Akbayan, 3 student leaders file P78-M ill-gotten wealth case vs CJ
Chief Justice Renato Corona, already on trial for alleged offenses constituting betrayal of public trust and other high crimes before the Senate sitting as impeachment court, is now facing a P78-million ill-gotten wealth case before the Office of the Ombudsman.
Rep. Walden Bello of the party-list group Akbayan and three student leaders from the University of the Philippines and the Ateneo de Manila University lodged the criminal charge yesterday, accusing the highest official of the judiciary of hiding real properties and bank deposits which should be forfeited in favor of the government.
The complaint was based mainly on Senate impeachment trial revelations that Corona, his wife, and even his children actually own some $2 million in questionable assets which the Chief Justice failed to declare truthfully in his statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALNS) from 2003 to 2010.
Bello filed the case along with Ernest Francis Calayag as chair of UP’S Movement of Students for Progressive Leadership and member of the national secretariat of the Student Council Alliance of the Philippines (SCAP), Moses Mijkhael SD Albiento as central board representative of the Sanggunian ng mga Mag-aaral ng Paaralang Loyola ng Ateneo de Manila, and Tristan Daine Brioso Zinampan as incoming chair of the UP Los Baños College of Development Communication Student Council.
The complaint said the Office of the Ombudsman, headed by former Supreme Court associate justice Conchita Carpio-morales, should effect the forfeiture of Corona’s questionable assets “whether registered in his name, that of his spouse, Cristina Corona, jointly in both their names, or in the name of his daughter Charina Corona, or any other nominee or transferee, acquired during his tenure as an Associate Justice and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, pursuant to RA 1379 (Forfeiture Act).”
Bello and the student leaders provided the anti-graft agency with a list of the Chief Justice’s undeclared or undervalued properties, including his alleged condominium units in Quezon City, Makati, and Taguig.
“In all, Corona has been shown to have under-declared in his SALN the real properties he actually owns by P35,912,691.82,” their sixpage complaint read.
As to his bank accounts, particularly those maintained in Philippine Savings Bank Katipunan branch that were also exposed during the Senate impeachment trial, the complainants said the total amount “exceeds the declared value of his personal properties in his SALN by P27,252,623.09.”
“The properties he has acquired in his SALN, taken together with the other real and personal properties whose ownership has been attributed to him based on the evidence presented at the impeachment trial, are thus manifestly out of proportion to his salary as such public officer or employee and to his other lawful income,” the complainants alleged.
“Pursuant to the provisions of Republic Act No. 1379, this property is presumed to be unlawfully acquired and subject to forfeiture in favor of the State,” they said.
In an interview with The STAR, Bello said Corona’s assets should be forfeited in favor of the government for basically being manifestly out of proportion to his income as an official of the judiciary.
Corona was appointed associate justice of the Supreme Court on April 9, 2002 and Chief Justice on May 12, 2010, which means that he has been a member of the high tribunal for nearly ten years.
Bello noted that as an associate justice, the respondent received a basic salary of P79,729.00 with allowances in the amount of P46,333.33 every month while as Chief Justice, he receives a basic salary of P91,226.00.
He told The STAR that in total, Corona has some P28 million or $2 million in assets that can be subject of confiscation, covering P27 million in real properties and P31 million in cash and bank deposits.
“He’s not just a peso millionaire but a dollar millionaire. I think that he is a very corrupt official,” Bello said, believing that the respondent has “no legal or moral authority to serve as chief justice.”
In a prepared statement, Bello said “the process of rectifying Corona’s injustice to the Filipino people begins by confiscating his unexplained wealth.”
“Corona earns a basic salary of P91,226.00. Even assuming that he has served as Chief Justice for a decade, he would not be able afford properties worth almost P50 million nor maintain bank accounts worth some P31million at one particular point,” he said.
“By law, property that is presumed to be unlawfully acquired is subject to forfeiture by the state,” Bello explained, referring to Section 2 of the Forfeiture Act which states that “whenever any public officer or employee has acquired during his incumbency an amount of property which is manifestly out of proportion to his salary as such public officer or employee and to his other lawful income and the income from legitimately acquired property, said property shall be presumed prima facie to have been unlawfully acquired.”
“Let us not forget that Corona’s acquisition of unexplained wealth is indeed a family affair, after all he tried to hide his properties under the names of his family members, as if that will save him. We cannot let the Corona family get away with abusing public office for their private benefit,” he said.
The student leaders, for their part, called on Ombudsman Morales to ensure that integrity is restored to government institutions.
“CJ Corona is a clear representation of how the previous administration has left the Filipino youth government institutions that lack integrity and morality,” they said.
“Filipino students across the nation are united in the aspiration to eradicate the corruption that marked the Arroyo government, and the forfeiture of Corona’s wealth is one very important step towards that,” the UP and Ateneo students said.
They alleged that former President and now Pampanga Rep. Gloria Macapagal-arroyo and her cohorts “pilfered the nation’s coffers at the expense of our future.”
Bello believes that Morales can act on the complaint he has filed even if Corona is an impeachable official who can only be removed from office through impeachment.
“According to a number of cases already, the Ombudsman has jurisdiction,” he said, stressing that they have enough evidence to charge the respondent.
Premature filing
Assistant Ombudsman and spokesperson Asryman Rafanan could not be reached for an official statement but other STAR sources from within the Office of the Ombudsman said the forfeiture case may have been filed prematurely.
“They can file. But in accordance with proper procedure, we wait for the outcome of the impeachment trial. If found guilty, that would be the time to file criminal cases,” said one source who requested anonymity.
“Insofar as criminal jurisdiction, for impeachable officers, we can only go so far as recommending filing impeachment complaint to the House,” another added, in case Corona is acquitted and gets to keep his post.
“For now, its jurisdiction-in-waiting. The case (by Akbayan) was prematurely filed,” one source explained, citing Republic Act 6770 or the Ombudsman Act of 1989.
Section 21 of the law specifically states that “the Office of the Ombudsman shall have disciplinary authority over all elective and appointive officials of the government and its subdivisions, instrumentalities and agencies, including members of the Cabinet, local government, government-owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries, except over officials who may be removed only by impeachment or over members of Congress, and the judiciary.”
Section 22 further provides that “the Office of the Ombudsman shall have the power to investigate any serious misconduct in office allegedly committed by officials removable by impeachment, for the purpose of filing a verified complaint for impeachment, if warranted.”