IMPEACHMENT TRIAL: Wednesday, March 14, 2012

At 2:14 p.m., the hearing was called to order with Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile presiding.

 

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  The continuation of the impeachment trial of the Honorable   Chief Justice Renato C. Corona of the Supreme Court is hereby called to order.  We shall be led in prayer by Senator Jinggoy Ejercito-Estrada.

(Prayer led by Senator Ejercito-Estrada)

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Amen. The Secretary will please call the roll of Senators.

THE CLERK OF COURT.  The Honorable Senator-Judges:  Angara, Arroyo, Cayetano Allan Peter “Companero”, Cayetano, Pia; Defensor-Santiago; Drillon; Ejercito-Estrada, Escudero; Guingona; Honasan; Lacson; Lapid; Legarda; Marcos; Osmena; Pangilinan; Pimentel; Recto; Revilla; Sotto; Trillanes; Villar; the Senate President.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  With 17 Senator-Judges present, the Presiding Officer declares the presence of a quorum.

SEN. SOTTO.  Mr. President.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  The Majority Floor Leader.

REP. SOTTO.  Thank you, Mr. President.  May I ask the Sergeant-At-Arms to make a proclamation.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  The Sergeant-At-Arms is directed to make the proclamation.

SGT-AT-ARMS.  All persons are commanded to keep silent under pain of penalty while the Senate is sitting in trial on the Articles of Impeachment against Chief Justice Renato C. Corona.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Majority Floor Leader.

SEN. SOTTO.  Mr. President, I move that we dispense with the reading of the March 13, 2012 Journal of the Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, and consider the same as approved.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Is there any objection?  There being none, the March 13, 2012 Journal of the Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, is hereby approved.

The Secretary will now please call the case.

THE SECRETARY GENERAL.  Case No. 002-2011..In the Matter of the Impeachment Trial of the Honorable Chief Justice Renato C. Corona.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Appearances.  Majority Floor Leader.

SEN. SOTTO.  We ask the parties to enter their appearances, Mr. President.

REP. TUPAS.  Good afternoon, Mr. Senate President, Your Honors, for the prosecution panel of the House of Representatives, same appearances.  We are ready, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Noted.  The defense.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  For the defense, Your Honor, the same appearance.  We are ready, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Noted.  Majority Floor Leader.

SEN. SOTTO.  Mr. President, we are now ready for the continuation of the presentation of evidence by the defense.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Is the defense ready?  I understand the prosecution reserved their right to cross-examine a witness yesterday.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Yes, Your Honor.  And we have that witness with us today.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Is the prosecution ready to do the cross-examination?

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  We are ready, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  All right.  Let us start the proceedings this afternoon by the cross-examination of the witness presented by the defense yesterday.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  While waiting for this witness, Your Honor, who is being summoned now by a member of the defense panel, may we be permitted, Your Honor, to make a short manifestation.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Proceed.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Yesterday, among the documents that were marked for the defense, Your Honor, is a handwritten letter of Mrs. Corona acknowledging the receipt by way of borrowing the different torrents certificate of title.  Now, they were borrowed by the prosecution lawyer, Your Honor, Atty. Justiniano Your Honor.  Now, when we—after the trial in yesterday’s proceedings, Your Honor, the said document had been missing and it was not returned. We tried to have a talk with Atty. Justiniano, but there was no satisfactory explanation regarding the same, Your Honor.  We are bringing that matter to the attention of this Honorable Court, Your Honor, just so proper remedy may be adopted by us in connection with the recovery of the said document.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    Is Atty. Justiniano here?

Well, what happened yesterday?

ATTY. JUSTINIANO.  I recalled having borrowed the bunch of documents, but I did not notice that receipt. There were bunch of document which I turned over.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    No. I saw them being transferred to you.

ATTY. JUSTINIANO.  Yes, Your Honor, there were bunch of documents, Your Honor. I think some of them are our copies of the documents which they marked.  I am not really sure if that one piece of paper is included in those bunch of documents.  May we be given time to look for them.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.   No.  I saw that the documents were handed to you. I think by the defense counsel.

ATTY. JUSTINIANO.  Yes, Your Honor.  We admit that.  The receipts, the xerox copy of the receipts, but I don’t really recall that one-page document, the receipt of the delivery of title.  But, anyway, we will look for it, Your Honor. It’s possible that they may have been—it may have been together with the other documents, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    Please do that, prosecutor, that is unethically indication.

ATTY. JUSTINIANO.  We will do that, Your Honor.  We will look for that document.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    Yes.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Thank you very much, Atty. Justiniano.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  How soon can we expect the prosecution to …

ATTY. JUSTINIANO.  Until tomorrow, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    Tomorrow? We are on trial today.

ATTY. JUSTINIANO.  We can ask some of our members to look for it.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    Who is the custodian of your records?

ATTY. JUSTINIANO.  I turned over the documents, Your Honor, after I had examined them to Atty. Winston Ginez, Your Honor.  As far as I am concerned, I don’t keep any documentary evidence, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    You are ordered to look for that document.

ATTY. JUSTINIANO.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.   Prosecution, proceed.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Thank you, Your Honor.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Under the same oath, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    Under the same oath.

JUSTICE CUEVAS. Yes, Your Honor.  Mrs. Bayuga on the witness stand.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Mrs. Bayuga, good afternoon.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Before we proceed, that is the only document missing, the handwritten?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  The handwritten acknowledgement, Your Honor, of the seven titles, TCT titles, and the deed of sale of the Miriam property, Your Honor, both in handwriting.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    And the deed of sale and the seven titles are with you?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Except …

JUSTICE CUEVAS.   In fact, we have it marked even, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    Except the handwritten receipt.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Yes, Your Honor, only the handwritten acknowledgment of Mrs. Corona relative to the borrowing of the seven TCTs, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    Alright.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Thank you, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    Proceed, counsel.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Thank you, Your Honor. Good afternoon, Mrs. Bayuga.

MRS. BAYUGA.  Good afternoon, sir.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  You testified yesterday, is that by virtue of a subpoena?

MRS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  And when exactly did you receive that subpoena?

MRS. BAYUGA.  Yesterday morning.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Also yesterday?

MRS. BAYUGA.  At around 10 a.m.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Now, when you received that subpoena, you were asked to bring with you the certification that you brought with you, is that correct?  Or had you already prepared that beforehand, ma’am?

MRS. BAYUGA.    Beforehand, sir.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.   Okay. Before you came to court yesterday to testify—you are aware of the Supreme Court Resolution dated February 14, 2012 regarding the propriety of Supreme Court Justices and employees from testifying before this impeachment court?

MRS. BAYUGA.  Naririnig ko po iyon pero hindi ko po nabasa.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ. Hindi ninyo po nabasa. So, nung sinabpena po kayo wala po kayong ginawa na may ugnayan ho doon sa resolusyon na iyon?  Kailangan nyo bang magpaalam sa korte bago kayo nagpunta dito?

MS. BAYUGA.  Siguro po hindi na dahil nung pong first time, February 1, meron din po akong subpoena from the prosecution.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ. Tama po, pero February 14 ho na issue iyong resolution.  Ang tanong ko po nung na-received nyo iyong inyong subpoena, which you said was Monday, in effect na ho iyong February 14 resolution.  May ginawa ba ho kayo, did you have to take any steps before coming to court and testifying?

MS. BAYUGA.  Your Honor, please, we are compelled to object, Your Honor, because there is nothing on record, Your Honor, that will show that this witness necessitated an authority from the honourable Supreme Court in order to be here and testify on the matters she has testified pursuant to the subpoena issued by this honourable court, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  What is the purpose of this line of questioning private prosecutor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Your Honor, I would just like to know if there was authority for the witness to testify because when it was our turn to present our evidence as pointed out by Senator Pangilinan…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.   What is the relevance or materiality whether there is or there is no authority given to this witness?

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  We would just like to know, Your Honor, and we would also like to know if there is a different treatment by the Supreme Court of the witnesses for the prosecution vis a vis witnesses for the defense.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  I would suggest that you go direct to the point of your cross-examination.  That is a peripheral matter, that is a collateral matter.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Yes, Your Honor.  Anyways, she had admitted that she did not have to do anything.

Okay, so, Mrs. Witness, you said that you prepared the certification which you brought to court yesterday.  You prepared it beforehand?  When exactly was this, Ma’m?

MS. BAYUGA.  Last February.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Do you have a date?

MS. BAYUGA.  This certification I prepared it last March 8.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Under whose instruction did you prepare it?  Who ask you to prepare it, Ma’m?

MS. BAYUGA.  Upon instruction of my superior.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  When you say superior this is Chief Justice Corona?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, he directly instructed you to prepare it, is that correct?

MS. BAYUGA.  Through my immediate chief.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, you did not talk to him directly.  Did you consult with him directly?

MS. BAYUGA. No, Sir.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Whether during the preparation or after it was prepared, you never had the chance to speak with the Chief Justice?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  So, when you prepared it, I am assuming that it was also the figures, you had a lot of figures here concerning his salaries and allowances.  I am assuming that you also had this check by the Office of the Chief Justice before you signed it.

MS. BAYUGA.  No, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So you just signed it without him having seen it beforehand, is that correct?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Thank you.  So, just to recap so I can move to another point. Chief Justice asked you to prepare this table which you did, and you signed it, and up to today, the Chief Justice has not seen this table?  Would that be accurate?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Your Honor, with the kind indulgence of the honourable court.  the exact  testimony of the witness, Your Honor, is to the effect that she was instructed by her immediate superior who must have been talked to by the Chief Justice.  That was the answer of the witness.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Your Honor, the witness is here, she is competent to answer.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.   Let the witness explain.  Madam Witness please very clearly with—make your answer clear so that there will be no wrangling.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Uulitin ko po, nagpagawa po si Chief Justice nitong certification na ito, ginawa nyo po, tama?

MS. BAYUGA.   Yes.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Tapos, pinirmahan nyo ng hindi nyo po pinapa-check muna kay Chief Justice.  Tama ho ba iyon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  So, hanggang ngayon ho ba hindi pa nakikita ni Chief Justice ito?

MS. BAYUGA.  Nakita na po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Kelan ho nya nakita?

MS. BAYUGA.  Last Monday.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Bago kayo nagpunta dito.

MS. BAYUGA.  Kahapon po ako nagpunta dito.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  So bago kayo nag-testify.  Ano ho ang comments nya?  Doon ho nagmiting na kayo ng face to face ni Chief Justice?

MS. BAYUGA.  Ibinigay ko lang po sa kanya.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Tapos bakit nyo ho ibinigay sa kanya.

MS. BAYUGA.  Dahil po mayroon pong discrepancy yon pong kami ay mag-check with the auditor yong una pong ibinigay naming certification.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So may pagkakamali yong una nyong draft?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yong pong computation ko po hindi ko po naisama yong salary increases ni Chief Justice.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  And he pointed out that there was a mistake.

MS. BAYUGA.  Hindi po sya ang nag-point out kundi po ang auditor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Teka ho, sabi nyo pinirmahan nyo na ho kaagad.  So yong signed certification nyo ho nakita hong may mali yon so gumawa ho kayo ng bago.  Is that accurate?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  So dalawa na ho yong signed nyo.  Yong isa tinapon nyo na ho, yong may mali.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yong isa itinapon  na po namin.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  So yong mali ho na yon hindi si Chief Justice yong nag-point out pero yong auditor.

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Pero pinarating nyo ho kay Chief Justice yon, yong first version?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo dahil kukunin ko po yong  isang copy.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Ano naman ho yong feedback sa inyo?

MS. BAYUGA.  Wala naman po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  So si Chief Justice po yong pinaka boss ho ninyo sa Supreme Court.  Tama ho ba yon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo, sya po ang chief of the agency.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So wala ho kayong pagkakataon na nagbigay sya ng instruction sa inyo tungkol sa paghanda nitong certification?

MS. BAYUGA.  Wala po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Either directly or indirectly wala hong pinapasabi?

MS. BAYUGA.  Wala po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Bukod ho kay Chief Justice, may iba pa hong Justice na involve ho doon sa pag-review at paghanda noong certification na dinala nyo?

MS. BAYUGA. Lahat pong Justices iginawa ko po ng certification.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Sabay-sabay ho nyong ginawa?

MS. BAYUGA.  Isa-isa po dahil napakarami po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Oho pero…

MS. BAYUGA.  For 2011 po yong ginawa ko sa ibang Justices.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  So yong paggawa nyo ho nitong certification na ito this is an annual thing, every year nyo hong ginagawa ito?

MS. BAYUGA.  Upon request po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  So sa ngayon hong pagkakataon si Chief Justice lang ho ang nag-request.  Tama ho ba yon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Mayroon pong ibang Justices.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Alam nyo ba ho kung para saan yong certification?

MS. BAYUGA.  Hindi ko po alam kung saan po nila gagamitin.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Yong certification nyo ho ano, babasahin ko po.  Ito ho yong Exhibit 114, yong una nyo hong papel na ipinakita sa korte.  This is to certify that Honorable Renato C. Corona, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines, received the following salary.  Yon po.  Tapos doon sa last page, this certification is being issued for whatever legal purpose it may serve His Honor, March 8, 2012.  Ito hong His Honor, si Chief Justice po yan?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Kasi sya ang nagpagawa sa inyo?  Gaano katagal nyo ho ginawa itong certification na ito?

MS. BAYUGA.    Matagal din po dahil nag-start po kami ng 2002.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Pero ito ho, so bale update lang ho ito ng existing certification?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yearly po meron po kaming inire-report sa COA.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Oho.

MS. BAYUGA.  Na salaries and allowances and other emoluments for the year, yearly po yon.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Ah hindi ganito na lang ho.  Kelan ho kayo in-instruct ni Chief Justice  na gumawa ng certification na ito?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Referring to the certification now marked in evidence?

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Exhibit 114.

MS. BAYUGA.  Mga third week of February.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Third week of February.  May kinalaman ba ho ang paggawa nito tungkol dito sa kaso na ito?

MS. BAYUGA.  Hindi ko po alam, sir.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Pero alam nyo hong may kasong on-going laban kay…

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Accountant ba ho kayo Ms. Bayuga?

MISS BAYUGA.  Hindi po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, second week of February, natapos nyo ho March 8, mga tatlong linggo?  Accurate ba ho yon, more or less?

MISS BAYUGA.  More or less po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Tapos, sabi nyo ho, mag-isa nyong ginawa, nobody assisted you, yun hong pagkasabi nyo kahapon.

MISS BAYUGA.  Dahil meron na po kaming existing records na yearly po hinihingi ng COA kaya po parang mas madali pos a amin yon.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, bale nagdagdag na lang ho kayo ng isang taon, ganon ho ba?

MISS BAYUGA.  Nagdadagdag lang po kami.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  So, yung past, the previous entries Calendar Years 2002 to 2010, hindi nyo na ho ginalaw yon?  2011 na lang ginalaw nyo?

MISS BAYUGA.  Ni-review din po namin.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Pag sinabi nyong ni-review nyo, yun yung binabanggit nyo kahapon na chine-check nyo po yung bawa’t payroll.  Tama ho ba yon?

MISS BAYUGA.  Opo.  Ni-review din po naming, baka po mamaya meroon pong pagkakamali.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  So, hindi nyo lang ho dinadagdag yung 2011, dino-double check nyo pa ho dun sa existing hard—may file ho siguro ng payroll non, yung sinasabi nyong voluminous ano?

MISS BAYUGA.  Meron po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, kayo lang ho ang gumawa niyan?

MISS BAYUGA.  Pinakukuha ko lang po sa file naming, then I’m the one who reviewed and evaluated the record.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  A, reviewed and evaluated the record.  So, hindi ho kayo nagpasok ng entries.

MISS BAYUGA.  Actually, may entries po ako.  I’m the one.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Sabi nyo ho kasi kahapon alone e, di ba?  Sabi nyo no one assisted you.

MISS BAYUGA.  Opo.  Meron po ako—Ako po ang gumawa po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Teka ho.  Kayo ho mismo nagpasok ng entries na bago?

MISS BAYUGA.  Ako po ang nagpasok ng entries.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  E yung mga nakaraan ho, 2002 to 2010, kayo ba rin ho nagpasok non?

