REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES CONGRESS OF THE PHILIPPINES SENATE SITTING AS AN IMPEACHMENT COURT IN| THE MATTER OF THE IMPEACHMENT OF RENATO C. fos CORONA AS CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE . SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES, CASE NO. 002-2011 REPRESENTATIVES NIEL C. TUPAS, JR., JOSEPH EMILIO A. ABAYA, LORENZO R. TANADA, II, REYNALDO V. UMALI, ARLENE J. BAG-AO, ET AL., Complainants. MANIFESTATION WITH MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION (RE: TESTIMONY AND DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY MR. ENRIQUE JAVIER, VICE-PRESIDENT — SALES, PHILIPPINE AIRLINES) The HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, through its Prosecutors (the Prosecution), respectfully manifests the following matters and further requests for a clarification on the order of this Honorable Court regarding the disallowance of the testimonial and documentary evidence relative to Article Ill of the Verified Complaint for Impeachment, particularly as regards the FASAP Case. In support of such manifestation and motion, the Prosecutors respectfully allege the following:1. On 1 February 2012, the Prosecution filed a Request for the Issuance of subpoena ad testificandum and subpoena duces tecum to Mr. Enrique Javier, Vice-President — Sales, Philippine Airlines (PAL) and Ms. Ria Carrion Domingo, Vice-President — Product Loyalty, PAL, among others, and to bring with them the original and certified true copies of the documents requested therein. 2. On the same date, Respondent Corona filed an Opposition to the said request with regard to Mr. Javier and Ms. Carrion-Domingo on the ground that the requested subpoena will violate his Constitutional right to due process because the complaint does not mention “any benefits or privileges that Chief Justice and Mrs. Corona obtained from it {PAL]”. In Respondent Corona’s Opposition, it stated that the PAL Platinum Card and related documents are irrelevant and immaterial. 3. On 2 February 2012, the Prosecution filed a Reply to respondent Corona’s Opposition. 4. On 8 February 2012, despite the opposition filed by Respondent Corona, the Hon. Juan Ponce Enrile, the Senate President and Presiding Officer of the Impeachment Court, granted the Prosecution’s Request for Subpoenae and issued Subpoena Ad Testificandum et Duces Tecum to Mr. Enrique Javier (Vice President-Sales of PAL) and Ms. Ria Carrion-Domingo(Vice President-Product Loyalty Marketing of PAL) and required them to bring the following documents: “1. Record/s of PAL Platinum Card No. A752 in the name of Renato C. Corona including record of issuance, record of usage, and other documents related to the card); 2. Record/s of PAL Platinum Card No. A753 in the name of Cristina R. Corona including record of issuance, record of usage, and other documents related to the card); 3. Philippine Airlines’ policies or rules concerning the issuance and use of PAL Platinum cards; 4, The following Passenger Name Records (PNR): a. PNR-BZFUMN (CORONA/RENATO) b. PNR-CFFTE2 (CORONA/RENATO) c. PNR-C6QIWN (CORONA/RENATO) d, PNR-BKEHT6 (CORONA/RENATO) e. PNR-BZFUMN (CORONA/MACRISTINA) f. PNR-EHIZDW (CORONA/MACRISTINA) g. PNR-C6QIWN (CORONA/MACRISTINA) h, PNR-BKEHT6 (CORONA/MACRISTINA) 5. The following Plane Tickets: a. 079-02437129241 (CORONA/RENATO; MNL-HNL-MNL) b. 079-02437964125 (CORONA/RENATO; MNL-HKG-MNL) c. 079-02438104732 (CORONA/RENATO; MNL-GUM-MNL) d. 079-02438048590 (CORONA/RENATO; MNL-SIN-IMNL) €. 079-02437129252 (CORONA/MACRISTINA; MNL-HNL-MNL) f. 079-02437064111 (CORONA/MACRISTINA; MNL-HKG-MNL) g. 079-02438104750 (CORONA/MACRISTINA; MNL-GUM-MNL) h.079-02438048603 (CORONA/MACRISTINA; MNL-SIN-MNL) 6. Record of booking tickets enumerated above.” 5. On 13 February 2012, Mr. Enrique Javier, submitted a Certification & Compliance with respect to the documents required from them. The certification is signed by him and contained several attachments, marked as.Exhibit “PPPPPPP” to “PPPPPPP-8” (attached in this Manifestation) as manifested in the record, evidencing the following: Platinum Card No. A752 in the name of Corona/Renato C. Mr. Date Issued - DEC2010 Expiry Date - DEC2011 [ PLATINUM CARD A752 USAGE TICKET NBR ISSUING. SECTOR | FLIGHT | FLIGHT OFFICE NBR DATE PNB TICKET | MNL- PR 110 OFFICE GuM . GuM- | PR111 Mane 2 0792438048590 | PNB TICKET | MNL-SIN | PR 501 OFFICE _ 7 SIN-MNL |PR508 | 19-Apr-11 0792437129241 | PNBTICKET |MNL- | PR100 | 25-Dec-10 OFFICE HNL | HNL- PR101 | 30-Dec-10 L MNL _ 0792437064125 | PNBTICKET |MNL- | PR318 | 18-Dec-10 OFFICE HKG _ _ HKG- | PR307 | 21-Dec-10 MNL Platinum Card No. A753 in the name of Corona/Ma. Cristina R. Ms. Date Issued — DEC2010 Expiry Date — DEC2011 PLATINUM CARD A752 USAGE aa | TICKET NBR ISSUING SECTOR | FLIGHT [FLIGHT OFFICE | NBR DATE 0792438580764 | PNB TICKET | MNL-CGK|PR503 | 10-Jul-11 | L OFFICE | [CGK-MNL|PRS504 | 15-Julti 0792438104750 | PNB TICKET | MNL- PR110 | 20-Apr-11 OFFICE GUM | GUM- PR111 | 24-Apr-11 MNL(0792438048603 | PNB TICKET | MNL-SIN |PR501 | 15-Apr-11 OFFICE | SIN-MNL |PR508__| 19-Apr-11 (0792437537320 | PNB TICKET | MNL-BKK |PR730 | 4-Mar-11 _| OFFICE <= BKK-MNL | PR731_| 7-Mar-11 (0792437129252 | PNBTICKET |MNL- [| PR100 | 25-Dec-10 OFFICE HNL | HNL PR101 | 30-Dec-10 | MNt__ a (0792437064111 ) PNBTICKET |MNL- | PR318 | 18-Dec-10 OFFICE HKG = HKG- PR307 | 21-Dec-10 —— _| MNL = | 0792438788791 | PNBTICKET | MNL- | PR133_ | 28-Jul-11 Z | OFFICE BCD BCD- PR158 | 28-Jul-11 MN 0792438406608 | PNB TICKET | MNL-GES |PR453 | 3-Jun-10 OFFICE | _ GES-MNL | PR454__| 4-Jun-10 | 0792437833678 | PNB TICKET | MNL-CEB | PR847 | 18-Mar-11 OFFICE CEB-MNL | PR 854 _| 19-Mar-11 0792437810940 | PNB TICKET | MNL- | PR177__ | 22-Mar-11 | oFFIce TAG | TAG- PR 176 24-Mar-11 MNL 0792437656040 | PNB TICKET | MNL-GES | PR 453 2-Mar-11 OFFICE _ GES-MNL | PR454 | 3-Mar-11 0792437536718 | PNBTICKET | MNL-CEB | PR849 | 15-Feb-11 | | OFFICE CEB-MNL | PR854__ | 16-Feb-11 6. The said Certification & Compliance also stated the privileges which come with the PAL Platinum Cards, specifically in Exhibit “PPPPPPP-3”, to wit:“PAL PLATINUM CARD BENEFITS, RESERVATIONS, TICKETING AND CHECK-IN PROCEDURES Benefits: © Unlimited courtesy travel on Philippine Airlines and PAL Express flights on the highest class of service. © Applicable taxes, fees, fuel and insurance surcharges are waived, courtesy of Philippine Airlines. * Free baggage allowance of - © 4 pieces, at 23 kilos per piece, on transpacific flights [USA and Canada} © 60kilos on other international and domestic flights © 20kilos on PAL Express flights * Access to all Philippine Airlines Mabuhay Lounges Worldwide. Also, Platinum Cardholders traveling on PAL flights can bring {four of his traveling companions, regardless of class of service, to use the lounge.” [emphasis ours] 7. On 14 February 2012, Respondent Corona filed a Motion to Quash Subpoena to Mr. Enrique Javier and Ms. Ria Carrion-Domingo, both of PAL, and reiterated the very same arguments in his Opposition dated 1 February 2012. 8. The Senate Impeachment Court did not act on the said defense’s Motion and the Subpoenae to Mr. Javier and Ms. Carrion-Domingo remain effective. It can be logically concluded that the Senate Impeachment Court found the testimonial and documentary evidence to be material and relevant to the FASAP case and Article III of the Impeachment Complaint. 9, On 21 February 2012, during the presentation of the testimony of Mr. Javier, after some questions have been asked by Private ProsecutorMarlon Manuel, counsel for Respondent Corona objected to the presentation of the said witness. The Honorable Presiding Officer sustained the objection of Respondent's counsel on the ground that testimony on Respondent Corona’s PAL Platinum Card and his availment of free PAL plane tickets thereunder constitute additional charges of bribery which are not included in the complaint. The Honorable Presiding Officer ruled that the evidence were immaterial and irrelevant to the case, specifically, Article Ii of the Complaint. 10. Prosecution, with utmost respect and humility, submits this Manifestation with Motion for Clarification for purposes of clarifying the materiality and relevance of the disallowed testimony and of seeking clarification on the disallowance after the Honorable Impeachment Court had already ordered, on 8 February 2012, the issuance of the relevant Subpoenae and did not act on the respondent’s 14 February 2012 Motion to Quash Subpoenae. Simply put, if the Senate Impeachment Court found that the testimony of the witnesses were relevant to the controversy at hand, the least that the Honorable Court should have done was to allow the testimony of the witnesses to be presented before it. Besides, the argument that the testimony will lead to a conclusion that Respondent Corona is being charged with bribery is not being presented by the prosecution as a theory of the case. The testimony on the PAL tickets is simply for purposes of proving Respondent Corona’s failure to comply withthe Constitutional standards of competence, integrity, probity, and independence. MATERIALITY AND RELEVANCY OF RESPONDENT CORONA’S ACCEPTANCE OF PAL PLATINUM CARDS AND FREE TICKETS IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL STANDARDS OF COMPETENCE, INTEGRITY, PROBITY AND INDEPENDENCE FOR MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE PENDING FASAP CASE 11. Respondent Corona, in his Opposition to the Request for Issuance of Subpoena dated 1 February 2012 by the Prosecution, raises objections to the issuance of subpoena duces tecum and subpoena ad testificandum requiring Mr. Enrique Javier and Ria Carrion Domingo of Philippine Airlines to testify and to bring documents on the ground that such issuance of subpoenae violates the constitutional right of Respondent Corona to be informed of the accusation against him and that the object, testimonial and documentary evidence to be presented are inadmissible as it is immaterial and irrelevant. 