Aquino covering up Corona-Arroyo connection

7 March 2012
Download PDF

Aquino and his cohorts have been blocking efforts to present evidence at the Senate impeachment trial that would prove how Chief Justice Renato Corona has been serving his patron Gloria Arroyo.

On February 28, the 25th day of Corona's trial, the Filipino people were stunned when Rep. Niel Tupas Jr., head of the prosecution panel announced that they were terminating the presentation of evidence.

The move was surprising as the prosecution had presented evidence on only three of the eight articles of impeachment against Corona. Tupad said they no longer needed to present evidence on the five other articles, claiming that they had already presented enough evidence to convince the Senate to oust Corona from the Supreme Court.

Tupas' decision ran counter to an earlier agreement among the prosecutors t.hat they would continue presenting evidence in court. This had in fact become doubly important since the trial was then hearing evidence on Article 7 which refers to Corona's pro-Arroyo decisions and his close relationship with the Arroyos.

Tupas move was assailed by representatives of progressive parties who were among those backing Corona's prosecution. We are wondering who ordered Tupas to close the door on Sereno's testimony. This is alarming and seems to be part of a series of moves to cover up Corona's connection to Arroyo, said GABRIELA Rep. Emmi de Jesus, Bayan Muna Rep. Teddy CasiƱo and Alliance of Concerned Teachers Rep. Antonio Tinio.

Tupas' termination of the presentation of evidence was done a day after Supreme Court Associate Justice Lourdes Sereno was invited to share what she knew about Corona's actions in favor of Gloria Arroyo. Bayan Muna Rep. Neri Colmenares had written Sereno inviting her to testify before the Senate on Corona's actuations.

Sereno would have been the best possible source of information on what Corona had done to ensure that Arroyo could leave the country to evade pending criminal cases against her. Sereno's dissenting opinion indicated that Corona distorted the Supreme Court decision to make it appear that the Arroyo camp had complied with the conditions set by the court for the Arroyo couple's travel abroad.

When the case was filed to oust Corona, he was clearly being held accountable for his partiality and obedience to Arroyo. It is this aspect of the case that is being weakened by no less than the chief prosecutor.

The progressive party representatives also explained that the case against Corona was being widely supported by the people because they know Corona to be an Arroyo lackey. If this fact could not be clearly established through the testimony of Sereno and others, the public will lose interest in pursuing this case.