MISS BAYUGA.  Yung pong mga past years, nagre-request ng ano po yon—nagawa na po yon pero kinuha din po uli namin ng payroll, kinuha ko po ang payroll, tiningnan ko po uli.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  A, so, para sigurado ho?

MISS BAYUGA.  Para po sigurado.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Pero, sabi nyo you did it alone.  Wala hong nag-check nung ginawa nyo?

MISS BAYUGA.  Wala na po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  So, isang tao lang ho yan, walang pangalawang set ng mata na titingin, baka nagkamali kayo ng isang numero, wala hong ganon?

MISS BAYUGA.  Kung mali man po, ako po yung nag-check alone.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  E yung mga myembro ho—abogado po ng defense counsel, nakipagkita ba ho kayo bago kayo nagpunta dito?

MISS BAYUGA.  Dun lang po kami nakaupo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Saan ho?

MISS BAYUGA.  Sa defense po dahil wala po naman akong kilala dito.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Ang sinasabi nyo ho kahapon bago kayo tawagin?

MISS BAYUGA.  Bago po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Bago ho nun, wala kayong—hindi kayo nakikipagkita sa kahit kaninong abogado?

MISS BAYUGA.  Wala naman po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Hindi ho kayo nag-practice ng testimony nyo?

MISS BAYUGA.  Wala naman po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Punta na ho tayo dun sa certification nyo, yung Exhibit 114.  May kopya ba ho kayo sa harapan nyo?

MISS BAYUGA.  That is the certification?

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Yes.

MISS BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Ginawa nyo ho March 8?

MISS BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Ngayon, una ko hong napansin, it’s divided into three different sets:  salaries and other emoluments, fringe benefits and other allowances, tapos yung panghuli ho, expense allowance.  Nakikita nyo ho yon?

MISS BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Ano ba ho yung pagkakaiba—Ano ba ho ibig sabihin ng emoluments?

MISS BAYUGA.  Iba’t iba pong allowances na tinatanggap ni Chief Justice.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Ang hong pinagkaiba nung set na yan, yung first group sa pangalawang group, yung fringe benefits and other allowances?  Kasi ho nakagrupo ho ng iba e.

MISS BAYUGA.  Opo.  Ito pong fringe benefit and other allowances, ang iba po dito binigay po namin sa—out of our fiscal autonomy.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Ano ho ibig sabihin non.  Pwede nyo ba hong ipaliwanag sakin?

MISS BAYUGA.  Yun pong allowances na ibinigay namin na fiscal autonomy, out of savings po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  As opposed to, yung first group ho?  Kung hindi out of savings yon, out of saan ho yan?

MS. BAYUGA.  Sa GAA po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  GAA, meaning, General Appropriations …

MS. BAYUGA.  Appropriations Act.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, iyan ho iyong budget ng Supreme Court?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  E iyong third grouping, expense allowance, ano ho ‘yon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Expense allowance po, ito po ay as JBC Chairman si Chief Justice.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Bakit ho may sarili siyang category?

MS. BAYUGA.  Ganito po ang pinagawa sa akin ng immediate chief ko na i-ano ko po iyong three categories.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay, pero hindi nyo po alam kung ano ang dahilan.

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Ngayon ho, sige, isa-isahin ho natin, doon ho tayo uli sa page 1, Exhibit 114, salaries ho, iyong unang-unang entry, P353,045 for calendar year 2002, nakita nyo po ‘yon?  Ano ho itong entry na ‘to?  I am assuming ito ho iyong official na sweldo niya as Chief Justice, tama ho ba ‘yon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Ito po iyong tinanggap niya starting April 9, 2002, iyon pong entrance niya as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  May I ask permission, Your Honor, just to advise the witness to talk louder, Your Honor, apparently …

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Yes.  Ayusin mo lang iyong microphone mo …

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  … para naiiintindihan ka namin.  Nahihirapan din ako e.  Malayo ako sa ‘yo kaya nakatingin ako dito sa monitor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Sige po, pakituloy.

MS. BAYUGA.  Ito pong P353,045, tinanggap po ito ni Chief Justice, effective April 9, 2002, noong siya po ay maging Associate Justice ng Supreme Court.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Oho.  Tapos, for evey year, ito ho iyong pinaka-basic na sweldo niya as Chief Justice.

MS. BAYUGA.  As Chief Justice.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  As Chief Justice, okay.  Tapos, doon sa calendar year 2010, may footnote, promoted to Chief Justice, effective May 17, 2010.

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Iyong pag-promote ho na ‘yon, may salary …

MS. BAYUGA.  May salary increase po siya.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Bakit hindi ho sa 2010 pumasok, iyong salary increase?  Parang konti lang iyong difference between 2009 and 2010.

MS. BAYUGA.  At that time po, wala pong—iyong salary increases po nila sa second tranche, hindi pa po ibinibigay, mayroon pong status quo ante order dahil po sa monthly special allowance pursuant to 9227.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  So, ibig sabihin na na-delay ho ng konti ‘yong increase ho.

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Pero reflected na ho ‘yon sa 2011.

MS. BAYUGA.  2011 po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Iyong susunod ho na entry, longevity pay, ano ba ho ang ibig sabihin niyan?

MS. BAYUGA.  Ano po ito, after 10 years po na nag—as Associate Justice, they are entitled to receive longevity pay.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Ano ho ang basehan niyan, batas ba ho iyan o Supreme Court resolution?

MS. BAYUGA.  Parang may batas po tungkol po dito.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Pero hindi ho kayo sigurado.

MS. BAYUGA.  Hindi po ako.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Next entry, PERA, what does PERA stand for, Ms. Bayuga.

MS. BAYUGA.  Personal Economic Relief Assistance.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.

MS. BAYUGA.  Pero ito po noong una is P1,500, then, inalis po natin, inalis po ‘yong AdCom, isinama po natin sa PERA.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Teka ho, ano ba ho ‘yong AdCom, sinasabi nyo ang AdCom, iyong susunod na entry, ano ba ho iyon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Additional comopensation po in the amount of P500 a month.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay, ano ho ang basehan noon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Nasa GAA din po iyan dati.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, lahat ho ng government offices, may ganyan o kayo lang?

MS. BAYUGA.  Ang alam ko po, lahat pong agency, mayroon.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Ito hong next entry, RATA, ano ho ang ibig sabihin ng RATA?

MS. BAYUGA.  Representation Allowance and Transportation Allowance.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  So, doon sa pangalan ho, eto ho iyong mga allowance na ibinibigay kay Chief Justice para sa transportation at saka para saan pa ho?

MS. BAYUGA.  Representation allowance po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Pag sinabing representation, ano ba ho ang ano…what would fall under that category?

MS. BAYUGA.  That is committable allowance po for miscellaneous expenses.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Katulad ho ng ano.

MS. BAYUGA.  Hindi ko po alam kung ano po iyong ginagastos nila sa RATA.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, ang ibig ninyo hong sabihin, ito ho ibinibigay sa Chief Justice monthly.

MS. BAYUGA.  In a monthly basis.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Oho.  Pero the Chief is going to use this for his transportation expenses.

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  At saka representation.  Siguro ho iyong mga restaurant, kakain sa labas, mga ganoon ho.

MS. BAYUGA.  Hindi ko …

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Hindi ba ho dahil RATA iyan, dapat iyong pera ho pumunta talaga sa transportation saka representation.

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Hindi naman ho salary ito, ‘di ba?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, these are funds which are used by the Chief Justice as a function of his office.  Ginagastos ho niya ito dahil Chief Justice siya para may panggastos siya, may panggasolina siya, tama ho ba iyon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, since ginagastos niya, hindi niya ho iniuuwi ito?  Hindi ho kanyang pera ito.  Ginagastos niya bilang isang opisyal ng Supreme Court.  Hindi niya ho ibinubulsa ito, panggasolina niya ho ito, pang-transportation, restaurant while he is on official business, tama ho ba iyon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Iyon hong susunod, extraordinary and miscellaneous expenses.  Next item na ho.  Iyong last na ho.  Ano ho ang ibig sabihin nito?

MS. BAYUGA.  Eto po, nakalagay din po, stated din po ito sa GAA, for the use in the office po ito.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Alam ninyo ba kung what particular use in the office.

MS BAYUGA.  Miscellaneous and extraordinary expenses po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ  Hindi ba ho ano iyan, iyong mga public relations, meetings, seminars, mga ganoon ho.?

MS. BAYUGA.  Diyan po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Tama ba iyon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Subscription to professional journals.

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo, diyan po napupunta.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Diya ho papasok iyan.

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Pero ito hong extraordinary and miscellaneous expenses, ano ho ito ano…  … kailangan may pruweba na ginamit ni Chief Justice, kailangan niya hong iliquidate ito ano, hindi niya puwedeng gastusin sa personal niyang gusto.  Kailangan din ho as a function of his office.

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, he has to make an accounting of where he spent these funds, tama po ba iyon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Ang liquidation po nito ay iyong paid payroll po na ipinadadala naming sa COA.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Pakipaliwanag nga ho iyon.  Ano ba ho ang ibig sabihin ng liquidation?  Pagkakaintindi ko ho doon, ina-account niya kung paano niya nagastos, tama ho ba iyon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Sa amin po. sa Supreme Court, it has been the practice na through payroll po ang payment na extraordinary and miscellaneous expense allowance.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Ano ho ang ibig sabihin ng through payroll?  Isinasama ho sa suweldo niya?

ATTY. BAYUGA.  Hindi po.  Additional payroll po ito.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Pero ang paggamit po ng pondo na ito para doon sa mga sinabi kong mga uses.  And in the same manner, hindi niya puwedeng iuwi ito, magbakasyon siya sa abroad.  Kailangan ginagamit niya for extraordinary and miscellaneous expenses of his office as a Chief Justice, hindi ho ba?

ATTY. BAYUGA.  For the office.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.   Hindi puwedeng kanya ho ano.

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Hindi niya puwedeng iuwi ito, hindi niya puwedeng isama sa bank account niya ito, tama ho iyon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, teka ho, eto hong mga allowance na ito, sinasabi ninyo kailangan gastusin niya in relation to his office, ‘di ba ho, as Chief Justice?  Hindi niya puwedeng iuwi ito, hindi niya puwedeng isama sa personal savings account niya, hindi niya puwedeng gastusin for his personal use.  Ibig sabihin hindi ho talaga kanya iyan.  But it goes with the office, iyong expenses ho na ito.  They come with the office and is expected to use them as a function of his office para may panggastos ho siya, tama ho ba iyon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, teka ho.  Kahapon kasi, sabi ninyo ‘yong, actually, headline ho sa diyaryo kanina, na iyong kinita ni Chief Justice Corona P21 million. Kasi binasa n’yo iyong total kahapon, ‘di ba? P21 million over ten years, pero hindi naman ho talaga kanya iyong buong P21 million na iyon, ‘di ba?  Kasi madami nga ho, sabi ninyo, eh, expenses nga ho niya, dahil Chief Justice siya, may mga panggastos siya, correct, tama ba ako?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  If Your Honor please, teka huwag kayong sasagot. Your Honor please, the trend of the question tends to establish, Your Honor, that the witness has something to do with the appropriation, payment and release of this amount.  All that the witness stated is that all these items mentioned by her came from already an entries involving a long-span of time.  In other words, she has nothing to do with the appropriation. She has nothing to do with the payment. She has nothing to do with the determination of the validity of the said appropriation, Your Honor. That is my point of objection, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Kayo po ay na-involve sa pagre-release ng mga payroll na iyan sa mga mahistrado?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Iyon pala. Trabaho niya iyon.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  This is release only, Your Honor.

MS. BAYUGA.  Only the payment po We just prepare the payroll, disburse to them, then, wala na po kaming pakialam kung saan po nila ginagamit.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  That is my point, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Kaya nga, iyong payment, may kinalalaman ka?

MS. BAYUGA. Opo, opo, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Kung paano nila ginamit iyon, hindi mo alam?

MS. BAYUGA.  Hindi ko po alam.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Iyon. So, …

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Pero, alam niyo kung para saan dapat iyong mga allowances na iyon, ‘di ba ho?

MS. BAYUGA.  Hindi ko naman po …

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Sinabi ninyo ho kahapon, iyong functions ninyo …

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Babasahin ko ho.  Ito ho iyong binasa—binasa n’yo rin ho ito: “Supervises and implement the policies, rules and regulations related to the operation of the Cash Collection Disbursement Division.”  So, kayo ho nagsu-supervise ng policies and rules?  “Supervises the activities of the personnel, custodian of all monies, and other cash items official receipts of the court,  signs, encashes checks of cash advances for salaries, allowances and other benefits.” So, sa inyo din ho nanggagaling iyon? Kayo rin ho ang pumipirma?  “Signs disbursement vouchers for cash advances, initial salaries, terminal leave with pay and other payments made to official employees of the court.” So, siya ho talaga. Kayo ho talaga ang involved dito, the disbursement at saka—sa division ng mga expenses na ito?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  If Your Honor please, …

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Sa inyo po galing ito.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  … the question is kilometric. It is too general.  The witness would not know which of these questions she will answer. Will you kindly …

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Those are her functions, Your Honor.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Yes, but what is…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Make your questions specific. Slice it into bits so that there will be no arguments.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.   Magmumukuhan na lang ho ako, pero, nagkakaisa ho tayo na iba-ibang entry ho ito dahil iba-iba iyong purpose noong mga pondo na ito. Hindi naman ho sweldo lahat ito, ‘di ba?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Isa lang iyong entry ninyo na salaries, ‘di ba, sa taas lang?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Sandali lang. Sandali lang.

Madam Witness, itong mga classification ng mga gastusin na ito, ito ay periodic na ibinibinigay sa mga mahistrado?   Periodic ba ito?

MS. BAYUGA.  Mayroon pong monthly. Mayroon pong quarterly.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Kaya nga, periodic.

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo, periodic po.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  … whether it is monthly, quarterly?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Hindi iyong kung gagastos siya ay nagbibigay siya sa iyo ng resibo na ito ay ginastos ko, hindi?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo, hindi po.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Eto ay nasa budget na, budget of expenditure?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Ng—sa Korte Suprema?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. At iyan ay inire-release na ninyo sa mga mahistrado buwan-buwan, lingo-linggo, buwan-buwan, o quarterly o semestraly.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.   Ngayon, kung ginamit nila yan o hindi, hindi nyo na alam iyon.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Walang liquidation na pumapasok sa inyo.

MS. BAYUGA.  Wala po.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Basta certification.

MS. BAYUGA.  Certification po na nakalagay po sa payroll.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Certification ang liquidation nito?

MS. BAYUGA. Yes, your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  O, iyon, o sige.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Thank you po.  Ano po iyong certification na iyon?  Sine-certify, halimbawa, si Chief Justice, sine-certify nya na nagamit nya itong pondo na ito para doon sa allotted purpose.  Ganon ba ho iyong certification?

MS. BAYUGA.  May nakalagay na po sa payroll na iyong pong na-spent po nila sa mga miscellaneous…

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  They spent it pursuant to the purpose for the fund, di ba ho?

MS. BAYUGA.  Oho.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Tama lang, okay.  So, they spent it while on duty with the Supreme Court.  they don’t take it home for their personal use, tama ho?

MS. BAYUGA.  Hindi ko po masagot iyon.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Maaari ba hong inuuwi nila?

MS. BAYUGA.  Hindi ko po alam dahil hindi naman po basta….

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Para saan po iyong certification?

MS. BAYUGA.  Gagastusin po nila iyon for miscellaneous expense.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Opo, sang-ayon po doon sa purpose ng pondo.  Okay, correct, salamat po.

Ngayon, sabi nyo custodian din ho kayo ng mga resibo, tama ho ba iyon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo, dahil sa amin po ang koleksyon.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  So, ano hong mga resibo ito, halimbawa iyong mga barong ho ni Chief Justice nasa inyo ba ho yon?

MS. BAYUGA.  No, Sir.  Official receipt we use during for daily receiving, receiving of daily collections for legal fees, bar examination…

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, hindi ho iyong mga resibo  ng each justice.