12. Article Ill of the Impeachment Complaint charges Respondent Corona of committing culpable violation of the Constitution and betraying the public trust by failing to meet and observe the stringent standards under Article Vil, Section 7(3) of the Constitution that provides that “amember of the Judiciary should be of proven competence, integrity and independence’, thus: ARTICLE III RESPONDENT COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION AND BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST BY FAILING TO MEET AND OBSERVE THE STRINGENT STANDARDS UNDER ART. Vill, SECTION 7 (3) OF THE CONSTITUTION THAT PROVIDES THAT “[A] MEMBER OF THE JUDICIARY MUST BE A PERSON OF PROVEN COMPETENCE, INTEGRITY, PROBITY, AND INDEPENDENCE” IN ALLOWING THE SUPREME COURT TO ACT ON MERE LETTERS FILED BY A COUNSEL WHICH CAUSED THE ISSUANCE OF FLIP-FLOPPING DECISIONS IN FINAL AND EXECUTORY CASES; IN CREATING AN — EXCESSIVE ENTANGLEMENT WITH MRS. ARROYO THROUGH HER APPOINTMENT OF HIS WIFE TO OFFICE; AND IN DISCUSSING WITH LITIGANTS REGARDING CASES PENDING BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT. 13. The ground constituting culpable violation of the constitution and betrayal of public trust as exemplified by details provided under Article Ill, is that Respondent Chief Justice Corona failed to meet and observe the stringent standards of the constitutional qualification of a member of a judiciary to be of proven competence, integrity, probity and independence. This failure to meet the constitutional standards is exemplified by the actuations of Respondent Corona in, among others, the case of FASAP vs. Philippine Airlines (PAL).’ With the sudden active participation of Respondent Corona, the Supreme Court En Banc recalled a 7 September 2011 Decision of the Supreme Court’s Second Division denying a Second Motion for Reconsideration of the 2008 ruling in favor of FASAP. The recall, " G.R.No. 178083, October 2, 2009 and Administrative Matter No, 11-10-1-SC, October 4, 2011at the instance of and with the participation of Respondent Corona, was carried out in response to mere letters filed by PAL’s counsel, Atty. Estelito Mendoza, and without eliciting a comment from or giving notice to the other parties so they could be afforded due process. 14. The recall by the Supreme Court En Banc of the 7 September 2011 Decision and the unexplained and sudden participation of Respondent Corona prevented the case from becoming final and executory. Consequently, no entry of judgment was issued in the FASAP Case. The recall, together with the sudden participation of Respondent Corona, was performed under questionable circumstances involving the party-litigant PAL and its lawyer, Atty. Estelito Mendoza. 15. The nature and cause of the accusation against Respondent Corona under Article III of the Articles of Impeachment is crystal clear. Respondent Corona will be convicted or acquitted based on such accusation. Respondent Corona has been informed that under Article Ill of the Impeachment Complaint, he is being charged and will be convicted or acquitted on the question of whether or not he betrayed the public trust or whether or not he culpably violated the Constitution. Respondent Corona, in fact, denied this accusation in his Answer. Such denial is clear proof that Respondent Corona is very much aware of the accusations against him. 1016. The testimony of Mr. Javier and Ms. Domingo and the documents on the PAL Platinum cards and the free PAL plane tickets are being presented as evidentiary facts related to the questionable issuance of the recall order in the FASAP Case and not to allege, much less prove, that Respondent Corona is guilty of bribery. The Prosecution, however, takes note of the comment made by the Senate Impeachment Court that Respondent Corona’s actuations, if proven true, may also tend to establish bribery. But this is not the Prosecution’s objective at this stage in presenting the testimony and documentary evidence to be presented by the witness. 17. In fine, Respondent Corona is being tried and will be convicted or acquitted on the charge that he failed to observe Competence, Integrity, Probity and Independence required of members of the judiciary when he acted on mere letters filed by PAL lawyer, Atty. Estelito Mendoza. A finding that Respondent Corona was extraneously, influenced, induced or interfered, directly or indirectly, by the benefits and privileges from PAL would provide not just a backdrop against which his action or participation in the recall of the 7 September 2011 Decision of the Supreme Court in the FASAP Case may be appreciated but will show that the recall of the FASAP decision is not a result of an impartial appreciation of the FASAP case but on other considerations which materially unravels the undeniable truth that Respondent Corona has failed to live up to the 1standards required of him under the Constitution. In the end, what would constitute betrayal of public trust or culpable violation of the Constitution is the Respondent Corona’s unwarranted act or participation in the recall of the 7 September 2011 Decision of the Supreme Court which prevented the case from becoming final and executory or the failure to abide by the standards of Competence, Integrity, Probity, and Independence. 18. Without belaboring the issue, Respondent Corona clearly understood the accusations leveled against him in the Impeachment Complaint since he had already specifically denied such accusation through the Answer he filed. Thus, with the accusations met with denials, the factual issues have already been joined. It is now appropriate for the Impeachment Court to receive evidence on the matter to ferret out these factual issues in the trial. 