitted that he owned The Bellagio penthouse, he gave us the misimpression that he had paid [ for] it via installments [in] small amounts. Apparently, his definition of installment is paying for the P14.5- million purchase price with only three checks, two P5-million checks and a third one for P4.5 million,” Quimbo said.
“So the pattern of deceit and lies [is] clear in so far as the SALN is concerned,” he added.