MS. BAYUGA.  No, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Linawin lang natin yan ano.  Ang sinasabi ninyo na resibo na ini-issue ninyo ay iyong resibo ng mga fees or charges na kinolekta ng Korte Suprema sang-ayon sa batas, sang-ayon sa reglamento, hindi ba?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Iyon ang income.  Ngayon, iyong expenditure eh walang resibo iyon na nanggagaling sa inyo.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.   Maliban na lang iyong sa sweldo, iyong mga allowances pinipirmahan nila iyong mga dokumento na nagpapakita na tinaggap nila iyong kanilang sweldo at allowances nila.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  O, iyon.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Ito hong mga allowances na ito, halimbawa, iyong extra-ordinary and miscellaneous, RATA, monthly special allowance, paano ho ang pagbigay ho nyan kay Chief Justice, cash ba ho yan, tseke ba ho yan.

MS. BAYUGA.  Cash payroll po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.    Ano ho ang ibig sabihin nun?

MS. BAYUGA.  We made the payroll, we prepared the payroll, then, in cash ibinibigay po naming sa kanila.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, cash as in cold cash, bills and coins ho iyan?  Hindi nyo poi dine-deposit dito sa bangko nila or walang tseke?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.    Cash ho talaga?

MS. BAYUGA.  In cash ho.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.    Alin ho dito sa mga entries iyong cash or lahat ba ho yan cash?

MS. BAYUGA.  In cash po lahat.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Sandali lang, iyan ba ay cash or tseke?

MS. BAYUGA.  In cash, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Currency?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Pesos and centavos?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.   Okay.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Eto hong entry na extra-ordinary—nasa page 2 na po ako, exhibit 115, iyong bandang baba ho, third to the last, extra-ordinary and miscellaneous expense (PET), ano ho ito?  Ano ho ang ibig sabihin nito?

MS. BAYUGA.  Monthly expense allowance or equivalent to extraordinary and miscellaneous expense allowance sa Presidential Electoral Tribunal po.

ATTY . HERNANDEZ.  So binibigay rin ho ng cash ito bawat buwan?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Medyo malaki ho ito, mas mataas pa ho sa salary nya ito.

MS. BAYUGA.  No, Your Honor, only P16,000 a month.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  E yong kasunod ho noon, yong monthly expense allowance, PET.

MS. BAYUGA.  That is monthly expense allowance equivalent to RATA from the Presidential Electoral Tribuna.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Yon ba hong Presidential Electoral Tribunal ay saan ho nanggagaling yong pondo noon, Supreme Court din ba ho yon?

MS. BAYUGA.  No, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Saan ho?  MEA rin ho yan?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Tapos ano ho yan, para bang hindi na rin ho kailangang i-liquidate yan basta binibigay ho sa bawat Justice yan?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Tapos cash ho ito?

MS. BAYUGA.  In cash po.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Dalawang item yan di ba?  RA, ano yong RA?

MS. BAYUGA.  Representation allowance and transportation allowance.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Yong TA.

MS. BAYUGA.  Transportation allowance, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  O ayon.  Kasama doon ang gasolina, di ba?  Transportation allowance, gasolina.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Kung magtaksi sya o sasakay sa eroplano, kasama yon?  Kasama ba yon?

MS. BAYUGA.  For gasoline expenses, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Gasoline expenses lamang.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  May I proceed.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Yong representation expense, yon ang for entertainment ng mga bisita, ng mga pangrega-regalo, hindi ba?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.    May I proceed, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Yes, proceed.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Ms. Bayuga, nabanggit nyo po kanina na paminsan-minsan kailangan mag-submit ng certification si Chief Justice.  Tama ho ba yon?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Certification in connection with what please?

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  For the release of the allowances.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Which allowance because—too general?

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Ang pagkakaintindi ko lahat ng allowance as she testified.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  So the question now relates to all the allowances.  We are objecting because the question is too general, Your Honor.  There are plenty of allowances mentioned in here.  The witness has nothing to do with the appropriation therefor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Alam mo there are certain allowances that are liquidated for purposes of auditing…

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  … by way of certification because it is cumbersome to file up receipts along the way, di ba?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  O yon ang sinasabi na certification.  Linawin mo sa witness.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Opo.  Alin-alin ba hong allowances yon, yong kailangan ng certification dito ho sa listahan ninyo?  Pwede nyo ba hong isa-isahin yong kailangang i-liquidate?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Certification of having spent, certification of having received, that is precisely our basis, Your Honor.  That is why we are objecting.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Your Honor, I am just basing on the…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Yong certification normally deals sa expenditure.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Ano-ano ho yon?

MS. BAYUGA.    Lahat pong ito ay paid by payrolls so lahat pong liquidation namin is the monthly report of disbursement.  The payrolls also received by the Chief Justice.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So lahat ho ito kailangan ng one certification.

MS. BAYUGA.  Not certification, sir, but payroll, the paid payroll itself.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Hindi ko po maintindihan.  What do you mean by paid payroll?

MS. BAYUGA.  I have no payroll here.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Ganito na lang ho, nabanggit nyo po  kanina na nagsa-submit si Chief Justice ng certification, hindi ba ho for expenditure?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yon pong certification na sinasabi ko sa inyo, stated na po sa payroll.  Ang nakalagay po doon na yon pong gagastusin nila for miscellaneous expenses ay for this purpose.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Pwede ba ho kayong magdala ng sample?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Thank you.  May dala ba ho kayo ngayon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Wala po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Pwede ho kayong magdala next time?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Thank you.  Siguro mga 4 or 5 para lang ho makita namin.  Kung pwedeng iba-ibang purposes para maiba naman.

MISS BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Thank you.

Okay.  So, punta na ho—takbo na ho tayo sa Exhibit 116.  Yung third page nyo ho yung Supreme Court Christmas Allowance.  Tapos may footnote ho kayo dito, SC Christmas Allowance to augment Representation Expenses for subsidy of SC Cash Raffle and Donation to Charitable Institutions.  Tama ho yon?

MISS BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, diyan ho talaga ginagamit itong allowance na ito?

MISS BAYUGA.  Ito po pine-prepare po namin ang payroll as per authority signed by the Chief Justice and the 14 Justices.  Then ibinibigay po namin sa kanila or nagbibigay sa amin for subsidy, for SC Cash Raffle.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Oho.  So, ..

MISS BAYUGA.  Hindi lang po si Chief Justice kundi lahat pong Justices.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Opo, opo.  So ginagamit naman ho for the purpose stated in the footnote.

MISS BAYUGA.  Yun pong iba, dahil nakalagay naman po diyan, donation to charitable institutions.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, dino-donate naman ho siguro nila sa charity yan ano?

MISS BAYUGA.  Hindi ko po sila nakikita kung ano dahil ang liquidation nga po hindi naman po resibo kundi po payroll.  E hindi ko po kayo masasagot.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Pero may certification ho sila?  So, ang assumption ho, ginamit ho para don sa pakay niya?

MISS BAYUGA.  Wala pong certification na nakalagay sa payroll.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  A, wala ho

MISS BAYUGA.  Wala po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Aantayin ko na lang ho yung dadalin nyo.

MISS BAYUGA.  Just the authority.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Oho.

MISS BAYUGA.  Yun pong authority isinend po sa amin approved by the Chief Justice and the 14 Associate Justices.  Igagawa po naming ng payroll yon.  Then, ire-receive po nila yon in cash.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Yung authority ho, anong usually ang nakasulat ho don.

MISS BAYUGA.  Yun po.  Kung ano po yung nakalagay don sa …

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  A, okay.  Yung purpose nga ho?

MISS BAYUGA.  Yung purpose po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So parang nag-certify sila na itong pondo na ito gagamitin talaga naming para sa charity yan.  Parang ganon ho, in a sense?

MISS BAYUGA.  Kung iyon po ang nakalagay sa authority.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Thank you.  Di ganon din ho yung susunod na entry, PET Christmas Allowance?  Ganon din ho?

MISS BAYUGA.  Ganon din.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Ito ho, may tanong ho ako.  Di ba ho, parang almost every Monday ay nagra-rally ho sa Supreme Court?  Yun hong pondo para diyan sa mga yan, san ho kinukuha yan?

MISS BAYUGA.  Wala po akong alam, Sir?

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Hindi nyo ho–Hindi ho galing sa inyong dis—Kasi, ang dalas ho non.  Tapos may mga streamer, may mga loud speakers, …

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Sagot kayo ng sagot.

MISS BAYUGA.  Hindi ko po kaya sagutin po, Sir, yon.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  May isa pala akong tanong.  Dun ho sa RATA …

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Sandali lang.  Ano ba naman ang kaugnayan ng Chief Justice?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Yes.  That’s what—E kayo’y sagot ng sagot.  Tumingin muna kayo dito.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Gusto ba ninyong ma-impeach ang buong Korte Suprema?

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  I’ll move on, Your Honor.

Yung ano pala, Mrs. Bayuga, yung RATA, dib a ho transportation yon?  R-A-T-A, di ba ho transportation allowance?

MISS BAYUGA.  Opo

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Pero si Chief Justice, di ba ho may sariling kotse na siya?  May service car na ho siya as Chief Justice?

MISS BAYUGA.  Meron po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Tapos may backup rin ho siguro yon para sa bodyguard?  May kotse rin ho yan?

MISS BAYUGA.  Actually, Your Honor, yun TA na nakalagay dito, hindi po nila tinatanggap yan.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.

MISS BAYUGA.  Stated lang po sa payroll.  Pero actually, ang tinatanggap lang po nila yung pong Representation Allowance.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  I see.  So wala na silang transportation?

MISS BAYUGA.  Wala na pong Transportation Allowance.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Kasi may sarili na silang kotse?  Provided ho yon?

MISS BAYUGA.  Provided po.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Pati gasolina ho nun libre na ho ano?

MISS BAYUGA.  Yun pong pang-gasolina po nila, yun pung TA nila.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  A, okay.  So gasolina ho?  Gasolina ho kasama, yung kotse ho hindi?  Tama?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  What do you mean kotse hindi?  Very vague, Your Honor.  I’m sorry I have to—Yung gasolina kasama sa allowance, yung kotse …

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Alam mo palagay ko yung mga kotse na assigned sa mga Justices ay capital assets ng Korte Suprema iyon.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Only assigned.

THE PRESIDNG OFFICER.  Under capital outlay iyon sa budget nila.  Ngayon, iyong mga RATA ay iyan ang MOOE, maintenanance and other operating expenses iyan sa budgeting ng gobyerno.  Then you have personnel salaries.  Kaya iyong mga representation, RATA, is MOOE iyan.  Iyong mga hard objects na kagaya ng kotse, kung ano pa ay capital outlay iyan.  Nasa libro lahat iyan ng mga ahensya pero iyong physical asset, ginagamit, kagaya ng desks, chairs, tables at mga airconditioning units, kasama na diyan ang mga bisikleta, motosiklo.  Ano pa?

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  May I proceed, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Yes, go ahead.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Thank you.  Ms. Bayuga, dito naman ho tayo sa ano, sa alpha list, iyong dala niyo hong exhibits 118 to 21, nasa harapan ba ho ninyo?

MS. BAYUGA.  Wala po akong copy Sir.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  I am just showing copies of the documents, Your Honor, to the witness before any question is propounded on this.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Proceed.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Thank you, Your Honor.  Ngayon, turning your attention to the second page of Exhibit 118, which is the 2002 alpha list, nakita nyo po, Ms. Bayuga?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  May entry ho dito ano, Renato Corona, salaries and other, ang entry po, P340,426.62, nakita nyo ba ho iyon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Bakit ho parang iba ho siya doon sa table na ginawa niyo?  Doon sa table niyo, P353,045?  May paliwanag ho ba doon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.  P340,425.62, ito na po ‘yong taxable compensation ni Chief Justice.  Deducted na po dito ‘yong mandatory deduction.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Ano ho iyong mga mandatory deduction?

MS. BAYUGA.  The 3% life insurance, the Medicare and the Pag-IBIG contribution.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Pero gross pa ho ito, hindi pa ho—wala pa hong taxes withheld ito ano?

MS. BAYUGA.  Meron na hong taxes withheld ito.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Ah, withheld na ho iyong taxes?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, net na ho ito.

MS. BAYUGA.  Net …

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Net of taxes na ho ito?  Sigurado ho kayo?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor, this is the taxable compensation income of the Chief Justice.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Yes, pero iyong 340 na ho na iyan, gross ho iyan.  Kaya nga ho doon sa column sa bandang kanan …

MS. BAYUGA.  Less 52 …

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Oho.

MS. BAYUGA.  Amount of exemption, P32,000 …

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Kapag sinabi niyang gross, ibig sabihin noon, after the allowable deduction before income net of tax, hindi ba?

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Tama no iyon ano?  Bawas na ho iyong deduction pero hindi pa ho iyong tax?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Meaning, the amount before netting the tax that will be deducted to cover the obligation to the government.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Tama ho iyon.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Dala nyo pala ho iyong 2002 to 2005, nasa inyo rin ba ho iyong 2006 to 2011, iyong alpha list ho.

MS. BAYUGA.  I don’t have the document.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Pero sa opisina, puwede ninyo ho bang dalhin kasabay na ho noong mga sample certifications next time?

MS. BAYUGA.  The certified xerox copies of the document.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Oho.  Puwede ho?  Thank you.  Ngayon, kung nasusundan ninyo ho itong impeachment proceedings, ang prinisinta po ng prosecution si BIR Commissioner Kim Henares.  Naalala po ninyo iyon?  Nag-testify ho siya na you can only be in an alpha list when you have no other sources of income, tama ho ba iyon?  Sang-ayon ho kayo doon?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Your Honor, the witness is being cross-examined on the  testimony of another witness which is improper for cross-examination.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  He is just trying to ask an information from the witness, if she knows.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Then I will request that the question be reformed, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  All right.  Reform it.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Kayo ho ay naghanda nitong alpha list, ano po?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Ang mga isinasama ho diyan sa alpha list ay mga individuals who have no other source of income, tama ho ba iyon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Hindi po.  Lahat po ng empleyado ng Supreme Court from the Chief Justice down to the lower …

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, hindi po ninyo tinutukoy kung mayroon silang ibang negosyo o pinagkakakitaan, kasi ang sabi ho ni BIR Commissioner Henares, ang puwede lang hong masama sa alpha list ay iyong mga taong empleyado lang sa isang kompanya at walang ibang source ng income?

MS. BAYUGA.  Lahat po isinasama namin, Your Honor.  Kung mayroon po silang additional income, mayroon pong other form na ilalagay po nila doon iyong income from the government at other income from the private.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Oho, ITR ho iyan, Income Tax Return.  Kung may other source sila, kailangan nilang mag-file noon.

MS. BAYUGA.  Mayroon po.  Dapat pong mag-file sila.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, dapat po wala na sila sa alpha list.

MS. BAYUGA.  Dapat po kasama sila.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Kasama pa rin ho?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.l

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Ang pagkakaintindi ninyo?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Okay.  Iyon hong treatment ho ninyo ng ano … so may salaries ho dito.  Iyan ho iyong talagang suweldo.  :Pero iyon hong allowances na malalaki, monthly expense allowance PET,  extraordinary miscellaneous expense PET, hindi ba ho kasama sa suweldo iyon?  Hindi ba ho suweldo ang treatment ninyo doon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Hindi po namin naisasama sa gross income.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, hindi ho nata-taksan ang mga iyon.

MS. BAYUGA.  It has been the usual practice of the court since I joined the court, almost forty years.  Hindi pa po ako hepe ay iyon na po ang kalakaran ng Supreme Court.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, hindi talaga ho isinasama sa ano,  iyong salaries lang ho talaga iyong nandoon sa alpha list.

MS. BAYUGA.  And the year-end bonus in excess of 30,000.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Ngayon ho, iyong alpha list, sige ho, palagay ninyo ng hindi ho tinataksan iyong mga allowances na iyan, may entries ho dito eh, may sample ho kayo sa harapan ninyo?  Page 2 ho, halimbawa, Exhibit 118, doon sa bandang gitnang kanan, mayroon hong dalawang columns.  Iyong sa kaliwa, non-taxable, iyong kanan ho taxable.  So, iyong kanan ho, iyong taxable, nandoon ho iyong salaries.  “Di ba ho iyong mga ibang kinikita ni Chief Justice, halimbawa  hindi ba ho dapat ipinapasok ho doon sa non-taxable?