19. The request for issuance of subpoena to require testimonial evidence from concerned PAL officers and the presentation of records as regards PAL Platinum Cards issued to Respondent Corona and his wife Cristina, policies and rules regarding such Platinum Cards, the Passenger Name Records and several plane tickets was put forward for the purpose of proving the fact in issue or facts relevant to the issue, i.e. the initiative and participation of Respondent Corona in the Supreme Court En Banc in recalling the September 7, 2011 Decision in the FASAP case where PAL happens to be one of the parties. This peculiar deviation from the 12established rules of procedure, under the prevailing circumstances, goes into the very core df respondent Corona’s competence, integrity, probity and independence. 20. The extraneous influence, inducement and interference, directly or indirectly, on the part of Respondent Corona, as well as the close relationship between Respondent Corona and PAL, which resulted in his mysterious and sudden participation in the recall of the Supreme Court Decision in the FASAP case are facts relevant to the issue. 21. When Respondent Corona did not take part in G.R. No. 178083 entitled FASAP vs. Philippine Airlines, it was FASAP that consistently won in the Supreme Court for three (3) consecutive times. First, the Third Division rendered a Decision on 22 July 2008 holding that PAL was guilty of illegally dismissing 1,400 PAL flights attendants. Second, on 2 October 2009, the Third Division dismissed PAL’s Motion for Reconsideration with finality. Third, on 7 September 2011, the Second Division denied PAL’s second Motion for Reconsideration and directed Entry of Judgment. 22. However, on 4 October 2011, the Supreme Court, in an en banc session, under a new matter, recalled the 7 September 2011 Decision. Asa result, the Supreme Court would have to render another decision to resolve whether or not there was illegal dismissal by PAL. Such recall was made in 13,a new matter, A.M. No. 11-10-1-SC, entitled “RE: LETTERS OF ATTY. ESTELITO P. MENDOZA”. Atty. Mendoza became counsel for PAL only when the FASAP case was already in the Supreme Court. After the Court issued the 7 September 2011 Decision, Atty. Mendoza wrote four (4) letters to the Supreme Court. 23. In his Answer dated 21 December 2011, Respondent Corona claimed that all letters are treated uniformly and are acted upon by the Court. On the contrary, however, favoritism was exhibited by Respondent Corona. When members of FASAP wrote to the Supreme Court in November 2009, the Court instructed FASAP to furnish PAL with a copy and PAL was given an opportunity to comment. In contrast, when Atty. Mendoza sent four (4) letters to the Supreme Court, FASAP was not given any notice and hearing about the said letters, which are basic requirements of due process. FASAP found out that, on the basis of Atty. Mendoza’s letters, the Supreme Court, had already recalled the 7 September 2011 Decision in the new matter, A.M. No. 11-10-1-SC. 24, Section 4, Rule 128 of the Rules of Court defines what is considered as relevant or material. The Rules state: Section 4. Relevancy; collateral matters. —Evidence must have such a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or non-existence. Evidence on collateral matters shall not be allowed, except when it tends in any reasonable 14degree to establish the probability or improbability of the fact in issue. 25. To be relevant then, evidence, either object, testimonial or documentary, must have such a relation to the facts in issue. “Facts in issue are those facts which a plaintiff must prove in order to establish his claim and those facts which the defendant must prove in order to establish a defense set up by him but only when the fact alleged by one party is not admitted by the other. Facts which are admitted, expressly or by implication, are not in issue. Facts relevant to the issue are those facts which render probable the existence or non-existence of a fact in issue or some other relevant fact.”* 26. Article Ill of the Impeachment complaint alleges, among others, that Respondent Corona suddenly participated in the recall of the September 7, 2011 Decision of the Second Division of the Supreme court in the FASAP case. Respondent Corona, on the other hand, denied such fact under paragraph 1, Article II page 36 of his Answer. Respondent CJ Corona, under paragraph 4, page 37 of Answer, even further admitted that he inhibited in the FASAP case since 2008. 27. Whether or not Respondent Corona participated in the recall by the Supreme Court En Banc of the September 7, 2011 Decision of the Second * Phipson’s Manual ofthe Law of Evidence, p.24 15Division is a fact in issue in this impeachment case. Whether Respondent Corona’s acceptance of PAL Platinum Cards and his availment of benefits under such card has relation to his sudden participation and the unexplained recall of the September 7, 2011 Decision of the Second Division are facts equally relevant to the issue. Hence, the testimonial evidence from Mr. Enrique Javier, Vice President for Sales and Ria Carrion Domingo, Vice President for Product Loyalty Marketing, both of Philippine Airlines, the PAL Platinum Cards issued to Renato Corona and his wife Cristina Corona, Passenger Name records (PNR) and Plane tickets are relevant, material and admissible under the Rules of Court. Accordingly, these documents sought to establish the Prosecution’s claim that Respondent Corona lacks the requisite competence, integrity, probity and independence. 