At the Sandiganbayan, the five court-appointed lawyers of Estrada are set to present in court today their oral arguments for their separate motions to withdraw as counsel for the former leader.
Calling the action "unprecedented," Estrada said the Supreme Court issued the decision following a meeting between Associate Justice Artemio Panganiban and Ombdsman Aniano Desierto at the Westin Philippine Plaza in Pasay City on March 12.
"It is all intended to malign and embarrass me in front of the cameras," he said in a statement. "The conspiracy of the court and the prosecution is very clear in connection with my cases. Their collusion is very, very evident.
Estrada said Chief Justice Hilario Davide was the first one to sign the Supreme Court decision in September last year denying the motion of the Ombudsman and the justice department.
"The (Supreme Court) justices had already ruled with finality denying the motion of the Ombudsman and the Department of Justice for a live media coverage and yet, they agree again now to debate on this issue," he said.
"And yet (Ombudsman Aniano) Desierto and (Justice Secretary Hernando) Perez remained determined to revive the issue. It seems it was the two of them who are disrespecting the Supreme Court and they deserve to be punished."
Estrada said he would file another motion for reconsideration on the legitimacy of the Arroyo administration and Republic Act 7080, the Plunder Law, if the Supreme Court grants Desierto’s motion for a live media coverage of his trial.
"Under the country’s High Tribunal, there is no such thing as a final ruling," he said. "If this is so, I may file another motion for reconsideration in connection with the legality of the Arroyo administration and the Plunder Law," he said.
The Supreme Court must cite for contempt anyone trying the revive the issue on the live media coverage of his trial as their actions are a "direct challenge" to the authority of the High Tribunal, Estrada added.
Associate Justice Minita Chico-Nazario, chairwoman of the anti-graft court’s special division, set for 8:30 a.m. today the hearing of the separate motions of lawyers Rodolfo Jimenez, Mario Ongkiko, Prospero Crescini and Irene Jurado, and former Sandiganbayan presiding justice Manuel Pamaran.
Jimenez seeks the suspension of Estrada’s trial in five criminal cases, including plunder, until the court has resolved his motion on whether private lawyers from the Integrated Bar of the Philippines would corroborate with those from the Public Attorney’s Office (PAO).
"To allow the appointment of the PAO lawyers as counsels de officio for President Estrada would result in an anomalous and scandalous spectacle of said President being defended by instrumentalities of the very department of the state whose task is to send the accused to jail," he said.
Jimenez said he does not want to be part of a "travesty," reminding the Sandiganbayan that a counsel de officio is only appointed when the accused cannot afford to retain a private lawyer.
"President Estrada can well-afford the services of counsels of his choice, as shown by the number of de parte counsels (private lawyers) he has dismissed," he said. "Therefore, the appointment of counsel de officio to defend him is not proper."
In separate supplemental motions, Ongkiko, Crescini, Jurado and Pamaran asked the court to withdraw their appointment as Estrada’s counsels de oficio and reinstall his nine dismissed private lawyers led by former Supreme Court Justice Serafin Cuevas.
"The herein de officio counsels also would not be able to devise the thrust of their cross-examination of the prosecution’s witnesses since they are not duly informed of the version of the accused as to the contested facts, as well as of the details of the evidence now in the possession of the accused," read a part of the manifestation.