MS. BAYUGA.  Dahil po ito po ay naka-program sa amin po, iyan po ang program and hindi naman po taxable income kanya po siguro hindi   na po isinasama.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  I have no further questions, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Are you closing your cross-examination?

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  I am, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  All right.  Re-direct.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  No re-direct, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  All right, the witness is discharged.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Thank you, Your Honor.

SEN. SOTTO.  Mr. President, before we discharge the witness, may we recognize Senator Drillon, and then, Senator Recto, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.   Senator Drilon has the floor.

SEN. DRILON.  Good afternoon, Ms. Bayuga.

MS. BAYUGA.  Good afternoon, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  You submitted before this court this Exh. 114. The total compensation for ten years is P21,636,781.00 for the Chief Justice.  My question is, in 2002, the income is P1,451,042.00 per your certification?  Just for the record.

MS. BAYUGA.  P1,004,451.42, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  Yes.  Now, out of that, the withholding tax was only on P353,045.00 as the amount appears to be on salaries?

MS. BAYUGA.  P110,281.60, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  What is P100…

MS. BAYUGA.  For P104,560.89, Your Honor, for the year 2002.

SEN. DRILON.  Is the withholding tax?

MS. BAYUGA.  Is the withholding tax.

SEN. DRILON.  And this withholding tax is a withheld tax on salaries?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  There was no withholding tax on the rest of the amounts appearing here in 2002?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  Now, in 2003, the total compensation income is P1,594,525.04 as appear in Exh. 117 for the column 2003 for the Chief Justice?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  The withholding tax was only on the salary, which is P485,100.00?

MS. BAYUGA.  Including the P15,425.00 for year-end bonus, salaries and year-end bonus in excess of P30,000.00, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  Did you submit any document on that?  Or where is that based, is that on an Alpha List?

MS. BAYUGA.  Included in the Alpha List, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  This is marked in evidence, may we know from both parties?

In the years 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011, all the withholding tax would be just be basically be on the salaries?

MS. BAYUGA.  Based on the salaries plus year-end bonus in excess of P30,000.00, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON. Okay. Just, so, we can have an example. Let’s say in 2010, the total amount appearing here on exhibit 117 for the Chief Justice is P2,882,682.38.  The salary for 2010 is P650,447.23.  Just for clarity where was the withholding tax based?

MS. BAYUGA.  It was based on the salary, basic monthly salary, longevity pay, and the year-end bonus in excess of P30,000.00.

SEN. DRILON.  But the bonus was far in excess of 30,0000 in 2010.

MS. BAYUGA.   Yes, Your Honor.  In excess of 30,0000, it was taxable.

SEN. DRILON.  It was taxable.  In 2010 was it in excess of 30,000?

MS. BAYUGA.  In excess of 30,000, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  In 2010?

MS. BAYUGA.  2010, P53,423.55 is taxable income po.

SEN. DRILON.  Okay.  But was there withholding tax on that?

MS. BAYUGA.   There was withholding tax.

SEN. DRILON.  What was the total bonus again in 2010?  Total.

MS. BAYUGA.  Total amount?

SEN. DRILON.  Yes.

MS. BAYUGA.  For 2010, the year-end bonus, all in all, including the P5,000 cash gift is P88,423.55.  But the taxable income is only P53,423.55.

SEN. DRILON.    I see.  And that was included in the alpha list.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON. Now, did you submit BIR reports from 2006 to 201, the alpha list?

MS. BAYUGA.  For 2011, Sir?

SEN. DRILON.  Yes, or 2006-2011 if available.

MS. BAYUGA.  For 2011, not yet, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  Not yet, because…

MS. BAYUGA.  It was delayed because one of our staff died last year.

SEN. DRILON.  What about for 2006?

MS. BAYUGA.  We submitted.

SEN. DRILON.  You submitted.

MS. BAYUGA.  It was duly received by the BIR.

SEN. DRILON.  How about to the court?

MS. BAYUGA.  200…

SEN. DRILON.  2006, 2007, 2008, 2009,…

MS. BAYUGA.  Up to 2010.

SEN. DRILON.  2010, has it been submitted to the court?

MS. BAYUGA.  It was duly received by the BIR.

SEN. DRILON.  Did you submit it to the impeachment court?

MS. BAYUGA.  No, Your Honor. The 2002-2005 only.

SEN. DRILON.  You did.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  Can you submit also the 2006-2010 and if 2011 is available, up to 2011.

MS. BAYUGA.  No, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  Now, can you submit it.

MS. BAYUGA.  The certified Xerox copy…

SEN. DRILON.  Only, yes, the certified Xerox copy.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  Okay, you submit that tomorrow.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  All right.  What about 2011?  It’s not yet ready?

MS. BAYUGA.   Not yet ready, Sir.

SEN. DRILON.  So, all of these allowances listed in exhibit 114 from 2002-2010, even 2011, were not subject to withholding tax except those year-end and cash bonus in excess of 30,000, is that correct?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  Please can you speak louder, yes?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  All right.  And it was not, according to you, subject to withholding tax because they were expenses which were supposed to have been liquidated in the payroll.  Hindi ba yon ang sinabi?

MS. BAYUGA.  Ever since I…

SEN. DRILON.  No, no, just answer the question.  They were not subject to any withholding tax, I mean these bonuses in excess of up to P30,000 and all of these other emoluments were not subject to withholding tax and were not reported as income because they were all reimburseable expenses as appearing in the certification in the payroll.

MS. BAYUGA.  Hindi ko po sinabing reimburseable ang mga allowances na tinatanggap ng Supreme Court.

SEN. DRILON.  So they are not income in your classification.

MS. BAYUGA.  They are income po.

SEN. DRILON.  They are income but they are not taxable.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yon po ang usual practice ng court na lahat pong allowances na tinatanggap namin ay not subject to tax.

SEN. DRILON.  I see.  Hindi, not subject to tax.  Now, when you were asked extensively on that certification, you said the certification appeared as appearing in the payroll.  Hindi ba?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  Do you recall exactly what appears there?  The following amounts are certified to have been spent by the recipient or substantially to that effect.  Is that how it looks?

MS. BAYUGA.  Hindi po, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  Ano yon?  What appears there?

MS. BAYUGA.  The monthly allowance then the monthly received by the recipient then they sign the payroll.  Iyan po ang aming inili-liquidate sa COA.

SEN. DRILON.  Ah there is a sheet of paper which appears like a payroll, the amounts of allowances and other emoluments appearing there are signed by the recipient and this serves as the liquidation of those amounts, ganon po ba?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

SEN. DRILON.  Ayon.  So wala na pong resibong binibigay basta pinipirmahan na lang doon sa payroll and that is deemed to be the liquidation?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  Kaya hindi po sinasama yan sa income for purposes of withholding taxes.  Hindi po ba?

MS. BAYUGA.  Nadatnan ko na po na yon po…

SEN. DRILON.  No, no, iyon po ang prinsipyo noon.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Sagutin mo lang yong question.

SEN. DRILON.  Hindi po sinasama yan sa withholding tax computation dahilan sa yan ay sa inyong reglamento, sa inyong practice yan po ay expense na na incur hindi po income.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  I will ask the question ‘no.  Madam Witness, yong mga hindi regular salary ay hindi isinasama sa subject to withholding tax sang-ayon sa treatment ng accounting procedure ng Korte Suprema.  Ganon ba?

MS. BAYUGA.    Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Ayun.

SEN. DRILON.  So that halimbawa lamang, looking at your Exhibit 117, for the year 2010 for the Chief Justice, the total amount of income or emoluments, I withdraw the word income—emoluments is P2,882,682.38, tama po ba yon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  Yung withholding tax, saan binase?  Sa salary?  P650,447.23.

MS. BAYUGA.  Sa Salaries po, Longevity Pay and …

SEN. DRILON.  Salary, …

MS. BAYUGA.  Salaries, Longevity Pay, Year-End Bonus and Excess of P30,000.

SEN. DRILON.  Salary, Longevity Pay, Year-End Bonus and Excess of P30,000.  Alin pa?  Yun lang?

MS. BAYUGA.  Dun lang po, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  A, doon lang.  Dun sa iba, walang income tax na ibinayad?  Sa ibang item?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  So, magkano lang po yung tatlong item na yan na sinabi mo?  Salary, Longevity Pay and Year-End Bonus and Cash Gift?

SUSPENSION OF HEARING

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Habang pinag-aaralan niya, one-minute suspension.  (Gavel)

It was 3:37 p.m.

At 3:41 p.m., the trial was resumed.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Trial is resumed.

Are you ready with the answer, Madam Witness?

SEN. DRILON.  Madam Witness, can you now provide us with the answer?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  Yes.

MS. BAYUGA.  P736,392.54, the gross taxable compensation income, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  For 2010

MS. BAYUGA.  For 2010.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  That consist of the recurrent salary plus longevity pay plus bonus beyond P30,000.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Okay.

SEN. DRILON.  Okay.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  And that is the base of the withholding tax based on the applicable rate in the internal revenue code, correct?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  All right.

SEN. DRILON.  Now, did Chief Justice Corona file an income tax return for 2010 or did he rely only on the alpha list as his return?

MS. BAYUGA.  His name was included in the alpha listing for 2010 but as to other income, I do not know Sir.

SEN. DRILON.  Not other income, the income beyond P736,892.54, in other words, the difference between P2,882,682.38 for 2010 as appearing in Exhibit 17, less P736,892.54 as you just reported, there was no income tax return filed for this amount?

MS. BAYUGA.  Hindi ko po alam Sir kung ini-include po niya sa other income.

SEN. DRILON.  In other words, you do not know because you are not in possession of information whether an income tax return was filed.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor, only the alpha list.

SEN. DRILON.  Only the alpha list.  All right.  Now, since you did not consider the allowances as taxable, they are not included in the alpha list reported to the BIR.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  And they are not included in any report to the BIR from the Supreme Court.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor, for almost 40 years.

SEN. DRILON.  I am sorry.

MS. BAYUGA.  For almost 40 years, since I joined the court, all allowances are not included.

SEN. DRILON.  I see.  Okay I have no more questions, just to remind the witness that she is committed to produce the documents that we have requested, specifically, the alpha list from 2006 to 2011.

MS. BAYUGA.  2010, Your Honor.

SEN. DRILON.  2010, I am sorry, yes.  If you can bring that.  Thank you very much.

SEN. SOTTO.  Mr. President.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Majority Floor Leader.

SEN. SOTTO.  May we recognize Senators Recto, Trillanes and then Escudero.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Senator Recto has the floor.

SEN. RECTO.  Thank you, Mr. President.  Thank you, Majority Leader.  Madam Witness, I am looking at Exhibit 114.  This should be the same document that was used for questions of you with regard to the salaries and other emoluments, fringe benefits and other allowances which total P21,636,000.00 of the Chief Justice from 2002 to 2011.  I was looking at the items, salaries and other emoluments is one; may listing sa ilalim noon; and then you have fringe benefit and other allowances.  And then you have the third item, expense allowance.  Ito iyong mga categories, okay.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. RECTO.  Nabanggit ninyo kanina na ang taxable na wini-withhold ninyo ay doon sa salaries and other emoluments and there are three items: salaries, longevity pay, and year-end bonus and cash gift.  In excess of 30 is what is taxable under the NIRC, tama ho ba iyon?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. RECTO.  Mayroon kayo ritong fringe benefit and other allowances.  Ang total lahat nito is about P3 million.  Hindi ho ba sa batas, iyong P3 million na fringe benefit hindi talaga kinakaltas sa tumatanggap noon at ang may obligation na magbayad nito ay iyong employer at hindi ang employee.  Iba iyong kaltas at iba iyong obligasyon na magbayad, fringe benefit.  Are you familiar with that law, with the law on … Dahil dito, maliwanag ha, salaries kinakaltasan natin, mayroon kang withholding tax, nasa alpha list ninyo iyan; pero mayroon ka rin ditong heading na fringe benefit and other allowances, walang kaltas dito.  Maliwanag.

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

SEN. RECTO.  Base sa testimony ninyo.  Alam  ba ninyo na ayon sa batas, na iyong fringe benefit ay binabayaran ng employer at hindi ng empleyado?

MS. BAYUGA.  Tuwi po kaming magbabayad ng fringe benefit, mayroon pong aurhority coming from the court na hindi po stated doon na I have to deduct.  No specific instruction to deduct the withholding tax for such allowances.

SEN. RECTO.  Correct.  Ang puntos ko ay ganito.  Base sa batas, iyong fringe benefit hindi naman talaga dine-deduct sa empleyado eh.  Binabayaran ng employer.  Ibig sabihin, the obligation to pay the tax for fringe benefit, whether gobyerno o pribado, is the employer and not the employee for fringe benefits.  Are you familiar with that?

MS. BAYUGA.  I am not familiar, sir.

SEN. RECTO.  Okay.  But ayon sa Section 33-B of the NIRC, Section 33-A of the NIRC, ang final tax of 32% effective January 1, 2000 is hereby imposed on the grossed-ups monetary value of fringe benefits furnished or granted to the employee by the employer.  The tax imposed is payable by the employer.  Nakalagay sa batas.  So, posible, ganyan ang nangyayari sa Supreme Court.  In some, hindi sa lahat, doon sa tinatawag na fringe benefit.  Dahil dito sa Senado, ganoon din dito, base sa fringe benefits.  Now, hindi lahat ito considered as fringe benefits.  I don’t know if you are expert witness. Kayo ho ba mayroon kayong other compensation income?

MS. BAYUGA. Ako po?

SEN. RECTO.  Opo.

MS. BAYUGA.  Katulad din po ng tinatanggap ng mga  …

SEN. RECTO.  Hindi compensation income. Ibig sabihin, hindi galing sa Supreme Court.

MS. BAYUGA.  Wala po.

SEN. RECTO.  May pribado ka bang negosyo?

MS. BAYUGA.  Wala po.

SEN. RECTO.  So, you would not be familiar what optional standard deductions? Hindi na rin?

MS. BAYUGA.  Hindi.

SEN. RECTO. Okay.  Kasi, kung halimbawa, kung sa pribado naman, mayroon kang kinitang P22 million, mayroon kang optional standard deduction na  40% kaagad. Samakatuwid, basta 18% ang gross na binayaran mong tax or gross  at hindi na 32% iyan, eh, may 40% kang OSD, compliant ka na sa Tax Code. But you would not know that because you don’t have other compensation income.  So, okay, huling tanong na lang, Madam Witness.  Bakit sa tingin ninyo nilagay dito  fringe benefit and other allowances?  Bakit iyon ang heading ninyo?

MS. BAYUGA.  Ito pong certification ay pinagawa lang po sa akin ng aking immediate chief.

SEN. RECTO.  Yes, I’m sorry.

MS. BAYUGA.  Ito po ay pinagawa lang po sa akin ng immediate chief ko.

SEN. RECTO.  Okay.

MS. BAYUGA.  Na ito ang dapat ilagay “salaries and other emoluments.”

SEN. RECTO.  Oho.

MS. BAYUGA. “Fringe benefits and other allowances.”

SEN. RECTO.  Sa madaling salita, may ibig sabihin ito, the salaries and other emoluments, iyong tatlong bagay dito taxable.  Iyong fringe benefit and other allowances, that is another heading, hindi ho ba?

MS. BAYUGA.  Opo.

SEN. RECTO.  At sa lahat ng  government officials, employees, may ganito, eh?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. RECTO.  Karamihan, hindi ho ba?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. RECTO.  And then, mayroon kayong pangatlo “expense allowance.” Nandito naman halos “ zero, zero, zero, zero.” Palagay ko ‘to,   as Chief Justice ng 2010 and 11, eto lang ang may entry, eh?

MS. BAYUGA.  As JBC Chairman.

SEN. RECTO.  JBC Chairman.  Ano iyong JBC?

MS. BAYUGA. Judicial and Bar Council.

SEN. RECTO.  Bar Council.  Okay.  Expense allowance, so ito maliwanag kailangan ginastos, expense allowance, eh, hindi ho ba?

MS. BAYUGA.  Hindi ko po alam.