28. As stated in the quoted Section 4, Rule 128 of the Rules of Court, even collateral matters may be allowed when it tends in any reasonable degree to establish the probability or improbability of the fact in issue Even assuming without admitting that the testimonial and documentary evidence of Mr. Enrique Javier of PAL would be considered collateral matters, the same would still be admissible if they tend in any reasonable degree to establish the probability that Respondent Corona was extraneously influenced, induced or interfered, directly or indirectly, in the recall of the 7September 2011 Decision in the FASAP Case. 16ONLY “ULTIMATE FACTS” ARE REQUIRED TO BE ALLEGED IN THE COMPLAINT; “EVIDENTIARY FACTS” NEED NOT BE ALLEGED THEREIN. 29. The manner of making allegations in the complaint is stated in Section 1, Rule 8 of the Rules of Court, which provides, Sec. 1. In general, ~ Every pleading shall contain in a methodical and logical form, a plain, concise and direct statement of the ultimate facts on which the party pleading relies for his claim or defense, as the case may be, omitting the statement of mere evidentiary facts. 30. “Ultimate facts” are the important and substantial facts which either directly form the basis of the plaintiff's primary right and duty or directly make up the wrongful acts or omissions of the defendant.” A fact is essential if it cannot be stricken out without leaving the statement of the cause of action or defense insufficient.” 31. On the other hand, “evidentiary facts” are those which are necessary to prove the ultimate fact or which furnish evidence of the existence of some other facts. Evidentiary facts should not be alleged in the pleadings otherwise it may only result in confusing the statement of the cause of action or the defense. They are not necessary therefore, and their ® Alsua vs. Johnson, 21 Phil 308 * Toribio vs. Bidin, GR No, 57821, January 17, 1985. 17exposition is actually premature as such facts must be found and drawn from testimonial and other evidence.” 32. Thus, only “ultimate facts”, as opposed to mere “evidentiary facts”, should be stated in the complaint. 33. As stated above, the ultimate facts in Article III of the complaint in relation to the FASAP case was that Respondent Corona committed culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust by failing to meet the Constitutional standards that a member of the Judiciary must be a person of proven competence, integrity probity and independence in allowing the Supreme Court to act on mere letters filed by a counsel which caused the recall of the 7 September 2011 Decision of the Supreme Court in the FASAP Case. These “ultimate facts" were properly alleged in the complaint. 34, Facts which will prove the extraneous influence, inducement and interference, directly or indirectly, on the part of Respondent Corona in allowing, and in fact participating, in the said recall of the 7 September 2011 Decision of the Supreme Court in the FASAP Case, such as the availment of respondent Corona of PAL Platinum Cards, free plane tickets, among others, are “evidentiary facts” which will tend to prove the probable * Regalado, Florenz D. Remedial Law Compendium. 2005 Edition. pp. 169-170. 18existence of the “ultimate facts”. These “evidentiary facts” need not be alleged in the complaint. In fact, the last sentence of the first paragraph in Section 1, Rule 8 of the Rules of Court even clearly provides that these facts should not be alleged in the complaint, to wit, “xxx omitting the statement of mere evidentiary facts.” 35. Very clearly, the rules prohibit the allegations of evidentiary matters in the complaint. The prosecution has thus properly omitted in the complaint matters which are considered as mere evidentiary facts. Thus, the testimony of Mr. Javier on matters relating to respondent Corona’s availment of PAL Platinum Cards, free plane tickets, among others, should have been properly admitted as they are very relevant and material in the case. EVIDENCE ON RESPONDENT CORONA’S AVAILMENT OF PAL PLATINUM CARDS AND FREE PLANE FARES DO NOT CONSTITUTE A NEW CHARGE OF BRIBERY BUT ARE MERELY EVIDENCE TO PROVE EXTRANEOUS INFLUENCE, INDUCEMENT AND INTERFERENCE, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, FOR RESPONDENT CORONA IN RECALLING THE 7 SEPTEMBER 2011 DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT IN THE FASAP CASE 36. During the 21 February 2012 hearing, the Honorable Presiding Officer disallowed the testimony of Mr. Javier since the allegations of 19respondent Corona’s availment of PAL Platinum Cards and free plane fares were considered as new allegations of bribery which is not included in the complaint. 37. With due respect to the Honorable Presiding Officer, the presentation of the above-cited evidence is not intended to present a new charge of bribery against respondent Corona which was not included in the complaint. Rather, the presentation of respondent Corona’s availment of PAL Platinum Cards and free plane fares is used only to lay the basis for Article Ill with respect to Respondent Corona’s sudden and unexplained participation in the Supreme Court's Recall Order of the 7 September 2011 Decision in the FASAP Case. 38. It is also important to note that Article III of the complaint is not based on Article 210 (Bribery) on the Revised Penal Code, rather, it is based on the Constitution and the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary. Specifically, one of the provisions that was used in the complaint is Section 1, Canon 1, which states: “SEC. 1. Judges shall exercise the judicial function independently on the basis of their assessment of the facts and in accordance with a conscientious understanding of the law, free of any extraneous influence, inducement, pressure, threat or interference, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason.” 2039. “Multiple admissibility” is a basic principle in evidence. When a fact is offered for one purpose, and is admissible in so far as it satisfies all rules applicable to it when offered for that purpose, its failure to satisfy some other rule which would be applicable to it if offered for another purpose does not exclude it.’ In short, evidence which is admissible for a purpose should not be excluded because it is inadmissible for any other purpose. In this case, evidence that can be excluded because it tends to prove bribery which is not stated in Article Il of the complaint with regard to the FASAP Case, should not be rendered inadmissible for the purpose of proving lack of integrity and independence on the part of Respondent Corona. 40. As stated above, the main allegation in Article IIl is that respondent Corona committed culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust in failing to meet the standards of competence, integrity, probity and independence. Specifically in the FASAP Case, Respondent Corona failed to meet these standards by allowing the Supreme Court to act on mere letters filed by counsel that caused the recall of the 7 September 2011 Decision of the Supreme Court which prevented the FASAP case from becoming final and executory. 41. The Prosecution, by presenting the testimony of Mr. Javier on Respondent Corona’s availment of PAL Platinum Cards and free plane " Francisco, Ricardo J. Evidence: Rules of Court in the Philippines. Rules 128-134. 1996 Edition. pp. 11 a1tickets, does not present an additional charge of bribery but, rather, merely intends to establish the extraneous influence, inducement and interference, directly or indirectly, in Respondent Corona’s sudden and unexplained participation in the recall of the 7 September 2011 Decision in the FASAP Case. The evidence sought to be elicited from said witness indubitably goes into the issue of whether Respondent Corona possesses the requisite competence, integrity, probity and independence as a magistrate, regardless of whether the act tends to prove the criminal act of bribery, which is immaterial for the purposes of the impeachment trial involving only Respondent Corona’s fitness to hold public office. 42. This was precisely the reason for presenting the PAL witness — to prove that Corona received special privileges, including free plane tickets from PAL, to explain Corona’s favourable treatment of the ex parte letter of Atty. Estelito Mendoza to recall the 7 September 2011 Decision of the Supreme Court in the FASAP Case without even giving FASAP an opportunity to be heard on the issue. It also explains why, on the other hand, FASAP’s own letters were not given the same attention as the letters of Atty. Mendoza because, unlike PAL, they could not give Corona such privileges. Clearly, this is relevant to the issue squarely tendered in the Impeachment Complaint on whether Respondent Corona possesses the required integrity, independence and probity to remain in the Judiciary. 22PRAYER WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed that . The Honorable Impeachment Court recall the denial of the testimony and the documents previously required of Mr. Enrique Javier, Vice President for Sales and Ms. Ria Carrion-Domingo, Vice President for Product Loyalty Marketing, both of Philippine Airlines, with respect to PAL Platinum Cards issued to CJ Corona and his wife, Cristina, the policies and rules thereof, the pertinent Passenger Name Records and Plane tickets mentioned in the Subpoena dated 8 February 2012; . Allow the said witnesses to testify before the Impeachment Court and the documents, particularly, the PAL Certification and Compliance to be presented in the Honorable Impeachment Court for purposes of proving, not the crime of bribery, but the allegation that Respondent Corona has committed culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayed the public trust when he failed to meet the stringent standards of competence, independence, probity, and integrity; 233. The matter be taken into Senate Caucus for the Senator-Judges to deliberate considering the utmost importance