My testimony now moot – Sereno

Associate Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno will no longer testify in the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona.

Her decision was implied in a letter to House prosecutor Bayan Muna party-list Rep. Neri Colmenares yesterday that made no mention of rulings of both the Supreme Court (SC) and the Senate sitting as impeachment court against her taking the witness stand.

Sereno only cited her belief that the request for her to testify already became moot when the House prosecution panel moved to rest its case.

“I understand, however, that the termination of the presentation of evidence by the prosecution panel yesterday and reiterated today before the impeachment court has superseded your invitation,” read Sereno’s one-page letter to Colmenares, who invited her on behalf of the panel.

Still, President Aquino’s first appointee to the high court thanked the House prosecutors for the invitation.

When asked if this means Sereno was willing to testify if only the prosecution did not end its case, her senior staff lawyer Zaldy Trespeses did not reply.

Sereno was supposed to attend the hearing yesterday to testify on her dissenting opinion on the SC’S issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) on the travel ban against former President and now Pampanga Rep. Gloria MacapagalArroyo in November last year.

But the trial was suspended for a week after the prosecution panel decided not to present additional evidence, believing their case in Article 2 of the complaint would suffice for a conviction.

Colmenares said he was not discouraged by Sereno’s letter.

“If you read her (Sereno) letter, it was not a categorical rejection of our invitation. She did not say: ‘no, I will not testify’. She was just saying that the prosecution has closed its presentation of evidence,” he said.

Colmenares said he was disappointed with the decision of lead prosecutor Rep. Niel Tupas Jr. of Iloilo to rest the case against Corona without making reservation for the appearance of Sereno.

He said the best recourse is for the Senate impeachment court to subpoena Sereno to compel her to testify.

Colmenares however said the move to request the Senate to issue a subpoena would still be discussed within the prosecution panel.

In terminating the presentation of evidence on Tuesday, Tupas made reservation only for the examination of Corona’s dollar deposits in Philippine Savings Bank if the SC reverses its decision to stop such examination.

Prosecution spokesman Rep. Miro Quimbo of Marikina said Tupas could not have asked for time to present Sereno as a witness “because we did not know if she was willing to testify or not.”

“We could not leave the presentation of evidence hanging because we were following a timeline for the expeditious conclusion of the trial,” he said.

However, Quimbo said Sereno could still volunteer to appear in Corona’s trial to answer questions from senator-judges.

“I am sure the impeachment court knows how to handle her testimony,” he added.

Aurora Rep. Juan Edgardo Angara, spokesman for the prosecutors, admitted they were not really expecting Sereno to testify.

“We were really hoping but not expecting (her to appear before the impeachment court),” Angara said.

“Anyway, her dissenting opinion is already on the record, so that’s strong enough,” he said.

Sources told that Sereno had already finished her “ponencias” or decisions of the SC that she was tasked to pen in order for her to have time to testify.

The prosecution wanted Sereno’s testimony for Article 7 of the impeachment complaint, which charges Corona with alleged partiality for Arroyo in the SC’S issuance of its controversial Nov. 15 TRO that would have allowed Arroyo and her husband to leave the country.

Sereno dissented from the majority vote for the grant of the TRO in favor of the Arroyos, claiming there were irregularities in the issuance of the order.

Based on Sereno’s dissenting opinion, Justice Secretary Leila de Lima has told the impeachment court that Corona made it appear that the Nov. 15 TRO was immediately effective even without the Arroyos complying with its three conditions.

De Lima said in effect, Corona helped Arroyo and her husband in their attempt to leave the country and escape prosecution.

It was then President Arroyo who appointed Corona as associate justice and later as chief justice.

In his answer to the impeachment complaint, the Chief Justice insisted that the TRO took effect upon its issuance, and that the Arroyos had five days to comply with its conditions.

Colmenares said had the Arroyos succeeded in flying out, they would now be beyond the reach of the country’s judicial system.

The day the restraining order was issued, Arroyo and her husband had booked several outbound flights and went to the airport to try to board planes for Singapore and Hong Kong, but immigration officers, on orders of De Lima, prevented them from leaving.