SEN. RECTO.  But you would not know if he did spend it, ‘no. Okay, iyon lang po,  Madam Witness, thank you.

THE PRESIDING JUSTICE.  Majority Floor Leader.

SEN SOTTO.  Sen. Trillanes, Mr. President, may we recognize him, please.

THE PRESIDING. JUSTICE. Who? Senator Escudero?

SEN. SOTTO.  Trillanes.  Trillanes.

THE PRESIDING JUSTICE.  Senator Trillanes is has the floor.

SEN. TRILLANES.  Thank you, Mr. President.  Well, I would like to address these questions to the Chief Defense counsel. Defense counsel, can you help me understand why you presented this witness?

JUSTICE CUEVAS. Well, I have stated the purpose on record, Your Honor, to show the different compensation, benefits, and other allowances received by the Chief Justice, Your Honor, in order to explain, at least, the sources of the amounts that have gone into his income, Your Honor.

SEN. TRILLANES.  So, how is this relevant to the case beforehand?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Very relevant, Your Honor, because if the other amounts of compensation whether by means of allowances and so on goes into the coffers of the Chief Justice, Your Honor, then, it will explain the other alleged deficiencies brought about by the evidence of the prosecution that he could not have acquired this amount of properties because his income does not justify the acquisition thereof.

SEN. TRILLANES. Okay, so, in short, Mr. Defense Counsel, you are trying to prove that the bank deposits are not ill-gotten?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  I have not gone that far, if Your Honor please.

SEN TRILLANES.  So, well, in effect, you are actually reviving Art. 2.4, is that the case, Mr. Defense Counsel?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  2.4, Your Honor, is in connection with illegally acquired wealth.

SEN. TRILLANES.  Yes.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  And the prosecution had been debarred  from presenting any evidence in connection therewith.

SEN. TRILLANES.  But you are actually presenting evidence to explain 2.4  or to disprove that the bank deposits are ill-gotten.  That is the only purpose that I can think of in this ….

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Well, that is your personal assessment if, Your Honor, please, but being a defense counsel, we have to do everything for purposes of at least explaining the position of the Chief Justice.  It may not jive with what your perception, Your Honor, with your postulation and articulation, but decidedly, we needed it because the impeachment court is not made up solely of one judge, Your Honor.  It is a collegial court, and our appeal is  to the entire court, Your Honor.

SEN. TRILLANES.  So, in short, you are conceding the opinion of this judge, is that the way I understand it, Mr. defense counsel?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Conceding the opinion as to what?  I hope you pardon me, Mr….

SEN. TRILLANES.  Okay.  Well, anyway, does your witness have any personal knowledge as to how the Chief Justice spent the money, the  22 million?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Well, the way the testimony of the witness have gone, Your Honor, she has nothing to do, neither is she privy to the manner by which this amount reflected in the various documents testified to by her, have been spent, Your Honor.

SEN. TRILLANES.  So, she had no idea whatsoever as to how much the Chief Justice actually spends every month for association dues, electric bills, grocery bills, gasoline and car maintenance bills, salaries of the household helper, if any, and so on and so forth.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  That is clear from her testimony, Your Honor.

SEN. TRILLANES.  So, in short, for all you know, the respondent is—or probably would be spending so much more than the 21 million stated.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  It could be, Your Honor, but that has not—I am sorry, akala ko tapos na kayo.

SEN. TRILLANES.  Yes, please, Sir, go ahead.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  It could be, Your Honor, but in accordance with the purpose of our offer, Your Honor, it is limited to the extraction of various amounts appearing in their salary payrolls and other documentary evidence lifted from there, this is the synchronize or summarization of what she has done.  In other words, she has nothing to do with the grant of this amount, she has nothing to do with the way they were spent, and she has nothing to do by way of justifying how all these matters came to existence, Your Honor.

SEN. TRILLANES.  It is very clear, Mr. Defense counsel.  Now, let’s just approximate.  For somebody with the stature of the Chief Justice who has maintaining a penthouse in the Beladio, what’s that other condominium?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  No, it is not a penthouse, in fact, it is not occupied up to now, Your Honor, so, our evidence will show—I am sorry.

SEN. TRILLANES.  Okay.  The stature of the Chief Justice who is maintaining, let’s say a few households, let’s just put a figure that he maybe spending around P150,000 to P200,000 per month, and with that you multiply by 12, he spending around 2 million more or less per year then times 10, 21 to 22 million.  So, in short…

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Ubos din.

SEN. TRILLANES.  Yes.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  If, Your Honor, please.  If I do not think I can produce evidence by mere manifestation or argumentation, Your Honor, I am not willing neither am I in a position, legally speaking and physically speaking to deal on the truth, accuracy of the figures that you have mention, Your Honor.

SEN. TRILLANES.  Yes, with that, I support the position of the Senate President that it is only the Chief Justice who can actually explain all of these things.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Maybe yes, Your Honor.

SEN. TRILLANES.  Yes.  Now, I would like to take this opportunity also to ask you if you have any plans to divulge the dollar accounts as promise by the Chief Justice himself?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Well, I have not yet, concretely and positively arrive at the ultimate conclusion that we have to or we do not have to.  That will depend on the progress of the proceedings and the nature of our evidence or the stages of which our evidence maybe.  Because we are on the defense, Your Honor, eh.  If the prosecution have not even establish the prima facie case against the respondent, then, I do not think we have to place him on the stand, Your Honor.

SEN. TRILLANES.  Yes, I understand, but I am just holding on to your word and records would bear us out as well as the word of the Chief Justice in his media rounds that he will divulge.  And if you are the Chief Justice talking, then you have to value his word.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Oh yes, I had been informed, Your Honor, although I did not hear, maybe I was asleep or elsewhere when these alleged statements were made but I will go on record, Your Honor, as not having stated that we will present his what we call foreign currency deposit, Your Honor.  In fact, I recall being asked by one of the Senator-Judges, Your Honor, as to whether I can convince him to do this and do that in connection with this foreign currency deposit, Your Honor, and I made the statement that we are still on the verge of fighting this particular issue before the honourable Supreme Court in a petition for certiorari prohibition that we have filed with the said court.

SEN. TRILLANES.  Well, you’ll have to understand and forgive me if I will remind you every now and then of that promise of the Chief Justice to divulge the dollar accounts.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Thank you for the manifestation.

SEN. TRILLANES.  Thank you, Mr. President.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Thank you.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Majority Floor Leader.

SEN. SOTTO.  Senator Escudero, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  The Gentleman from Sorsogon.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Thank you, Mr. President.  Isang katanungan po lamang sa ating testigo ngayong hapon.  Ma’am, noong nagpunta po dito si Commissioner Henares, sabi po nya wala daw silang record na nagbabayad kayo ng buwis via withholding tax based sa alpha list insofar as the Justices of the Supreme Court is concerned.  Pakipaliwanag po sa amin kung bakit nya nasabi yon.

MS. BAYUGA.  Hindi ko po masasagot ang inyong katanungan, Your Honor.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  When we asked the commissioner kung nagre-remit ba, nagbabayad ba ng buwis, ipinakita lamang yong alpha list for certain years pero may mga taon na wala daw po silang record, wala po silang alpha list.  Sina-submit nyo po ba ito taon-taon sa BIR?

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Received by the BIR?

MS. BAYUGA.  Duly received by the BIR.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Saan pong tanggapan ng BIR, kung maaari pong malaman?  Dahil hindi ko makita ang dahilan kung bakit hindi alam ng  commissioner yan sasabihin po sa amin yon.

MS. BAYUGA  RDO No. 33.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  RDO No. 33 which is located in Manila, I presume.

MS. BAYUGA.  Intramuros.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  In Intramuros, Manila.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Revenue District Office No. 33.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  At nire-remit nyo rin po sa pamamagitan ng pagbayad sa bangko yong wini-withhold ninyo.  Nakita ko po yong record nyo, roughly P34 million total for the past 8 years.

MS. BAYUGA.  Through TRA.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Ano po yong TRA?

MS. BAYUGA.  Tax Remittance Advice po.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  So may pruweba po kayo na bayad yong withholding taxes na dapat due and owing sa gobyerno sa mga natatanggap na sweldo at taxable income ng mga Mahistrado ng Korte Suprema.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Can you kindly, it was requested earlier, can you kindly furnish us with a complete set dahil kulang po yata yong nabigay nyong alpha list sa amin 02205 po lamang.  Pakibigay po sa amin kung maaari yong balance rin para lang…

MS. BAYUGA.  Up to 2010, Your Honor?

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Kung ano po yong available.  May 2011 na  po ba, wala pa?

MS. BAYUGA.  Wala pa po, Your Honor.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Up to 2010 lang, please.

MS. BAYUGA.  Yes, Your Honor.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  With due respect, Your Honor, if I’ll be allowed to say a couple of words in connection with this, Your Honor.  If I recall, Your Honor, when the honourable Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Commissioner Henares, took the stand as a witness for the prosecution, Your Honor, well, there was Exhibit CCCCC-7, Your Honor.  It was marked in the hearing of February 6, 2012 and this covers the taxable years 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010.

SEN. ESCUDERO.   Ah in previous years yong wala nila.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Meaning 2002 to 2005?

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Yon po yong wala ang BIR daw.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Correct.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Tama po.  So kumpleto na po yon sa record ng impeachment court sa ngayon?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Tama po.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  From 2002 to 2010.  2006 to 2010, galing sa BIR?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Opo.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  2002 to 2005 galing po sa kanya ngayon.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Sa defense, opo.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Ah kaya yon po ang lohika kung bakit 2002-2005 lamang ang prinesenta ninyong alpha list.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Ang aming purpose ay just to show that there was compliance in connection with the requirement of filing of all these things as shown by these various statements 2002 year-end report on compensation for the year 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005, Your Honor.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Thank you, Your Honor.

Can we get the concurrence of the Secretariat, Mr. President, even at a later time if indeed we have a complete record of the Alpha List already and the payments made by the Supreme Court insofar as salaries and emoluments they are taxable by Justices.  Even at a later time.  Para lang malaman natinng kumpleto yung record natin from 2002 to 2010.  Ma’am, nandyan po ba?  Thank you.  I would like to thank the Secretariat.

May I address some questions just to place everything in proper perspective.  May I get confirmation from the prosecution?  I asked this before, ang napatunayan diumano na ari-arian sa panig ninyo, ni Chief Justice Corona, ay 24.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  The number of real properties?

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Dalawampu’t apat kabilang na yung anim na parking lot.  Tama po ba?

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Tama po, as far as I know.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Ngayon, kabilang sa ebidensyang pinresenta ninyo yung HHH, a Deed of Sale tungkol sa isang ari-arian sa Quezon City na binenta na, ayon din sa inyo.  So, ang claim lang ninyo nung pinresent ninyo yung testigo ay yung kinita daw don ay wala sa kanyang SALN.  So, do I take it na 24 yung kine-claim ninyong ari-arian ni Chief Justice na dapat dineklara niya sa kanyang SALN kasama, ulitin ko, yung anim na parking lots?  Would that be accurate?

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Your Honor, I’m sorry.  I’m not in a position at this time to make that statement.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Can I ask someone who’s in a position to answer, Mr. President, because we cannot be more or less, it should either be 21, 23, 24, so that we, as Senator-Judges, would know, ano ba yung dini-disprove ngayon ng depensa at ano ba yung napatunayan ng prosekusyon kaugnay sa kanilang alegasyon na hindi nilalaman ng SALN ni Chief Justice.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Is the prosecution in a position to answer the question of the distinguished Senator from Sorsogon.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Your Honor, may we have like a five-minute recess so we can check our records and give the exact data?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  All right.

SEN. SOTTO.  Mr. President.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Tamang-tama yung recess.  Sige.

SEN. SOTTO.  Mr. President.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Yes.

SUSPENSION OF HEARING

SEN. SOTTO.  Because of the lateness of the hour, may we move to suspend for 15 minutes instead.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Trial suspended for 15 minutes to check the record of the prosecution.  (Gavel)

It was 4:08 p.m.

RESUMPTION OF THE TRIAL

At 4:50 p.m. the trial resumed.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.   Trial resumes.

Majority Floor Leader.

SEN. SOTTO.  Mr. President, before the brake, Senator Escudero had the floor.  After Senator Escudero, the Minority Leader, Senator Allan Cayetano wishes to be recognized also, but at this point, may we continue with Senator Escudero and the present witness.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Senator Escudero.  Before we go off, the prosecution was verifying their records regarding the status of the claimed assets, hard assets that were not included in the SALN.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Mr. President, bago po sumagot ang Kagalang-galang na Chief Prosecutor, tinatanong ko po ito para mailagay sa tamang perspektibo iyong nagaganap sa harap natin ngayon. Dalawangput-apat na ari-arian diumano ang nasabi noon sa akin, ewan ko ngayon kung ilan, ang pag-aari ni Justice Chief Corona, subalit lima lamang ang nasa SALN. At ang sinusubukang patunayan ng depensa, eh, hindi kanya iyon. So, nagka-countdown ho kasi kami dito ng ilang Senator-Judges. Pwede po bang malaman ilan po ba ang napatunayan ninyo, tingin ninyo napatunayan ninyo?

REP. TUPAS.  Ginoong Pangulo, doon sa—base doon sa offer of evidence na sinabmit namin at inadmit ng impeachment tribunal mayroong …

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Real estate muna.

REP. TUPAS.  Real estate lang po.

SEN. ESCUDERO.   Real estate lang po.

REP. TUPAS.  Real properties, mayroong 21 titles covering 21 properties. Nasabi ko lang 24 dati, kasi iyong 24 na iyon, iyong tatlo doon ay parking lots na wala namang title, so, naging 21 lang ngayon, at 21 including three parking lots doon sa Velagio.

SEN. ESCUDERO.   Twenty-one kasama na ho doon iyong three parking lots.

REP. TUPAS.  Tama po.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Iyon bang mga parking lots, eh, kasama sa titulo ng condo?

REP. TUPAS.  Hiwalay po iyon, Ginoong Pangulo.  At sa 21 titles na ito, mayroon ditong tatlong titulo ng tatlong parking lots.

SEN. ESCUDERO.   Tatlong tituladong parking lots.

REP. TUPAS.  Tama po.

SEN. ESCUDERO.   So, 24 noong una dahil nasama ninyo iyong tatlong parking lots na walang titulo kasabay noon ang titulo ng unit?

REP. TUPAS.  Tama iyon.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Pero iyong asset din iyon, eh, iyong parking lots asset din iyon dahil may value iyon.

REP. TUPAS.  Tama po.

SEN. ESCUDERO. Gaya ng nasabi ko, Ginoong Pangulo, sinusubukan po naming mag-countdown kung tutugma iyong pinepresentang ebidensiya ng magkabilang panig. So, 24, ah, 21 kung tatanggalin ko ho iyong parking lots, 18, kasama po ba dito iyong Exh. HHH ninyo na nagprisinta kayo ng ebidensiyang binenta na po ito to make it …

REP. TUPAS.  Tinitingnan ko lang.

SEN. ESCUDERO.   Opo.

REP. TUPAS. Tsinetsek ko lang kung ano iyong HHHH.  Kasama na po iyon.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Sandali, dati 24, ‘di ba?

REP. TUPAS.  Tama po.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Tinanggal ninyo iyong tatlo dahil parking lots iyon?

REP. TUPAS.  Dahil walang titulo po iyong tatlong iyon.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Walang titulo. So, 21.

REP. TUPAS.  Dalawangput-isa.  Tama po, Ginoong Pangulo.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  May mga titulo iyan?

REP. TUPAS.  Tama po.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Pero iyong tatlo na walang titulo, eh, kanino iyon?

SEN. ESCUDERO.   If I may answer, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Yes.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Kasama na iyon noong Condominium Certificate of Title kung saan nakadikit iyong mga parking lots na iyon, kung hindi ako nagkakamali?

REP. TUPAS.  Tama po iyon.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Okay, so, iyon ay one asset iyon involved in one title?

REP. TUPAS. Yes, sir.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Okay.

SEN. ESCUDERO.   May I ask, sa 21 nabanggit ninyo, tatlo doon parking lots, kasama ba doon iyong lupa sa Pansol, Quezon City na ayon sa Exh. HHH ninyo, which is an absolute deed of sale, eh, binenta na o nilabas ninyo na ba yon sa 21?  Pansol, pansol.