of the subject matter; and 4, Other reliefs just or equitable under the circumstances, are likewise prayed for. Pasay City, Metro Manila, 22 February 2012. ‘THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Republic of the Philippines By HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES PROSECUTORS > “KAKA” J. BAG-AO jead Prosecut Public Prosecutor Copy Furnished: JUSTICE SERAFIN R. CUEVAS (RET.) ET AL, Counsel for Respondent Chief Justice Renato Corona Suite 1902 Security Bank Centre 6776 Ayala Avenue Makati City, Philippines 1226 24EXHIBIT PPCPREP. id Philippine Airlines FEB 13 2012 CERTIFICATION & COMPLIANCE 1. In compliance of Items 1, 2 and 3 of the Subpoena, the following is a listing of the usage of Platinum Card No. A752 in the name of Renato Corona and Platinum Card No. A753 in the name of Ma. Cristina Corona derived from information available in the computer files of Philippine Airlines in different departments. Platinum Card No. A752 in the name of Corona/Renato C. Mr Dute Issued — DEC2010 Expiry Date ~ DEC2011 PLATINUM CARD A752 USAGE ISSUING = OFFICE SECTOR FLIGHT NBR | FLIGHT DATE MNL-GUM PR 110 20-Apr-I] GONENNE PRI PNB TICKET eaicE MNLSIN PR SOY i __SIVENE, PRIUS | PNB TICKET — : OFFICE | MNEENE PR 100 iz - NCE PRIOT PNB TICKET A nae wmbanke [Rae HRGMNC [PROT | TICKET NBR feipaeseloatsa: | Marre Platinum Card No. A753 in the name of Corona/Ma. Cristina R. Ms. Date Issued - DEC2010 Expiry Date ~ DEC2011 i ~ PLATINUM CARD A753 USAGE 4 TICKET NBR ISSUING SECTOR ruicHT NBR | FLIGHT DATE OFFICE | Bs : ; PNB TICKET 2 7924385 7 x ul 0792438580764 eae MNL-COK PR S03 10-Jul-11 ‘CGK-MNE PRIO4 earn eeeIIckeT lees ovszaseiowso | Shae | MNecum | prno | 20.aprin roxorl GUREMANL pI SeApett Philippines Cable: Flsiline, ManilaSxHIBIT PPPPPPP-£ \.” > PNB TICKET ae 0792438048603 oEnee MINL-SIN PR 501 LS-ApeeLd ‘SICMNE PR 508 1S-Aprit sarsiao | PNBTICKET 7 a (0292437537320 Bence MNLBKK | Pe730 4-Mar-I1 BRK-MNE PRIL TMae-11 e PNB TICKET 7 a o7a3712 Pane MNL-HNL PR 100 25-Dee-10 TNC-MNE PRIOT 3ODecI0 : PNB TICKET : a | o7ozsszosst it ae MNL-HKG: PR3I8 18-Dec-10 TRGMNE PRIO7 21-Dee-10 a PNB TICKET 28-Juk 0792438788791 nce MNL-BCD PR 133 28-JuleLT BCD-MNI PRISE 38-Jubt a PNB TICKET : (0792438406608 cence MNL-GES PR4S3 3-dun-11 GESMNE PRISE un Te PNB TICKET a (0792437833678 eitee MNL-CEB PR 8a 18-Mar-11 CEB PROSE 19-Mar-11 = PNB TICKET a (0792437810940 ps MNL-TAG PRI77 22-Mar-11 TAG-MNE, PRITE eMail ae PNB TICKET 5 a 0792437656080 Once MNL-GES PR453 2Mar-I1 GEST, PRIS SMar-T ane PNB TICKET 0792437536718 ence MNL-CEB PR 849 15-Feb-1T CEBMNE [PRES 16-Feb-11 Further, attached as Annex “A” is a copy of the PAL Platinum Card Benefits, Reservations, Ticketing and Check-in Procedures issued to all ticketing, offices 1. In compliance of Item 4 in the Subpoena, attached are the following: Annex “B” ~ PNR-BZFUMN (CORONA/RENATO) PNR-BZFUMN (CORONA/MACRISTINA) Annex “C” ~ PNR-CFFTE2 (CORONA/RENATO) Annex “D” ~ PNR-C6QIWN (CORONA/RENATO) PNR-C6QIWN (CORONA/MACRISTINA)EXHESIT PPPPPAP-20 ‘Annex "E” ~ PNR-BKEHT6 (CORONA/RENATO) PNR- BKEHT6 (CORONA/MACRISTINA) Annex “F” — PNR-EHIZDW (CORONA/MACRISTINA) ‘These PNRs' are stored in the computer accessible by the Information Systems Department. The Vice President — Information Systems printed the above attachments. ; HI As to Items 5 and 6, PAL is not in possession of the plane tickets or boarding passes as these are in the possession of the passengers. However, the information as to booking reference is found in the PNRs attached herein. The plane ticket numbers are highlighted and marked as follows S.a 079-02437129241 Annex “B” ~"B-1” 5b 079-02437064125 Annex “C” ~"C-1" 5c 079-02438104732 Annex "D" ~“D-1” 5d 979-02438048590 Annex “E” ~"E-1" Sie 079-02437129252 Annex “B” —"B-2" 5 079-02437064111 Annex “F” ~ “F-1"" 5.g 079-02438104750 Annex “D” ~"D-2” Sh 079-02438048603 Annex “E” -"E-2” EXHUBLT PPPPPPR QWa” '\ Prepared by: FEB 13 2012 hee) ENRIQUH P. JAVIER Vice Pfesidlent-Sales Department | Philiplpine Airlines, Inc.- “ exemsn PPPPPPP-3" EXHIBIT PPPPPPP=3-A" | FEB 13 2 VU me / FEB 13 2012 \V ..__ PALPLATINUM CARD \- BENEFITS; RESERVATIONS, TICKETING AND GHECK-IN_PROCDURES: ‘© Unlimited courtesy travel on Philippine Airlines and PAL Express flights on the highest class of | service. \ «Applicable taxes, fees, fuel and insurance surcharges are waived, courtesy of Philippine Airlines \ \ \ * Free baggage allowance of - | ‘0 4 pieces, at 23 kilos per piece, on transpacific fights [USA and Canada] | ‘0 60 kilos.on other international and domestic fights | © 20kilos on PAL Express flights \ | «Access to all Philippine Aiines Mabuhay Lounges worldwide. Also, Platinum Cardholders traveling | | ‘on PAL fights can bring in four of his raveling companions, regardless of class of service, touse the | lounge. | Reservations, Ticketing and Check-in Procedures: When booking a fight — © please call Philippine Ailines 24-hour reservation phone numbers Manila. + 63 2 855-7888 or +63 2 855-8888 USA. +1 800 635-8659 or +1 800 435.9726 [1 800 I FLY PAL] ‘© give your fight schedule and platinum card number to our reservation agent © for your guidance, the applicable booking prionity codes are ~ NAJ — forbusiness class NAY for economy class hile the applicable hooking class codes are - J for business class Y for economy class + For ticketing at any Philippine Aitines Ticket Offices, present the original Platinum Card and your flight details. letter of authorization is required if a representative will arrange the ticket in your behalt. When checking-in, present your ET (electronic ticke!] and the original Platinum Card at Philippine Airlines Business Class check-in counter. +0BZFUMN ¥ CY . 