LRA exec grilled over CJ properties

Senators grilled the administrator of the Land Registration Authority ( LRA) yesterday over his release to prosecutors in the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona of a list of the chief magistrate’s real estate properties, which turned out to be inaccurate.

LRA administrator Eulalio Diaz III, a former Ateneo classmate of President Aquino, and lead prosecutor Iloilo Rep. Niel Tupas got a dressing down

from Sen. Joker Arroyo for their “cavalier attitude.”

Arroyo lashed out at Tupas and Diaz for having misled the public into believing the Corona couple owned 45 properties. The defense team admits only five properties.

Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, Senate President ProTempore Jinggoy Estrada, Senators Francis Escudero, Teofisto Guingona III, Pia Cayetano and Loren Legarda took turns questioning Diaz over the listing of the 45 properties.

In his letter to Tupas dated Jan. 10 this year, Diaz explained that he was merely acting on the lawmaker’s request for information on the “real estate properties registered in the name of Renato Corona et al.”

Diaz testified that Tupas called him by phone around Jan. 8, or about eight days before the actual trial started. Diaz was appointed to his post on Aug. 4, 2010.

Diaz told the court that the list of 45 properties emerged after a search in the agency’s computer of the names of Renato Corona and Cristina Corona, as well as their children, Ma. Carla, Ma. Charina and Francis Vincent, and of Corona’s son-in-law, Constantino Castillo III.

“I was of the impression that they need materials on trace backs. We just punched the names of the people who were requested … this is the family of the Chief Justice… you punch the key words and this was generated,” Diaz told the senators.

Tupas stressed there was no attempt to mislead the public and the court as alleged by Sen. Arroyo.

“We did not mislead the public…we have reason to believe the authenticity of the documents. We attached it in good faith and it turned out later that the titles of the properties were not (actually) the property (of the Coronas),” Tupas said. This prompted the prosecution to only submit titles of properties they have established as owned by the Coronas during its formal offer of evidence.

Upon clarification of Guingona, Diaz explained that the LRA computer system search is similar to a “Google search” in the Internet, which can trace back titles to the original certificates of titles with names of original owners. Diaz added that it is most accurate if land titles are provided, rather than names of supposed owners because some similar names – first and last names – will also be reflected in the computer search.

During direct examination by defense counsel Noel Lazaro, Diaz admitted that 17 of the 45 titles had already been “cancelled.”

The senators also rebuffed Diaz’s claims that the document was a result of a “general search.” Diaz admitted that it was the first time that the LRA issued such a certification.

Enrile also insisted that Corona should have listed his Makati City condominium unit in his SALN as early as 2003 when he purchased it.

“Actually, they are all confused about this whole thing but actually it is simple as far as this chair is concerned. We are talking of asset, the asset originally was three point something million (pesos). That was transformed to a complete asset known as condominium,” Enrile said.

“But still, from the beginning of time of this contractual relationship, there was an asset. Only that it passes from cash to a concrete thing known as a condo unit. The condo unit came into existence when it was actually constructed but all along there was an asset that must be reflected in one’s SALN,” he added.

In yesterday’s hearing, defense lawyers presented another witness to help explain why Corona did not declare in his 2004 SALN his condominium unit at The Columns in Makati City.

Lawyer Jose Roy presented Carmina Cruz, customer relations head of Alveo Land Corp., developer of The Columns, to establish that Corona’s wife Cristina formally “accepted” their unit on Aug.12, 2009 or only after “defects” in the unit had been fixed.

The property manager of The Columns, Benz Lim, testified that the condo unit of Corona was fully paid in 2004 and the deed of sale and CCT were turned over to the Coronas at that time.

Lim said that Mrs. Corona originally owned a studio unit in 2003 but she applied for an upgrade to a one-bedroom unit, which had a total cost of P3.588 million.

However, Lim said that the date of acceptance was only recorded on Aug. 12, 2009 and that was when the condo association started collecting dues from Mrs. Corona.

Sen. Miriam Santiago cited a 2009 decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Cebu Winland Development Corp. vs Ong Siao Hua, which indicated that the execution of a deed of sale does not provide conclusive presumption of delivery of possession.

“The Chief Justice honestly declared the condo unit in 2010 after Mrs. Corona accepted it in 2009. The acceptance was information given to him by the seller. We consider that as an admission on the part of the seller that the complete transfer of ownership and free, intelligent and voluntary acceptance of possession occurred on Aug. 12, 2009 regardless of the provisions on deemed acceptance and the issuance of title in 2004,” Roy said.

“We don’t care if the condo existed or not. It had to be booked in 2003 and 2004 as an asset and if the unit had not been delivered, it should have been booked maybe as accounts receivable by Ayala Land. If not delivered even in 2010, that P3.5 million should still have appeared in his asset side,” Sen. Sergio Osmeña III said.

“The condo is irrelevant, the value must appear (in the SALN),” Osmeña said.