REP. TUPAS.  Kasama pa po iyon sa 21 properties.

SEN. ESCUDERO. But in your own exhibit HHH, deed of absolute sale, binenta na ito.

REP. TUPAS.  Nabenta na po ito noong…ipinapatsek ko lang po pero ang pagkakaalam po namin dito…

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Ang date received po sa Register of Deeds ay April 13, 2010.

REP. TUPAS.  Correct, 2010.  Pero isinama naming yon kasi may mga dates na year-end na dapat kasali pa yon sa SALN ng respondent Chief Justice na hindi isinali.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  So, kasama sa 21.

REP. TUPAS.  Kasama sa 21.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Kasama rin po sa 21 iyong pito na diumano pinatunayan ni Ginoong Vicente na siya na raw ang may-ari.

REP. TUPAS.  Kasama po, tama.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Kasama rin po ba doon sa 21 iyong pag-aari ni Mirriam Roco na binili raw nya.  Inallege mo ba iyon na kasama sa 21?

REP. TUPAS.  Hindi po.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Mag-aarithmetic ho ako ng konti para masubaybayan ko at ma-appreciate ko rin yong ginagawa ng depensa.  Twenty one, tatlong parking lot, so, kung aalisin ko iyon, 18, ina-account ko lang Manong Ping…18, pito so labing isa, lima ang kini-claim ni Chief Justice na kanya, so, ang so far wala pang tangka na ipaliwanag, hindi ko sinasabing tatanggapin namin at paniniwalaan naming ay anim.

REP. TUPAS.  Hindi po, kasi…

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Hindi, iyong lima inaamin naman nya eh.

REP. TUPAS.  Iyong hindi nya inamin.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Iyong hindi inamin ay anim.

REP. TUPAS.  Iyong walang tangka pa na pagpapaliwanag.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Walang pang tangkang ipaliwanag.

REP. TUPAS.  Tama po.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  So, iyon ang hinihintay nating gawin kung saka-sakali ng depensa.

REP. TUPAS.  Tama po iyan Ginoong Pangulo.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Sa pera naman, sa bank accounts, maaring makita namin kung saan papunta and lahat ng ito.  Base sa inyong teorya, magkano ba iyong cash-on-hand ni Chief Justice kumpara sa kanyag idineklara sa kanyang SALN.  Nalito ho kasi kami ng kaunti dun sa mga bank accounts dahil may inopen, may klinows, ang isang pahayagan tinotal po lahat nung amounts na lumabas, eh, hindi naman ho dapat itototal iyon dahil may inilabas, may ipinasok.  Sa inyong teorya po magkano po ba iyong cash on hand na dapat nyang idineklara, para makita po namin kung pumapantay ba iyong ebidensya na tinatangkang iprisenta ng depensa doon sa nais nilang ipaliwanag na diprensya.

REP. TUPAS.  During the break, ang kinompute po namin based dun sa offer of evidence, yung real property lang po…

SEN. SOTTO. At a later time, Mr. President.

REP. TUPAS.  At a later time, we will submit it.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Just so we can do a matching of the allegation and the answer of both the prosecution and the defense,  that  we can weigh how it has been answered thus far.  And if the defense is still on line with respect to being on a sue on Article II.

REP. TUPAS.  Yes, but it was previously asked in the previous hearing of this honourable tribunal, and ang klaro lang doon 2010 ay iyong cash P3.5 ang sa SALN, at ang P31.5 million iyong prinesent ng prosecution na pagmamay-ari ni Chief Justice.  Pero with respect sa ibang taon po, isusumite po namin iyon para mapaliwanagan lalo si Senador Escudero.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  As a final point, Mr. President, just for the record, in relation to the question of Senator Trillanes awhile ago, it was my understanding that  the ruling of the Presiding Officer in the Senate impeachment court in disallowing evidence to be presented on Article 2.4 is that, in barring it, ang assumption natin don, I don’t know if it was in caucus or in plenary was that, if it is proven by the prosecution although we said not properly alleged, that there is income or there are assets in excess of income, the losses there is a presumption that it is ill-gotten.  And, therefore, the burden shifts from the prosecution to the defense to prove that it is not ill-gotten.  In which case, the prosecution can present during rebuttal, perhaps, evidence to prove otherwise.  Kaya nga sinabi namin, sa ngayon hindi kayo pwede mag-presinta ng ebidensya, and I think that is the tendency of the witnesses being presented by the defense now to try to explain and prove the sources of income at ang hinihintay rin po namin sana dumating tayo sa puntong iyon Justice Cuevas, pinapalabas nyo sino ang may-ari, saan galing yong pera.  Ang hinihintay din po namin ay yong paliwanag kung bakit wala doon, ano yong nandoon at saan ba matatagpuan doon sa dokumentong tinatawag na SALN yong mga kanya pa at yong inaamin nyang kanya, nakapangalan man sa kanya o hindi.  Darating naman po tayo doon, hindi po ba?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Tiyak na darating po kami roon.

SEN. ESCUDERO.  Thank you, Mr. President.   Thank you, Your Honor.  Thank you, Congressman Tupas.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Thank you.

REP. TUPAS.  Thank you.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  All right, proceed.  The Minority Floor Leader.

SEN. CAYETANO (A.).  Magandang hapon, Mr. Senate President, sa magkabilang panig.  Nakatayo na rin po si Justice Cuevas, payagan nyo po na i-pursue ko lang po yong point ni Senator-Judge Trillanes at ni Senator-Judge Escudero.  Naintindihan ko po kasi yong kahapon yong prinesent na witness tungkol po doon sa lupa sa Marikina.  Kasi halimbawa po ano, pina-tabulate ko sa staff ko yong properties na nasa SALN and yung properties na wala.  So yong properties na wala, isa-isa ninyong pinapaliwanag or I assume na umpisa pa lang yong kahapon kung bakit wala sa SALN.  So yong kahapon, maliwanag sa akin na sinusubukan nyong patunayan na hindi naman sa kanya yon so bakit nya ilalagay sa SALN.  So yon po maliwanag sa akin yong part na yon.  Pero doon po sa tanong ni Senator Trillanes, nakikita ko po yong point nya.  Kasi po ang ruling ng korte ay yung 2.2 at 2.3 ang ating nililitis.  Ibig sabihin po yong  whether or not there was a filing ng SALN at ayon sa prosekusyon kasama din dito whether or not accurate at tama po ang dineklara sa SALN.  Pero ang sinabi po ng korteng ito hindi pwedeng magbigay ng ebidensya ang prosekusyon tungkol sa ill-gotten wealth.  So noong ipinakita nyo po ang witness na ito—magandang hapon, ma’am—at ipinalabas na P21 or P22 million ang kinita nya in ten years or if I just do a simple mathematical, although hindi ganoon ka-accurate, something like P2.1 or P2.2 million a year, hindi ko rin po sobrang maintindihan.  At this point in time ho hindi ganoon kaklaro kung ano ang pinapatunayan ng prosekusyon sapagkat tina-tabulate ko rin po ang summary ng mga pondong ipinakita ng prosekusyon, assuming we will admit all of that and assuming tama po yon.  For example po, let’s say in the year 2009, ang SALN declaration isP 2.5 million pero ang lumabas sa mga bank accounts ay P9.178,501 million or for example po ng 2010, ang SALN declaration is P3.5 million pero kung tama po ang addition namin sa tatlong bank account P31,752,623 or yong 2009 po to be clear, P9,178,501.  So by showing us that he made P2.1 million a year, how do you relate that to the point na ang pinapatunayan or dini-disprove or pinu-prove dito  is that mali ang pinayl ng SALN?  Hindi naman pinapatunayan dito kung sapat ang kinita ng Chief Justice kasi sinabi na natin e.  Pag ill-gotten wealth, hindi kayo pwedeng magpresenta ng ebidensya.  So even assuming the Chief Justice made 7, 10, 15 million this year or last year or the years before, hindi yun yong point as of now.  Ang point as of now is, nadeklara ba ito sa SALN.  Unless po yong pinapatunayan nyo, yong sinasabi ni Senator Escudero.  That because you believe that the presumption kick in because ang naging total is P31.752 million, there is now a presumption that this is ill-gotten and you are trying to prove that it is not ill-gotten.  So pwede po bang paki klaro lang iyon because if you are just trying to show to the public that hindi corrupt at may pinagkunan, I understand that.  But hindi naman po yon ang issue sa korte.  Now, if you are trying to prove something else sa korte, let me give you this opportunity to clarify it to us and make the connection.  So, what is the connection between his income and his declaration sa SALN?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Well, we will be dealing with that aspect of the litigation, Your Honor, not only through the testimony of this witness, Your Honor, but there are other witnesses in connection that we will be presenting in connection with the additional income SEN. CAYETANO (A.).  So, this is preliminary.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Right., Your Honor.

SEN. CAYETANO (A.).  Okay.  I think that’s the only thing that we wanted clarified.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  In other words, this is not the totality of the evidence for the prosecution in order to establish the non-culpability of the honourable Chief Justice, Your Honor.

SEN. CAYETANO (A.).  So, this is just step 1.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Correct, Your Honor.

SEN. CAYETANO (A.).  But, you agree with us that the issue here is the filing or non-filing of the SALN and the accuracy of the SALN.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Well, I do not think the issue will deal on the filing or non-filing, Your Honor, because that is admitted by the evidence of both parties.  You will recall, if Your Honor, please, you will recall that even at the start of the presentation of the evidence, the representative of the Supreme Court who brought those documents here have them marked at instance of the prosecution, and they are all the SALNs, Your Honor, covering period 2002 to 2010, Your Honor, and we also adopted it …

CAYETANO (A.).  Yes.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  … as our own evidence in order to show that it is not true that there was no compliance with the requirement of preparation and filing.

Now,—Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. CAYETANO (A.).  You are talking about the physical filing on the presence of the SALN which we all admit …

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Correct, Your Honor.

SEN. CAYETANO (A.).  … is the—I termed it as an issue, filing and non-filing, because if my memory serves me right, ang paliwanag po ng prosecution, pag hindi accurate yung filing or may mga falsities, it is tantamount to non-filing.  That’s why I’m not ready to make a decision on that and I know the defense is saying that that is not the case.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Correct.

SEN. CAYETANO (A.).  And you read the law and 6713 and the implementing rules on that day na diniscuss natin.  I just wanted na ibalik po yung tanong ni Senator Trillanes to make sure na ang pinag-uusapan po natin dito, hindi issue whether not corrupt si CJ or whether yung pera ay galing sa masama o mabuti.  Ang pinag-uusapan ditto, whether or not yung SALN niya ay finayl at na-declare ba o hindi, or may paliwanag ba, in layman’s term, Mr. Counsel.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Opo.

SEN. CAYETANO (A.).  I’m satisfied with that.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Yun po ang aming tatangkaing patunayan sa mga darating pang mga testigo at ebidensiya ng defense, Your Honor.  As of this moment, we are not—I have to confess, Your Honor, and very candidly at that, that we are not yet prepared to jump into conclusions, Your Honor, unless our basic evidence are already on record.

SEN. CAYETANO (A.).  I will accept that.  I just wanted to be fair to both sides …

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Yes.

SEN. CAYETANO (A.).  … dahil unfair naman sa prosecution kung sila hindi pwedeng adduce ng evidence to prove ill-gotten wealth, and then ang defense ay pwede naming mag-adduce ng evidence to prove na hindi siya ill-gotten.  But, tama din naman po si Senator Escudero that as long as the amounts are over what is declared or what his income—what is his legitimate income, there is a presumption that kicks in, and of course, we will give you all the latitude to dispute that presumption.  But, as you said awhile ago, you do not even believe that the presumption already applies or that we should presume that the amounts named in the bank accounts is over and above.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  If Your Honor, please, I regret very much to not be able to give my conformity to such kind of an articulation, Your Honor.  We are of the different persuasion and we will prove to this honourable court that even assuming there is discrepancy or quite a difference in the making of the return which may be considered inaccurate, Your Honor, that is not a ground in our thinking as a ground for impeachment, Your Honor.

SEN. CAYETANO (A.).  Yes.  We simply don’t want to confuse the issues but I’m more than satisfied and I thank you, counsel, for clarifying that.  Thank you, Mr. Senate President.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Thank you also.

SEN. SOTTO.  Mr. President, may we recognize Senator Lacson before …

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  The Gentleman from Cavite is recognized.  (Gavel)

SEN. LACSON.  Thank you, Mr. Presiding Officer.

Ipahintulot po ninyo na basahin ko lang yung Konstitusyon, yung napatungkol ditto sa ating pinag-uusapan sa Article XI, Section 17.  Ang sinasabi po nito:  “A public officer or employee shall, upon assumption of office and as often thereafter as may be required by law, submit a declaration under oath of his assets, liabilities, and net worth.”

Meron pa pong karugtong, hihinto na lang po muna ako don.

And understanding ko po, pag sinabing submit a declaration under oath, ang understanding ko po ay dapat totoo, tapat at eksakto.  Hindi po ba?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Tama po sapagka’t kung hindi ganon, walang katuturan, walang kahulugan ang provision na yan.

SEN. LACSON.  Kaya ko po binasa …

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Kung kahit ano finayl ay okay na, e bale wala po yan sa magaspang na pangungusap.

SEN. LACSON.  Kaya ko po binasa para magabayan na rin kayo sa pagpiprisinta ng inyong depensa ng sa ganoon, hindi tayo wayward.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Salamat po.

SEN. LACSON.  Gusto rin po naming marinig kung paano ipapaliwanag ng nasasakdal o iyong impeached official, in this case, iyong ating Chief Magistrate, dahil alam niyo po, sa mga naiprisinta ng prosekusyon, tatatpatin ko kayo, nagkaroon po ng doubt, in my mind, at least, na mayroon talagang basehan iyong impeachment complaint.  Ngayon, ito po ay nakabitin sa—nakabitin po doon dahil gusto kong margining ang paliwanag at pwede pong mawala iyong doubt in my mind kung maganda ang inyong paliwanag o paliwanag ng inyong kliyente.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Tama po iyon.  Salamat po sa inyong pagbibigay paalala sa amin, pero kung inyo pong mamarapatin, ipahintulot ninyong sabihin ko, hindi naman si Justice Cuevas ang ebidensya, Your Honor.

SEN. LACSON.  Hindi nga po.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  We have to call for witnesses.  We have to present documentary evidence to prove our point, Your Honor. 

SEN. LACSON.  Tama po.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Irrespective of what Justice Cuevas may be articulating here or postulating, that is nothing.

SEN. LACSON.  Tama po iyon.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  If it did no consist of evidence, Your Honor.

SEN. LACSON.  Pero kayo po ang lead counsel, kaya sabi ko, bayaan niyong magabayan ko kayo para tama iyong ating pinag-uusapan dito.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Salamat po.

SEN. LACSON.  Salamat po.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Thank you.  Thank you.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  So, proceed.

SEN.SOTTO.  Senator Estrada, Mr. President, the President Pro-Tempore.

SEN. ESTRADA.  Thank you, Mr. President.  Isang katanungan lang po doon sa lead prosecutor ng prosecution panel.

Isang katanungan lang, Congressman Tupas, ibabalik ko lang iyong aking dating tanong noong araw tungkol doon sa mga titulo na allegedly, pagmamay-ari ni Chief Justice Renato Corona.  Iyon pong iprinisinta niyo sa media, iyong 45 titles, ibig sabihin ba ho hindi nyo po sinuri iyong iprinisinta niyo sa media na 45 properties sapagkat lumalabas po ngayon, ayon sa computation ni Senador Escudero na 21 titles minus three because of the parking lot, at iyong pito ay pinatunayan na noong witness kagabi, si Mr. Vicente, e 11 na lang ang dapat patunayan, at iyong lima doon out of the 11 ay inaangkin na ni Chief Justice Corona.  So, anim na lang iyong patutunayan ng depensa.  Ibig bang sabihin, noong iprinisinta niyo iyong sulat ng LRA ay hindi niyo nilinis iyong mga pagmamay-ari ni Chief Justice, basta na lang ibrinodcast niyo sa publiko iyon?  Did you just make it appear that Chier Justice Corona really or truly owns those 45 properties?

