My Google Page Rank

Enrile being set up for ouster

PDFPrintE-mail

LIFE’S INSPIRATIONS: “…Brothers and sisters, if someone is caught in a sin, you who live by the Spirit should restore that person gently. But watch yourselves, or you also maybe tempted…” (Galatians 6:1, the Holy Bible).


ENRILE BEING SET UP FOR OUSTER: Lead prosecutor and Iloilo Rep. Niel Tupas’s request for Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile to be more “flexible” in allowing the prosecution to present its evidence in the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona proves just one thing: our congressmen and their private lawyers are finding it hard to support their charges against Corona.

I mean, any lawyer with just even a bit of trial practice should have no problem proving the accusations of his client, if those accusations are true and supported by the evidence. Problems arise when the accusations are merely fabricated, because no amount of testimonial or other evidence can be presented to prove a false allegation.

But, you know what I think of the prosecution’s request for Enrile to be more flexible? I guess it is not really a request for more leniency, as Enrile is already very lenient with the prosecution. I feel that those who are after Corona’s head are starting to realize they cannot twist Enrile to their side, so he is now being set up for an inhibition and ouster as Senate president, and I can see that Enrile knows this plan against him, too.

PROSECUTION UNPREPARED, SCOLDED BY MIRIAM: Of course, it did not help the prosecution any that Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago, “the lady from Iloilo”, finally made an appearance in the impeachment trial on its fifth day last Tuesday, January 24, 2012.

With Miriam’s participation, the prosecution’s lack of preparation and readiness all the more became apparent, considering that Tupas could not even clearly say how many witnesses his team intends to present, or how many pieces of documentary evidence the prosecutors are going to offer against Corona.

Tupas’ comparable lack of trial practice and lack of litigation experience came to the fore with more force when lead defense counsel, former Supreme Court Justice Serafin Cuevas, sounded categorical and definite with the number of Corona’s witnesses as well as with his documentary exhibits, upon the sudden and surprise inquiry from Santiago.

Santiago and, later, Enrile were both right: when the impeachment complaint was signed by 188 congressmen and transmitted to the Senate in a flash, the impression was that every piece of evidence and every witness with a condemnatory testimony against the chief justice have all been marshaled and readied.

With Tupas’ performance last Tuesday, the public cannot be blamed if they will think that the Corona impeachment was just hurriedly and hastily resorted to, for one reason or another.

DEFENSE ACCUSES PROSECUTION OF “MOB RULE”: I am waiting for the prosecution in the impeachment trial, and their distinguished spokesmen as well, to answer claims by Tranquil Salvador III and Karen Jimeno, defense counsels, that Tupas’s request for “flexibility” is actually a request to allow “mob rule” to govern the impeachment trial. Mob rule in the impeachment of Corona? Tupas should answer this.

By Atty. Batas Mauricio




Related news items:
Newer news items:
Older news items: