Home » corona impeachment
You are browsing entries tagged with “corona impeachment”
The Jan. 20 privilege speech of Sen. Bong Revilla got front-page treatment in major newspapers the following day. The headlines (e.g., “P-Noy meddled in CJ trial,” “Noy, Mar lobbied for CJ ouster”) seemed to confirm that former chief justice Renato Corona might have been an innocent victim of political vendetta waged by the Aquino administration against the Arroyo administration.
By Amando Doronila
The expectations of most Filipinos that they would benefit from the high economic growth claimed by the Aquino administration have plunged during the previous 12 months, according to a Pulse Asia survey last December.
This newspaper has always stressed the mixed nature of the impeachment process, that it is at once both legal and political.
By Fr. Joaquin G. Bernas S. J.
In his recent privilege speech before the Senate, Sen. Ramon “Bong” Revilla alleged that President Aquino sought to influence his vote on Chief Justice.
By Neal H. Cruz
During the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona, one of Corona’s defense lawyers, Jose Roy, revealed that he received information that the Aquino administration was preparing to pay P100 million to every senator who would vote to convict Corona. The senators pounced on Roy and demanded that he apologize to them—which he did.
The roiling controversy over President Aquino’s Disbursement Acceleration Program is exactly what Sen. Jinggoy Estrada intended when he took to the Senate floor last week to defend himself against charges that he had benefited from the so-called pork barrel scam. He did not name the DAP; he likely did not know the details behind what he called an after-the-fact “incentive” of P50 million “allotted” to each senator who voted for the conviction of Chief Justice Renato Corona. But what he said was enough to start a shift in the public discussion over pork.
By Artemio V. Panganiban
Acting on the motion of PSBank, the Supreme Court dismissed the bank’s petition to stop the Senate from opening the dollar deposits of then Chief Justice Renato C. Corona on the ground that the case had become moot and academic. The impeachment trial has long been terminated and the Court’s adjudication of this case is no longer relevant or material to the impeachment proceedings.
By Conrado de Quiros
I said it before: Juan Ponce Enrile has got to be one of the luckiest persons on earth. In at least two life-changing, or history-altering, situations, he was there at the right place at the right time.
By Conrado de Quiros
Whence come President Aquino’s chart-busting, confidence-boosting, enemy-scuttling ratings?
By Ismael G. Khan Jr.
In his keynote speech at the launch of the book “History of the Supreme Court” to mark the Court’s 111th anniversary on June 11, former Chief Justice Reynato Puno decried the “spiritual slump” and apparent disarray in the judiciary in the aftermath of its “collision with the political branches of government,” as well as the widespread confusion following the conviction of now ex-Chief Justice Renato Corona by the Senate impeachment tribunal. But because of Corona’s decision not to appeal his removal, we will never know for sure how a “severely wounded” Court would have dealt with certain questions the answers to which were left hanging in the course of his impeachment trial.
By Bingo P. Dejaresco III
The philosopher Confucius was not confused when he said: “In a country that is well governed, poverty is something to be ashamed of; in a badly governed country, wealth is something to be ashamed of.”
By Randy David
Twice during the impeachment trial of then Chief Justice Renato Corona, petitions were filed before the Supreme Court praying for its intervention in the unfolding process at the Senate. The first sought to abort the trial on the ground that the complaint endorsed by the majority in the House of Representatives was not properly verified. The high court responded by calling for the submission of written memoranda, but it did not stop the trial. The second petition was for the purpose of preventing the Senate from opening the bank accounts of Corona on the ground that their absolute confidentiality was protected by law. The high court issued a temporary restraining order to that effect, and the Senate voted to comply with the TRO.