REP. TUPAS.  Yes, unang-una, Mahal na Pangulo, hindi anim na properties iyong patutunayan ngayon kasi mayroong 21, at least, 21 properties iyong inoffer.

SEN. ESTRADA.  21 minus three because of the parking lot, as I understand correctly.

REP. TUPAS.  No actually, 24 siya minus three kaya naging 21 siya.

SEN. ESTRADA.  All right.

REP. TUPAS.  Noong nag-request po kami doon sa land registration authority at ang ibinigay sa amin noong araw na iyon ay mayroong 45 properties at may presumption of regularity—ang sa amin po, sa isip namin, in good faith, may presumption of regularity iyong official functions and acts of agencies, especially for Land Registration Authority, na siya po iyong custodian ng records.  At nailagay po namin iyon sa aming motion.  Actually, naalala ko, noong—it was January 13 yata noong nagkaroon kami—nag-submit kami dito sa—this honorable tribunal ng isang motion na attached iyon.  So, pero as we go along, sinuri namin iyon at after naming sinuri, 24 minus three which is 21 properties ang ini-offer namin during the offer of documentary evidence.

Iyon po ang nangyari, Ginoong Pangulo.

SEN. ESTRADA.  So, inaamin niyo po ngayon, Congressman Tupas, na hindi po 45 properties ang pagmamay-ari ni Chief Justice.

REP. TUPAS.  Hindi po 45.

SEN. ESTRADA.  21 or even less.

REP. TUPAS.  21 po kasi iyon po ang offer of evidence po namin sa aming exhibits po, 21 titles.

SEN. ESTRADA.  Thank you.

REP. TUPAS.  Thank you po.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Unang-una, 45, naging 24, ngayon 21 na lang, hindi ba?

REP. TUPAS.  21 titles po.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  May numero noon na 24.

REP. TUPAS.  Yes, sir.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Ano ang nabawas doon sa 24?

REP. TUPAS.  Iyong 24 po, Ginoong Pangulo, that included doon iyong tatlong parking lots doon sa Burgundy.  Pero iyong nakita namin, wala palang separate na titulo iyong parking lots na iyon kasi kasama lang doon sa condominium certificate of title.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Ngayon, itong sa 21, may kasama pa rin na parking lot.

REP. TUPAS.  Tatlo po.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Tatlo pa rin.

REP. TUPAS.  Yes.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Tatlo doon sa Burgundy.

REP. TUPAS.  Hindi po.  Tatlo po sa Belagio na lang.  Iyong Burgundy di na namin kinount iyon kasi iyong Burgundy kasama na po iyon sa certificate of title.  Isang titulo lang sa Burgundy.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  O sige.

REP. TUPAS.  Salamat po.

SEN. SOTTO.  Mr. Presidient, Senator Guingona wants to be recognized.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  The Gentleman from Bukidnon, T.J. Guingona.

SEN. GUINGONA.  Thank you, Mr. President.  Justice Cuevas, may tanong lang ako ano.  Assuming we have 21 properties that the prosecution has presented, and assuming that you can explain everything, fine then.  As far as the properties are concerned, that is fine.  Then for the year let us say 2010, the SALN declaration of the Honorable Chief Justice has an amount of 3.5 in the bank.  P3.5 million po.  But according to the calculations as presented, there is P31 million versus a declared of 3.5, may discrepancy po.  Assuming again, sir, na maipaliwanag din iyon, mai-explain talaga, the thing that I would like to find out then is, how come the dollar account, ano po, hindi po naka-declare dito sa SALN?.  At siguro naman nakalagay sa batas, hindi po ba, na one of the exceptions sa dollar account is that the depositor gives his consent, hindi po ba?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  That is correct, Your Honor.

SEN. GUINGONA.   Hindi ba you agreed with Senator Lacson that a SALN has to be accurate ano po, truthful.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  By accurate we do not mean centavo per centavo, peso per peso, Your Honor.  Because there are cases, on the point already, wherein the exact amount do not tally and yet it was considered filed through mere inadvertence.  Simple negligence, it is not a ground for administrative case, Your Honor.  Now, may go a little further, if you will allow me, Your Honor.

SEN. GUINGONA.  Please do, sir.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Now, there is no dispute as to several parcels of properties, Your Honor.  Even in our answer, we categorically admitted for instance these Belagio, Makati Boni Ridge, Burgundy.  These are admitted.  So, there is a no controversy to this.  We have stated it in our SALN, Your Honor.  It is not merely stated in there.  When we filed our answer, we made a categorical admission that these properties belong to the honourable Chief Justice Corona.  Now, insofar as the dollar deposit is concerned, we have not gone that far, Your Honor, because there is no necessity for revelation of this because this is covered by the exemption provided for under the Foreign Deposit Account, Your Honor.

SEN. GUINGONA.  Agreed, but there is no indication of its existence in the SALN.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Well, anyway, I think we should wait for the reception of evidence coming from the defense before we discuss these things.

SEN. GUINGONA.  Very well, Mr. President.  We will await the presentation.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Thank you, Your Honor.

SEN. SOTTO.  Mr. President, if we are finished with the witness …

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  May I just make a short statement.  Your Honor, earlier we had closed and terminated my cross-examination.  I made a mistake.  I was reminded by my co-counsel that we had requested for two batches of documents.  May we be allowed to …

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  You are asking permission for …

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Additional cross.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  To reopen the cross-examination?

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  If necessary, Your Honor, when we see the documents tomorrow.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    Okay.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Thank you.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  May we know what those documents are, Your Honor?  Because this is highly a sensitive issue already.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    There were, indeed, the record will show that they were asking for a document.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Yes, sir.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    I remember this.  What were those documents that you …

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  About four or five samples of the certification she was mentioning.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    Yes.  Yes.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  And also these Alpha Lists from 2006 to 2011.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    That is correct. So, granted.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Thank you, Your Honor.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Thank you, Your Honor.  We submit.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    Alright. Next witness.

SEN. SOTTO. We are finished with the witness.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  So, we cannot close the testimony of the witness, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    Yes.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Because he will have to appear tomorrow in connection with …

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    Subject to redirect by the …

SEN. SOTTO. Prosecution.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  No.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  By the defense, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    By the defense.  Alright.

SEN. SOTTO.  Senator Lacson wants to be recognized, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Senator …

SEN. LACSON.  Bago po nating pahintulutang umalis iyong testigo, nakita na po ba iyong nawawalang dokumento?  Baka may ma-contempt na naman dito.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    Aling dokumento, iyong sulat?

JUSTICE CUEVAS. Iyon pong sulat na acknowledgment receipt by Mrs. Corona stating to the effect that she received seven TCTs, covering the seven parcels, the deed of sale, which was—which I showed to counsel, Atty. Justiniano, during the cross-examination being conducted by him, Your Honor.  In fact—ano bang tawag doon?  The video will show, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.     Was that written acknowledgment attached to the certificate of titles?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  No, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    They were separate—it was a separate.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Separate, Your Honor, two documents. First, acknowledgment receipt by Mrs. Corona and secondly, the deed of sale of the property belonging to Mirriam Corona, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    Was that the deed of sale returned?

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  It was not returned, Your Honor.  The two documents have not been returned.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    Well, you better explain this.

REP. AGABAS. Yes. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. President, we don’t know about it. Nevertheless, we were trying our best to look for it. Yesterday, Atty. Justiniano is also trying to recall, just in case, he was able to receive it yesterday, so, if it was so that he received it yesterday, so, we were trying to trace where it is—where is that document you are asking us now. Because, yesterday, as you can see, well, if we have some cameras here, we have lots of paper here in this table yesterday. So, unluckily, sir, I used a car other than the car I use now. So, requested, just in case, my staff was able to get it yesterday because one of our staff was the one who took those papers and the documents yesterday, so, I requested that the car come here, so, it is now on its way. We were trying to trace out if it was included in those papers.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  But be sure the car will not get loss.

REP. AGABAS.  Of course, it will not. Okay. So, we don’t know the kind of paper you are asking us, nevertheless, you gave us an idea, so, later on, we will try to look into it.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    Wait a minute. This is a matter between  the defense counsel and the prosecution. The court had nothing to do with the interchange of a document or the transfer of document to one panel and its return. So,

REP. AGABAS.  Yes. Mr. President, we already asked Atty. Justiniano what’s that and he did not even mark it yesterday, so with the defense, they did not mark that kind of paper, that document.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Yes, we were not able to mark it yet because it was in the process of identification. And when Atty. Justiniano, our colleague, made mentioned about it, he asked that he be allowed to go over it. So, I gave it to him and the video will show that.

REP. AGABAS.  Mr. Chairman, they already finished the direct during that time. Atty. Justiniano …

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  He was cross-examining.

REP. AGABAS. … he was in his cross-examination. So, we will try our best, Mr. President to look for it.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    I remember that there was a request—indeed, there was a request from Atty. Justiniano to look at the, what do you call this, the copies of the TCTs covering the seven parcels in the name of  Cristina Corona that were sold to Mr. Vicente Then, later on, the sale of another parcel of 1,700 square meters owned by Miriam Roco cropped up including the deed of sale and that was also, I think, shown to the prosecution lawyers by the defense.  The Chair distinctly remember this scene, but the return I did not notice that anymore.

SEN. RECTO.  Mr. President.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Yes.

SEN. RECTO.  As you correctly stated, this is a matter for the prosecution and the defense.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Yes.

SEN. RECTO. It is not a document in the possession of the court.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Yes.

SEN. RECTO.  This is between the two of them, so, I believe, Mr. President, let the two parties settle that among themselves rather than, Mr. President, himself, trying to figure out what this was.  This is between the two parties not with the court.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  We have tried our level best, Your Honor, and with all humility, we should not have burden the court, Your Honor, had there been no refusal.  Kasi walang ganito, and so and so, where else are we going to go?  We cannot institute a separate civil action in connection…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  That is why the court is trying to appeal to both sides to thresh this out.  You know, we are all professionals here.  I am not casting any doubt on the integrity of one or the other.   But the fact is, certain documents are missing.  So, indeed, the presiding officer notice and remembers the transfer of this documents from the side of the defense to the prosecution panel in the course of the examination of Mr. Vicente, the witness.  So, somewhere along the way, these two documents were missing, and so the two sides must endeavour to look for these documents.

REP. AGABAS.  We will do it, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Because they are material evidence in this case.

REP. AGABAS.  Yes, Your Honor, I would like to manifest, Your Honor, that this Representation, I don’t have any idea with respect to what the defense cousel is saying.  Nevertheless, we just learned about it, this Representation, when you make a manifestation awhile ago, the defense counsel.  Nevertheless, we will confer with them, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Okay.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Thank you, thank you, Madam

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.   Now, proceed. Next witness.  The witness is discharged, the defense may now present its next witness if you have any witness.

SEN. SOTTO.   The witness is discharged temporarily, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Yes, temporarily.  Come back tomorrow at two o’clock.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  We request, Your Honor, for one minute break, we will call the witness, the witness is in our room.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  All right, trial is suspended for one minute.

It was 5:28 p.m.

RESUMPTION OF HEARING

At 5:35 p.m., the hearing was resumed.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Call your witness.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Your Honor, please, we are calling Miss Irene GUEVARA as our next witness, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Swear the witness.

THE SECRETARY.  Madam Witness, please raise your hand.

Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth in this impeachment proceeding?

MISS GUEVARA..  Yes, Your Honor.

THE SECRETARY.  So help you God.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  May we request, Your Honor, that Atty. Joel Bodegon of the Defense panel be recognized and allowed to conduct the direct examination of the witness, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Atty. Joel Bodegon has the floor.

JUSTICE CUEVAS.  Thank you, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Proceed.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Thank you, Your Honor.

We present this witness for the purpose of—Well, she will testify, Your Honor, on her employment with the Senate Electoral Tribunal, the composition and function of the Tribunal, the membership of the respondent, Chief Justice Renato Corona, in the Tribunal, and the allowances and per diems that he received during the period that he was a member of the Tribunal.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  I think the composition of the Electoral Tribunal, being a part of this Senate is within its judicial notice.  So, just establish the membership of the Chief Justice in that Tribunal.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Proceed.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Miss Guevara, can you kindly state your name and other personal circumstances.

MISS GUEVARA.  I’m Atty. Irene R. Guevara, of legal age and a resident of Angono, Rizal.  I’m presently employed with the Senate Electoral Tribunal as Secretary of the Tribunal.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Thank you.  With the permission of the honourable court.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Yes, please.  Go ahead.

ATTY. BODEGON.  You stated that you are an attorney.  When did you become a lawyer.

MISS GUEVARA.  In 1981.

ATTY. BODEGON.  From what school did you attend your …

MISS GUEVARA.  From the Ateneo de Manila University.

ATTY. BODEGON.  And when did you pass the bar?

MISS GUEVARA.  I took the 1981 Bar Examinations …

ATTY. BODEGON.  And …

MISS GUEVARA.  … and passed it.

ATTY. BODEGON.  And you passed it?

MISS GUEVARA.  Yes.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Did you place in the top 10?

MISS GUEVARA.  Luckily I did.  I was No. 1 in the 1981 Bar Examinations.  (Applause)  Thank you.

ATTY. BODEGON.  After you topped the Bar Examination in 1981, what employment did you obtain?

MISS GUEVARA.  I worked as a staff member of the Office of then Associate Justice Venicio Escolin who was then my—who was my professor at the Ateneo, and after the 1986 revolution, I was taken on by Chief Justice (inaudible).  Then Associate Justice Marcelo B. Fernan and continued in his office when he became Chief Justice, and after hereon, for the vice presidency, I transferred to the Office of Chief Justice Andres Narvasa.  And after that, I was appointed Deputy Assistant Chief Attorney of the Supreme Court until I transferred to the Senate Electoral Tribunal in 1995.

ATTY. BODEGON.  And, your having transferred to the Senate Electoral Tribunal has been continuously until the present?

MISS GUEVARA.  Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. BODEGON.  And what is your present position with the Tribunal?

MISS GUEVARA.  I am the Secretary of the Tribunal.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Since when have you been Secretary of the Tribunal?

MISS GUEVARA.  Since September 1995.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Until the present?

MISS GUEVARA.  Until the present time.

ATTY. BODEGON.  As Secretary of the Tribunal, would kindly inform the honourable court what your duties are?

MS. GUEVARRA.  As secretary of the tribunal, I am the head of the secretariat.  I oversee the day-to-day operation of the different services in the secretariat.  I also exercise general supervision over the services, the offices and I keep records of the proceedings of the tribunal.  Our function is a kin to the clerk of court of a regular court of justice because we are quasi-judicial office.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Thank you.  Now, in the course of the performance of your duties as secretary of the tribunal, did you come to know the respondent, Chief Justice Renato C. Corona?

MS. GUEVARRA.  Yes, Your Honor, he became member of the Senate Electoral Tribunal, and he was also my professor in the Ateneo Law School.

ATTY. BODEGON.  How was he as a professor of law?

MS. GUEVARRA.  Is that relevant?

ATTY. BODEGON.  If you care to answer.

MS. GUEVARRA.  I’d rather not if I will be excused.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Anyway, thank you.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  By the way, what courses did you take under the Chief Justice?

MS. GUEVARRA.  Only one subject, this is private international law in the fourth year.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Conflicts of law.

MS. GUEVARRA.  Yes, Sir, Mr. Senate President.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Okay.  Would you kindly inform the honorable court the allowances and per diems that the members of the tribunal receive?

MS. GUEVARRA.  Yes.  As a member of the tribunal, one receives a monthly—may I just wait for my—I actually wrote it down because, you know, these are figures, and as lawyers would say, we are not really good at figures.

So, they have a monthly expense allowance or per diem in the amount of P20,000 per month; extraordinary and miscellaneous expense in the amount of P19,166.67 a month; and additional allowable expenses of P82,000 per month, or a total of P121,166.67 monthly.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Per member of the tribunal.

MS. GUEVARRA.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  How many members are there?

ATTY. BODEGON.  There are nine members.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Six Senators and three …

MS. GUEVARRA.  Three Justices …

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  … Justices.

