Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Corona v. Senate PDF
Corona v. Senate PDF
ENBANC
CHIEF JUSTICE RENA TO C.
CORONA,
Petitioner,
-versus-
Promulgated:
JULY 17, 2012
yr
X- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X
'
No Part.
On leave.
Resolution
RESOLUTION
VILLARAMA, JR., J.:
Before this Court is a petition for certiorari and prohibition with
prayer for immediate issuance of temporary restraining order (TRO) and
writ of preliminary injunction filed by the former Chief Justice of this Court,
Renato C. Corona, assailing the impeachment case initiated by the
respondent Members of the House of Representatives (HOR) and trial being
conducted by respondent Senate of the Philippines.
On December 12, 2011, a caucus was held by the majority bloc of the
HOR during which a verified complaint for impeachment against petitioner
was submitted by the leadership of the Committee on Justice. After a brief
presentation, on the same day, the complaint was voted in session and 188
Members signed and endorsed it, way above the one-third vote required by
the Constitution.
On December 13, 2011, the complaint was transmitted to the Senate
which convened as an impeachment court the following day, December 14,
2011.
On December 15, 2011, petitioner received a copy of the complaint
charging him with culpable violation of the Constitution, betrayal of public
trust and graft and corruption, allegedly committed as follows:
ARTICLE I
RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST THROUGH HIS
TRACK
RECORD
MARKED
BY
PARTIALITY
AND
SUBSERVIENCE IN CASES INVOLVING THE ARROYO
ADMINISTRATION FROM THE TIME OF HIS APPOINTMENT AS
SUPREME COURT JUSTICE AND UNTIL HIS DUBIOUS
APPOINTMENT AS A MIDNIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE TO THE
PRESENT.
ARTICLE II
RESPONDENT COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATION OF THE
CONSTITUTION AND/OR BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST WHEN
HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE TO THE PUBLIC HIS STATEMENT OF
Resolution
Resolution
ARTICLE V
RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST THROUGH
WANTON
ARBITRARINESS
AND
PARTIALITY
IN
CONSISTENTLY DISREGARDING THE PRINCIPLE OF RES
JUDICATA IN THE CASES INVOLVING THE 16 NEWLY-CREATED
CITIES, AND THE PROMOTION OF DINAGAT ISLAND INTO A
PROVINCE.
ARTICLE VI
RESPONDENT
BETRAYED
THE
PUBLIC
TRUST
BY
ARROGATING UNTO HIMSELF, AND TO A COMMITTEE HE
CREATED, THE AUTHORITY AND JURISDICTION TO
IMPROPERLY INVESTIGATE A JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME
COURT FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXCULPATING HIM. SUCH
AUTHORITY AND JURISDICTION IS PROPERLY REPOSED BY
THE CONSTITUTION IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES VIA
IMPEACHMENT.
ARTICLE VII
RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST THROUGH HIS
PARTIALITY IN GRANTING A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING
ORDER (TRO) IN FAVOR OF FORMER PRESIDENT GLORIA
MACAPAGAL-ARROYO AND HER HUSBAND JOSE MIGUEL
ARROYO IN ORDER TO GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO
ESCAPE PROSECUTION AND TO FRUSTRATE THE ENDS OF
JUSTICE, AND IN DISTORTING THE SUPREME COURT DECISION
ON THE EFFECTIVITY OF THE TRO IN VIEW OF A CLEAR
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE CONDITIONS OF THE
SUPREME COURTS OWN TRO.
ARTICLE VIII
RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST AND/OR
COMMITTED GRAFT AND CORRUPTION WHEN HE FAILED AND
REFUSED TO ACCOUNT FOR THE JUDICIARY DEVELOPMENT
FUND (JDF) AND SPECIAL ALLOWANCE FOR THE JUDICIARY
(SAJ) COLLECTIONS.1
Resolution
the
prosecution
panel
composed
of
respondent
Rule XVIII.
Philippine Daily Inquirer, January 5, 2012, Vol. 27, No. 28.
Resolution
2.
SO ORDERED.
Resolution
Id. at 366-367.
Resolution
Resolution
Id. at 46-47.
Id. at 3-6.
Id. at 378-425.
Resolution
10
Petitioner
Id. at 973-1023.
506 U.S. 224 (1993).
Resolution
11
It is
thus prayed that the present petition, as well as petitioners prayer for
issuance of a TRO/preliminary injunction, be dismissed.
The core issue presented is whether the certiorari jurisdiction of this
Court may be invoked to assail matters or incidents arising from
impeachment proceedings, and to obtain injunctive relief for alleged
violations of right to due process of the person being tried by the Senate
sitting as Impeachment Court.
14
15
Edward S. Corwin, cited in Judicial Review of Impeachment: The Judicialization of Philippine Politics by
Franco Aristotle G. Larcina, University of Santo Tomas (UST) Law Review, Vol. L, AY 2005-2006.
THE
FEDERALIST
PAPERS
No.
65,
Alexander
Hamilton,
accessed
at
http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/fed/blfed65.htm.
Resolution
12
Resolution
13
Mootness
In the meantime, the impeachment trial had been concluded with the
conviction of petitioner by more than the required majority vote of the
Senator-Judges.
any protest vacated his office. In fact, the Judicial and Bar Council is
already in the process of screening applicants and nominees, and the
President of the Philippines is expected to appoint a new Chief Justice
within the prescribed 90-day period from among those candidates shortlisted
by the JBC. Unarguably, the constitutional issue raised by petitioner had
been mooted by supervening events and his own acts.
An issue or a case becomes moot and academic when it ceases to
16
17
Resolution
14
No pronouncement as to costs.
SO ORDERED.
~S.VILL
WE CONCUR:
ANTONIO T. CARPIO
Senior Associate Justice
o art)
0 J. VELASCO, JR.
~~4~
(On leave)
ARTURO D. BRION
Associate Justice
18
19
Philippine Airlines, Inc. v. Pascua, G.R. No. 143258, August 15,2003,409 SCRA 195,202.
Vda. de Dabao v. Court ofAppeals, G.R. No. 116526, March 23, 2004,426 SCRA 91, 97.
(.
Resolution
15
--
~~/
(No Part)
MARIANO C. DEL CASTILLO
Associate Justice
ROBERTO A. ABAD
Associate Justice
JOSE
CAl~"'TDOZA
EREZ
Ass~lt~J::~:
Associate Justice
ESTELA MfPERLAS-BERNABE
Associate Justice
A&, A1~~
CERTIFICATION
I certify that the conclusions in the above Resolution had been
reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the
opinion of the Court.