Prosecutors by duty had to belittle as mere “defense by publicity” impeached Chief Justice Renato Corona’s media blitz. But presumably, they saw the value of his six straight radio-TV interviews to their cause. So they must have enjoyed listing down the many discrepancies in his statements. For, they can use these against him when his counsels start presenting his defense Monday. They can even debunk these in the same shows where Corona talked. After all his impeachment trial is as open as can be. Unlike in criminal cases where media coverage is banned, people are judging him by what he says through the media in and out of the Senate court.
Chief among Corona’s inconsistencies pertains to the Philippine Savings Bank. He was asked about the P37.7 million in three accounts he had closed on Dec. 12, 2011, the day he was impeached. He said he cleaned out the accounts in a huff because he had lost trust in PSBank. Allegedly the manager of the Katipunan-QC branch near his home had been leaking details of his deposits to neighbors.
For one who doubted PSBank, Corona did something most unusual, however. On the same day he withdrew the P37.7 million, he re-deposited it under a new account — in the same bank. This is shown in transcripts (pp 42-43) of the testimony last Feb. 20 of PSBank president Pascual Garcia, to wit:
“Mr. Garcia: There were three deposits by way of credit memos which were basically transfers of maturities of other accounts to this account on December 12, 2011, Your Honor. And the — shall I —
“Senator Drilon: Please proceed. Continue, Sir.
“Mr. Garcia: The first credit was for the amount of P7,397,566.36. This was the transfer from a time deposit account to this account. Another amount was P12,988,951.36, which is also a transfer from a time deposit account. And the last one actually was for the amount of P17,270,654.97. So —
“Senator Drilon: This was —
“Mr. Garcia: This was done on December 12, Your Honor.
“Senator Drilon: So, this was also a transfer from a credit memo transferring as is from the other account.
“Mr. Garcia: Yes, Your Honor.
“Senator Drilon: So, in other words, the three (3) accounts which were closed on December 12, 2011, were all deposited in 089-101005094?
“Mr. Garcia: Yes, Your Honor.”
Expressed before millions in audience, Corona’s suspicions about PSBank is difficult to reconcile with his continued depositing. His new account number 089-101005094 speaks for itself, in the “best-evidence rule” that his defense counsels are so fond of quoting.
Then again, Corona is pinning his hopes on the Senate suppressing any testimony and data on his PSBank accounts. That would erase from the trial records, though not from the public mind, the tens of millions of pesos he had not declared in his annual Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth. Already the senator-judges had junked his first plea for such deletion. Still, his lawyers are pressing on, stating in another form that the PSBank info is unacceptable because illegally obtained. Stifled on Corona’s request, meanwhile, are his five dollar-deposits in the same bank. One reportedly held $700,000 (P32 million) in initial deposit. But it can’t be divulged in an impeachment trial, according to Corona’s justices, unless he allows so in writing. All this is incongruous with his repeated promises to explain everything in due time.
Left hanging are other puzzles. Why didn’t the highest magistrate, aggrieved by the grave crime of bank-secrecy breach, sue PSBank and its allegedly leaky manager? It looks like he’s the one now waiting for a huge damage suit for slander to be slapped against him. Too, will he call in as witnesses the neighbors who supposedly tipped him off about the deposit info leaks? No such names are listed in the defense panel’s submissions to the Senate.
There are contradictions in related matters. Like, Corona dismisses as “all lies” the assertion of a cousin and a nun-aunt of his wife to be co-owners of a family corporation. Impliedly he means that the P34-million proceeds from an expropriation of a prime lot in Manila is all his wife’s. In which case, it should have been listed — but weren’t — in their joint SALNs for 2008, 2009 and 2010.
At any rate, Corona can answer those when the time comes for him to testify in his defense. But that’s if he testifies at all. At this point, it’s yet unsure. In another contradiction, he professes to want to do so, just that he’s no longer the Chief Justice speaking, but a client abiding by his counsels. To which the prosecutors might retort, of course: then why doesn’t he take a leave from the Chief Justiceship, so that he doesn’t have to spend SC public funds to go around town getting interviewed? That way, he’d lessen suspicions too of media outlets — especially those with cases pending in the SC — ingratiating themselves with him.
* * *
Catch Sapol radio show, Saturdays, 8-10 a.m., DWIZ (882-AM).
E-mail: jariusbondoc@gmail.com