MS. GUEVARRA.  … of the Supreme Court.

ATTY. BODEGON.  You mentioned—may I continue, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Yes, please.

ATTY. BODEGON.  You mentioned that Chief Justice—the respondent, Chief Justice Corona became part of the tribunal.

MS. GUEVARRA.  Yes.

ATTY. BODEGON.  What positions did he occupy?

MS. GUEVARRA.  He was designated member of the tribunal.

ATTY. BODEGON.  During what period was this?

MS. GUEVARRA.  This is from February 28, 2008 to April 30, 2009.

ATTY. BODEGON.  How long was that?

MS. GUEVARRA.  A period of 14 months.

ATTY. BODEGON.  14 months, and during that period, how much allowances and per diems did he receive?

MS. GUEVARRA.  In the 14 months that the Chief Justice was a member of the tribunal, he received a total amount of P1,696,333.38.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Now, you were subpoenaed by the honorable court to bring with you document evidencing the allowances, per diems and reimbursements that the respondent, Chief Justice Renato C. Corona received from the tribunal during the period that he has been part of it.

MS. GUEVARRA.  Yes.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Do you have that document with you?

MS. GUEVARRA.  I have certification issued by the office dated January 5, 2012, this was signed by me.

ATTY. BODEGON.  If, Your Honor, please, we tried to have this pre-marked this afternoon, unfortunately, there was no one from the clerk of court to allow us to …

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Mark it now.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Now, anyway—so, we request that the certification produced by the witness be marked as our Exhibit 166, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Mark it accordingly.

ATTY. BODEGON.  In what capacity was …

MS. GUEVARRA.  I signed the certification as the secretary of the tribunal.  This was based on the records kept by the accounting service accomplished in the ordinary course of business of the Tribunal.

ATTY. BODEGON.  May I invite your attention, kindly show her the document, to the signature above the typewritten name Atty Irene R. Guevarra, whose signature is that?

MS. GUEVARRA.  This is my signature, sir.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Incidentally, what positions did the respondent Chief Justice Renato C. Corona occupy with the Tribunal?

MS. GUEVARRA.  At that time, he was the Third Justice Member of the Tribunal.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Was he ever chairman of the tribunal?

MS. GUEVARRA.  No, he did not become chairman of the Senate Electoral Tribunal.  What I know is that he became chairman of the HRET, the House of Representative Electoral Tribunal.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Thank you.  That will be all with the witness, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  All right.  Cross-examination.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Yes, Your Honor.  May we have the document.  With the permission of this honourable Court.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Proceed.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Atty. Guevarra, your certification states that Chief Justice Corona received the amount of P280,000.00 for the period March 2008 to April 2009.

MS. GUEVARRA.  Yes.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Is this correct or should this be P280,000.00.

MS. GUEVARRA.  P280,000.00.  P20,000.00 a month.  Monthly expense allowance/per diem.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  You earlier testified that there were three components of the funds or the allowances and fees which Chief Justice Corona received.  The first was monthly expense.  Is this an allowance or this part of his income?

MS. GUEVERRA.  It is considered an allowance, expense allowance.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, it has to be liquidated.

MS. GUEVARRA.  We have the same procedure adopted by the Supreme Court as earlier explained … which is a certification.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Do you have this certification?

MS. GUEVARRA.  Certification in the payroll, if I may read it.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Yes.

MS. GUEVARRA.  Actually, it is just an acknowledgment of the receipt of the sum, opposite our name as monthly expense allowance incurred in the performance of our duties as members of the Senate Electoral Tribunal for the month of …

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  May I see that document please.

MS. GUEVARRA.  This is unsigned.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  For the record, witness handed to counsel a one-page document which is unsigned, which appears to be just a sample …

MS. GUEVARRA.  Yes, a sample of the payroll.  This is actually the payroll for the month of March, 2008 as a sample.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, according to this certification, the expense was incurred in the performance of their duties as member of the SET, is that correct?

MS. GUEVARRA.  Yes, that is right.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, it is not really income.  It was used by them when they perform their functions, is that correct?

MS. GUEVARRA.  We did not consider it their income, as in fact we did not withhold taxes from it.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Fair enough.  The second item is the EME, miscellaneous expenses.  What does the first E stand for?

MS GUEVARRA.  Extraordinary and miscellaneous expenses.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Is it the same treatment as the month expense?

MS. GUEVARRA.  Yes.  There is also a certification in the payroll that states, this is to certify that the expenditures to be reimbursed without the need of presenting receipts for purposes within the contemplation of Section 25 and other related sections of Republic Act No. 9401 or similar procedures, provisions of the General Appropriations Act are necessary, lawful and correct and were incurred by reason of and/or in the furtherance of the performance of the functions and duties of my position as chairman or member of the Senate Electoral Tribunal.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  May I see that document, please.

ATTY. BODEGON.  May we request, Your Honor, that the two documents now presented by the witness be respectively marked as our Exhs. 167 and 168 for the defense.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Mark them accordingly.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  And so, as with the first item, this is also an expense. It is not part of his income, correct?

MS. GUEVARRA.  Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  And the last entry is what you termed as the additional allowance?

MS. GUEVARRA.  This is the additional allowable expense.  Again, we have the certification. This is to certify that the additional allowable expenses being received herein are necessary, lawful and correct and incurred by reason of and/or in the furtherance of the performance of the functions and duties of my position as chairman or member of the Senate Electoral Tribunal.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  May I see that document again, please.

ATTY. BODEGON.  We request, Your Honor, that the last document read by the witness be marked as our Exh. 169.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Mark it accordingly.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Your Honor, for the prosecution, we are also requesting that the last three documents presented by the witness be marked as Exh. PPPPPPPPPP, QQQQQQQQQQ, RRRRRRRRRR.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Mark them accordingly.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Thank you.  So, Atty. Guevarra, again, this is not part of his income, is that correct?

MS. GUEVARRA.  Insofar as the SET is concerned, these two items are reimbursements for expense, the chairman or the member should have spent them for his office …

ATTY. HERNANDEZ. In relation to his duties …

MS. GUEVARRA.  … in relation to his duties as …

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  … as a member of …

MS. GUEVARRA. … as a member of the tribunal.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  So, in other words, he can’t use these expenses or these allowances for his personal use, is that correct?

MS. GUEVARRA.  Well, under the law, that should be the case.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ. We have nothing further, Your Honor.

ATTY. BODEGON.  No redirect, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  No more question from the cross?

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  No more questions, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    How about redirect?

ATTY. BODEGON.  No redirect, Your Honor.

SEN. SOTTO.  Mr. President.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Yes.  The Majority Floor Leader.

SEN. SOTTO. May we recognize Senator Pimentel.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    The Gentleman from Misamis Oriental.

SEN. PIMENTEL.  Thank you, Mr. President. Alam ninyo po, I spent four years of my life appearing before the S.E.T., so I have personal knowledge of the professionalism of Atty. Guevarra.

MS. GUEVARRA.  Thank you.

SEN. PIMENTEL.  So, gusto ko lang pong magpasalamat sa inyo publicly, ‘no. Salamat po sa inyong professionalism na pinakita ninyo po sa mga litigants before the tribunal at very objective po si Atty. Guevarra, marunong makipaglaban sa katotohanan, kaya, pwede po nating gawin siyang model, actually, when we decide this particular impeachment case before us. So, salamat po, Atty. Guevarra, for the professionalism which you displayed when you handed my case.  Thank you.

MS. GUEVARRA.  Thank you very much.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    Any one else?

SEN SOTTO.  One last, Mr. President, Senator Recto.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.    The Gentleman from Batangas,  Senator Recto.

SEN. RECTO.  Iyong nabanggit ninyong allowances, are they under the PS column or MOOE column.

MS. GUEVARRA. The per diem, ah, the monthly expense allowance per diem, is under the PS, which has a budget for that.

SEN. RECTO.  Magkano iyon?

MS. GUEVARRA. P20,000.00 a month po.

SEN. RECTO. So, that means, PES for compensation for the work that you do?

MS. GUEVARRA.  Opo and the other are …

SEN. RECTO.  Pwede mong i-take home iyon. Pwede mong i-take home iyon, PS iyon eh?

MS. GUEVARRA.  Yes.

SEN. RECTO.  Okay. And the others are MOOE?

MS. GUEVARRA. MOOE.

SEN. RECTO.  Ibig sabihin kailangan mong gastusin?

MS. GUEVARRA.  Yes.

SEN. RECTO.  Para maliwanag.

MS. GUEVARRA. Opo.

SEN. RECTO. Thank you.

THE PRERSIDING OFFICER.  Majority Floor Leader.

SEN. SOTTO.  We may discharge the witness, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  The distinguished-lady witness is discharged.

MS. GUEVARRA.  Thank you very much.

SEN. SOTTO.  If the prosecution counsel or the defense counsel would ask one more question about the allowances of the Senate, I will be constrained to cite them for contempt.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Another witness.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Yes, Your Honor, may we call on Atty. Girlie Salagda of the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.   The witness mentioned may now enter the Chamber and take the witness stand and take an oath and testify.

ATTY. BODEGON.  May we request for one minute break, Your Honor, for us to fetch the witness.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  That is too long, okay, one minute.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Thank you, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Trial is suspended.

It was 5:55 p.m.

At 5:57 p.m., trial was resumed.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Trial resumed.  Swear the witness.

THE SECRETARY.  Madam Witness, please stand, raise your right hand.  Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in this impeachment proceeding?

ATTY.  SALAGDA.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE SECRETARY.  So, help you God.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.   Atty. Bodegon.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Yes, Your Honor, with the permission of the Honorable Court, we are presenting the witness, Your Honor, to testify on her employment with the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal, the composition and functions of that tribunal…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Can you just stipulate on this, these are very routine matters.

ATTY. BODEGON.  They want to conduct a lengthy cross-examination, Your Honor, we are giving them the opportunity.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.   All right.  Proceed.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  No, Your Honor, we are willing to stipulate, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  What is the pleasure of the defense.  Subject to cross-examination.  Can you stipulate so that we can expedite the proceedings.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Yes Your Honor, we had subpoenaed the witness to produce and testify before the court on the allowances and per diems received by the respondent, Chief Justice Corona, when he was part of the tribunal both as member…

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Of the House of Representatives.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Yes, Your Honor, House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal, both as a member and later as chairman, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  All right, would you accept that?

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  All right.

ATTY. BODEGON.  So, may we request the witness to present the certification that we had subpoenaed to produced.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Just mark the material document that she was required to produced, subject to cross-examination.

ATTY. BODEGON.  May we request that the certification be marked as our Exhibit 170.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Mark it accordingly.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Do you confirm that the signature on that document is yours?

MS. SALARDA.  Yes, sir.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  The prosecution, do you confirm the authenticity of those documents?

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Yes, yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  All right.  Then the authenticity of the documents is not in dispute.  Mark them as exhibits.

ATTY. BODEGON.  There is an attachment to the certification, Your Honor, which is marked 170.  We request that the attachment consisting of two pages be marked as Exhibit 170-A and 170-B.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Mark them accordingly.  Now, witness, what is the total amount of money received by the respondent based on those documents while he was a member of the House Electoral Tribunal?

MS. SALARDA.    May I consult my notes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Yes, proceed.

MS. SALARDA.  During his 21h months as member of the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal, he received a total P2,504,022.92 in allowances, extraordinary miscellaneous expense and per diem and as Chairman of the tribunal, for five months, he received a total of P855,784.93 or a total of P3,359,807.85, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.   That includes for personal services.

MS. SALARDA.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  And for…

MS. SALARDA.  MOOE, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  MOOE.

MS. SALARDA.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  And then what else?

MS. SALARDA.  Allowances, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  All right, allowances.  Is that correct, counsel for the prosecution?

ATTY. BODEGON.  For the defense, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  For the defense.

ATTY. BODEGON.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  All right.

ATTY. BODEGON.  That will be all with the witness, Your Honor, if they are willing.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  You have no further question.

ATTY. BODEGON.  No more, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  All right.  Direct examination is closed.  Now, cross-examination.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Yes, just a few questions, Your Honor.  Among these itemized rows in the document you presented, reimburseable expenses, extraordinary and miscellaneous expense and per diem, which one is personal service, which one is MOOE and which one is allowance?

MS. SALARDA.  The per diem is from the PS or personal service while the additional allowances and the extraordinary miscellaneous expense are from the MOOE, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  And so a certification is necessary for the Chief Justice to claim the extraordinary and miscellaneous expense.  Is that correct?

MS. SALARDA.  Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  No further questions, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  No further questions?  No further cross?  You finish your cross-examination?

ATTY. HERNANDEZ.  Finish, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  All right.  Any question from the members of the court?

SEN. SOTTO.  Mr. President, because of parliamentary courtesy, there is only one question from Senator Estrada.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  The Gentleman from San Juan.

SEN. ESTRADA.  Thank you, Mr. President.  Ano ho ang pangalan ninyo?  Hindi ko nakuha e.

MS. SALARDA.  Your Honor, I’m Atty. Girlie I. Salarda from the HRET.

SEN. ESTRADA.  Saan ka nag-aral ng law?

MS. SALARDA.  From the University of Santo Tomas, Your Honor.

SEN. ESTRADA.  Ah UST.  Hindi Ateneo, UST?  Okay.  Doon sa P2,504,022.92 na tinanggap ni Chief Justice during the span of five months, ito ba ay kasama noong sya ay Chairman na ng HRET?  Am I correct?  Does that include his chairmanship, as the Chairman of the HRET?

MS. SALARDA.  No, Your Honor.  That is only the total when he was a member of the HRET.

SEN. ESTRADA.  Okay.  Ilan members ang Ilan bang members ng HRET?  Kasi sa SET I understand there are three two Justices and six Senators.  Dun sa HRET, ano bang composition ng HRET?

MISS. SALARDA.  HRET is composed of three Justices from the Supreme Court, Your Honor, and six Members of the House of the Representatives.

SEN. ESTRADA.  Only six members and none of them in the prosecution panel are members of the HRET?

MISS. SALARDA.  None, Your Honor.

SEN. ESTRADA.  All right.  Yun bang tinanggap ni Chief Justice during the span of 21 months, yun din ang tinatanggap ng bawa’t myembro ng HRET?

MISS. SALARDA.  Yes, Your Honor.

SEN. ESTRADA.  Ganon din?

MISS. SALARDA.  Opo.

SEN. ESTRADA.  So, that is not taxable?

MISS. SALARDA.  No, Your Honor.

SEN. ESTRADA.  Thank you.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Madam Witness, what years did the Chief Justice serve in the House Electoral Tribunal?

MISS. SALARDA.  Based on our records, Your Honor, he served as member of the House of Representatives from January 2, 2007 to February 27, 2008 and April 30, 2009 to November 5, 2009.  And he served as Chairperson of the Tribunal from November 6, 2009 to May 16, 2010, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  So, how many years would that be?

MISS. SALARDA.  Around three years, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Three years.  He started in?

MISS. SALARDA.  January 2, 2007, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010.

MISS. SALARDA.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  So, four actually years but not actually 48 months?  Because each year must be reflected in the SALN of the Chief Justice, okay?

MISS. SALARDA.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  All right.  So, it will cover four SALNs.

MISS. SALARDA.  Yes, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Okay.

SEN. SOTTO.  Mr. President, we may discharge the witness.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  If there are no further questions from the witness, the witness is discharged.  (Gavel)

SEN. SOTTO.  Mr. President, I have been informed by the defense that the other witnesses will be ready by tomorrow.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  All right.

SEN. SOTTO.  So, with that, may we ask the Sergeant-at-Arms to make an announcement, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  The Sergeant-at-Arms will now make an announcement.

THE SERGEANT-AT-ARMS.  Please all rise.

All persons are commanded to remain in their places until the Senate President and the Senators have left the session hall.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Majority Floor Leader.

ADJOURNMENT OF TRIAL

SEN. SOTTO.  Mr. President, there being no other Business for the Day, I move that we adjourn until two o’clock in the afternoon of Thursday, March 15, 2012.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER.  Is there any objection?  (Silence)  There being none, the trial is hereby adjourned until two o’clock of Thursday, March 15, 2012.  (Gavel)

It was 6:08 p.m.

 

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s