DAY 2: CHIEF JUSTICE CORONA IMPEACHMENT TRIAL - NO SUBPOENA TO CORONA FAMILY JANUARY 17, 2012

IMPEACHMENT COMPLAINTS AGAINST CHIEF JUSTICE RENATO CASTRO

The Complainants hereby accuse Respondent of numerous acts that comprise: (a) Betrayal of Public Trust; (b) Culpable Violation of the Constitution; and (c) Graft and Corruption, that render him absolutely unfit for the position of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

GROUNDS FOR IMPEACHMENT
Respondent betrayed the Public Trust, committed Culpable Violation of the Constitution and Graft and Corruption in the following manner:

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 ASSETS, LIABILITIES, AND NET WORTH AS REQUIRED UNDER SEC. 17, ART. XI OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION.

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. VIII, 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.

ARTICLE IV

RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST AND/OR COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION WHEN HE BLATANTLY DISREGARDED THE PRINCIPLE OF SEPARATION OF POWERS BY ISSUING A "STATUS QUO ANTE" ORDER AGAINST THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN THE CASE CONCERNING THE IMPEACHMENT OF THEN OMBUDSMAN MERCEDITAS NAVARRO-GUTIERREZ.

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 COURT'S 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.

DISCUSSION OF THE GROUNDS FOR IMPEACHMENT

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 WHICH CONTINUED TO HIS DUBIOUS APPOINTMENT AS A MIDNIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE AND UP TO THE PRESENT.

1.1. Sec. 15, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution clearly prohibits the President from making appointments within two months immediately before the next presidential elections and up to the end of his term, except for temporary appointments to executive positions when continued vacancies therein will prejudice public service or endanger public safety. In the case of In Re Appointments Dated March 30, 1998 of Hon. Mateo A. Valenzuela and Hon. Placido B. Vallarta as Judges of the Regional Trial Court of Branch 62, Bago City and of Branch 24, Cabanatuan City5, the Supreme Court rules that this provision bars the appointment of members of the judiciary.

1.2. However, in the case of Arturo de Castro v. Judicial and Bar Council and President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, et. al., In Re Applicability Of Section 15, Article VII Of The Constitution To Appointments To The Judiciary, Estelito P. Mendoza, Philippine Bar Association vs. JBC, et al6. ,..................................

READ MORE
http://www.chanrobles.com/index.php/component/content/article/35/62-impeachme...

VIDEO SOURCE: GMA NEWS NETWORK

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• pilipinas
• pnoy
• noynoy
• benigno aquino
• ninoy
• supreme court
• corona
• cory aquino
• richard gordon
• puno
• erap estrada
• miriam santiago
• gloria arroyo
• mikey arroyo
• fg mike arroyo
• panfilo lacson
• maguindanao
• rh bill
• reproductive health bill
• responsible parenthood bill
• pagcor
• pcso
• manila
• cbcp
• pinasism
• pinaswatcher
• sendong
• NBN ZTE

[ecannuj]

it is best to listen to facts to be informed and not be swayed by public opinion. in this case, the defense clearly has the upperhand. the prosecution is a big disappointment. no solid casebacked by facts. puro salita lang

[bayyagg]

Just saw the GMA News channel 11!

Stupid prtosecutors, like Tupaz, wuz asking Corona to show the SALN, though he himself does not have any SALN since he( TUPAZ ) joined Congress!

PURE STUPiDiTY... He knows/seen a LOTs of SHiT to somebody's ARSE but never seen his own SHiT under his ARSE!

uLOL!

[JusticeForPinoys]

This is just a trial run for the upcoming big and main event to follow. I suggest a pay per view for the Arroyo vs The Philippines would generate enough money to feed the poor. What ever happened to Joc Bolante who scamed millions out of the Fertilizer funds? Armand Arreza of subic was never put on trial for abusing his budget while in office. A web of corruption?

[mycze]

nu b yan hanggang day 2 consistent yung isa dyan puro away... pwd namang manuod nlng...

[marqgil1]

ipaglaban ba dapat



[fdf6967]

tama na muna ang banatan po ninyo,....

pwede magtanong sino young girl amputi naka mac pa sa likuran po ni Sen. Joker Arroyo,. sexy po niya,..salamas

[maseraticrg]

@ecannuj clearly said my friend.

[maseraticrg]

@eduardbill LOL papatawa ka ba? e ikaw ano bang narating mo sa pagpupunas mo ng pwet? WALA. o ano pang dinadada mo ngayon? BOBO

[eduardbill]

@maseraticrg wala kang kuentang tao, kaya until now di ka umasenso, ayusin mo na lang buhay mo, kawawa pamilya mo dinadamay mo sila sa pagigigng iresponsable mo. Hanap mo negosyo ulul wala kang utak paano mo palalaguin, di ka nga makahanap ng job dahil walang gustong kumuha sa iyo. Dakila kang BOBO

[maseraticrg]

@eduardbill asus nagdrama na si bobo. balik ka muna high school pre absent ka kasi ng absent pag pol sci na ang topic e. ayan tuloy lagpak ka pati dito.. haha

[eduardbill]

@maseraticrg Isangla mo man ang kaluluwa mo kasama ng buo mong angkan kay satanas o demonyo di kayo magwawagi, tandaan mo may katapusan ang kasamaan ni corona