5 nek pee Yen ATOME ys MEADE 2EAPPAE SY. ttn : 1 PR 01005 25DEC MNLNL HK? 1535 0715 53.00 6 FEB GS 2 }PROIO! J S0DEC HNEMNLHK2 O18 1430 3 al 4 FONE 1 MNLPR-MNL MOBILE PHONE 63 919 828 9774 JEAN CORONA/MACRISTINAMS _1_SSRTKNEPR HK0001 MNL HNL 01001 2SDEC - EXHIBIT ?/PPEPP AA [PICORONARENATOMR 0792437129241C1 “BOT j 3 SSRDOCSPR HK0001 MNL HNL 0100 J 25DEC. P/PHL/EA0008434/PHL!15OCT48/M/26NOV 14/CORONA/RENATO- 4 SSRTKNEPR HKO0001 ICORONA/MACRISTINAMS 0792437129244C1 5 SSRTKNEPR HKOOO1 ICORONA/MACRISTINAMS 0792437 12924402 [1CORONA/MACRISTINAMS 0792837129252C1 © B 2 ” 7 SSRURPNPR HK0001 BZFUMN 0002-ICORONA/MACRISTIN. P/PHL/SS086704 I/PHL/24UL48/F/05A PRI L/CORONA/MACRISTINA- \y 1CORONA/MACRISTINAMS, i * 10 SSRDOCSPR HK0001 HNL MNL 0101 4 30DEC. /P/PHL/EA0008434/PHL/150CT48/M/26NOV 4/CORONA/RENATO- 11 SSRSACAPR HKOOO] HNL MNL 0101 J30DEC -1CORONA/RENATOMR SAC03, 12 SSRTKNEPR HKO0O1 HNL MNL 01013 30DEC - 13. SSRURPNPR HKO0O1 /BZFUMN 00002. 1 SSRDOCSPR HRGOOT HNL MNL_ 101} 30DEC ICORONA/MACRISTINAMS 15 SSRIKNEPR HKOOOL 1CORONA/MACRISTINAMS,0792437129244C1 17 SSRTKNEPR HKO00L HNL MNL 0101 J 30DEC:- Ae FicoRsNameceicsmuani onsen asics EXPN ThpePr ee dec SRURPNPR HOO! BZEUMN 002. ICORONA/MACRISTINAMS SSRTKNEPR HKQ001 1CORONA/MACRISTINAMS 0792437 129244C2 Vr OSIPR PLATINUM CARD A752/DEC2011 RENATO C ' OSIPR I/R E-MAILED TO FADERAMIJ//GMAIL.COM/0645Z/23DEC2010 OSIPR UR E-MAILED TO FADERAM/GMAIL COM/6462/23DEC2010 2 SSRURPNPR HOOD IBXZFUMN Uo-ICORONA/RENATOMR FEB 13 4a! 1CORONA/RENATOMR ICORONARENATOMR O7924371292412 16 SSRTKNEPR HK0001 1CORONA/MACRISTINAMS 079: Bil C2 1 SSRURPNPR HKO0O01 /BZFUMN 0001-1CORONA/RENATOMR SSRTKNEPR HKOOO! ICORONA/MACRISTINAMS 0792437 129244C | vy OSIPR PLATINUM CARD A753/DEC2011 MA CRISTINA C PRINTED BY: KEVIN Y. GAN-GO VP-Informatiog Systems Pebitty 10, 2012cAmmex EXHIBIT PRMPPP:S” 7 CRETE 1. N/ICORONARENATOMR: FEB AS 1tN 1 PROBI8 J 18DEC MNLHKG HK1 1000 1215 J-J_ 006 2.PR0307. 2IDEC HKGMNL WK1 1800 2000 5-01 002 3 PR 0307 J 21DEC HKGMNL $C1 2040 2240 J 00 2 FONE V MNLPR-MNL MOBILE PHONE 63 919 828 974 JEAN GEAX _1 SSRTKNEPR HK0001 MNL HKG 0318 J 18DEC - [ICORONAMRENATOMR.0792437064125C1 C.- |* | 2. SSRFOTVPR HKOO0L MNL HKG 0318] I8DEC - 1 CORONA/RENATOMRPR 30383 1883/MP 3. SSRFQTVPR HK0001 HKG MNL 0307} 21DEC 1CORONA/RENA TOMRPR30383 1883/MP- 4 SSRSACAPR HK0001 HKG MNL 0307 J 21DEC - { \CORONA/RENATOMR SACO3 . 5. SSRTKNEPR HK0001 HKG MNL 0307) 21DEC - [XJ .5- ” [1CORONA/RENATOMR.0792437064125C2 | ERAN PPPPPPP SB 1 OSIPR PLATINUM CARD A752/DEC2011 RENATO C 2 OSIPR VR E-MAILED TO FADERAMI//GMAIL.COM/ 3 OSIPR. X HKGKZ X CORONA 99K PER SACA0S0053 X JOVIE/OC CEO 4 OSIPR UTA PAX/AGT RE SC FLT DUE NO HKG CTC RMK 1 EHIZDW 10DEC MNLPR 3SSU*DVD* PRINTED BY Ha KEVIN Y. HAREIGAN-GO. VP-Inforshationy Systems February 10, 2012EXHIBIT “PpPPPPP 6.” Annex 1 COQIWN i 202 1, Ni ICORONA/RENATOMR FEB 13 y 2. Ni ICORONA/MACRISTINAMS. { IN 1 PR O110J 20APR MNILGUM HK2 2200 0400 KT @13 2 PROLILJ 24APR GUMMNL HK2 0600 07501-5007 FONE ' 1 MNLPR-MNL MOBILE PHONE 63 918 904 8050 RENATOC.. + | * GFAX 1 SSRSACAPR HK0001 GUM MNL 0111 J 24APR ~ ICORONA/RENATOMR SACO3 2. SSRTKNEPR HK0001 ICORONA/RENATOMR 07924381047 15C 1 3. SSRTKNEPR HKO001 ICORONA/RENATOMR 0792438104715C2 4 SSRTKNEPR HK0001 GUM MNE O11) 24APR ICORONA/RENATOMR 0792438 104732C2 5. SSRURPNPR HK0001 /COQUWN 0001-1CORONA/RENATOMR: 6 SSRNSSTPR HK0001 GUM MNL 0111 5 24APR -ICORONA/RENATOMR 24 7 SSRDOCSPR HK0001 GUM MNL OIL} 24APR /P/PHL/EA0008434/PHL/150CT48/M/26NOV 14/CORONA/RENATO: ICORONA/RENATOMR, 8 SSRDOCSPR HKOOO| GUM MNL 0111 5 24APR /P/PHL/XX1702421/PHL/24JUL48/F/22DEC15/CORONA/MA CRISTINA: ICORONA/MACRISTINAMS 9 SSRTKNEPR HK0001 GUM MNL O11 24APR - 1CORONA/MACRISTINAMS 0792438 10475002 10 SSRURPNPR HKO00! /C6QIWN 0002-1CORONA/MACRISTINAMS II SSRNSSTPR HKOOO] GUM MNL 01113 24APR - 1CORONA/MACRISTINAMS 2C 12. SSRTKNEPR HKO001 ICORONA/RENATOMR 07924381047 15C1 yw 13. SSRTKNEPR HK0001 ICORONA/RENATOMR 0792438104715C2 _l4 SSRTKNEPR HK0001 MNL GUM 0110] 20APR ~ [ICORONARENATOMR O7DDasBIONICL "D7 eM PtRE es! SSRURPNPR HIKO001 IC6QIWN 000}-1CORONA/RENATOMR, 16 SSRDOCSPR HKOOO] MNL GUM 01103 20APR FEB 13 20%2 /PIPHL/EA0008434/PHL/150CT48/M/26NOV 4/CORONA/RENATO- : 1CORONA/RENATOMR Rg _17 SSRTKNEPR HK0001 MNL GUM 0110 J 20APR y e [ICORONA/MACRISTINAMS.0792438104750C1. “D2. ‘PPPPPPP oA 18 SSRURPNPR HK0001 /C6QIWN 0002-1CORONA/MACRISTINAMS. 19 SSRDOCSPR HKO0001 MNL GUM _ 0110 J 20APR /R/PHL/XX 1 70242 1/PHL/24JUL48/F/22DEC 15/CORONA/MA CRISTINA~ 1CORONA/MACRISTINAMS 1 OSIPR PLATINUM CARD A7S3/DEC2011 MACRISTINA C OSIPR PLATINUM CARD A752/DEC2011 RENATO C OSIPR V/R E-MAILED TO FADERAMI/GMAIL.COM /1116Z/19APR201! OSIPR. V/R E-MAILED TO FADERAMI/GMALL,COM /1116Z/19APR2011 OSIPR X GUMKZ X CORONAJR SPCS PER SACA0S0584 X JOVIE{OC CEO