Impeachment against CJ Corona..

[umi001]

Fence-sitter ako. If I were a judge, I might actually vote to acquit.

While I do think Corona has violated the trust of his office, voting for acquital would send a message to the administration that they can't just expect things to roll their way simply because they have the numbers. They have to work for what they want, and do things the right way.

In other words, two wrongs don't make a right.

I agree. I also think that Corona has failed to maintain the impartiality and objectiveness required by his office, but at the same time, proper process needs to be observed. When I hear the prosecution bleat that technicalities should not be allowed to get in the way of justice, I cringe inside - these are not technicalities, but the law of the land, precisely crafted to ensure that due process is observed, the proper allocation of guilt is done, and perhaps most importantly, that each individual and office in government is properly checked and balanced. Without these laws, these "mere technicalities", we are left ripe for the taking by another dictator who will brook no opposition to his plans "for the betterment of the country". If the prosecution is unable to prove their assertions, or the defense is able to introduce evidence explaining the allegations and inconsistencies, then Corona should, rightfully, be acquitted - you cannot go into the impeachment trial of the highest judicial officer of the land haphazardly, unprepared, and just expect things to just go your way, simply because you have the backing of the President.

[Jiggs]

But am not sure about it. Criminal trial daw is differrent to Impeachment trial..no need to prove beyond reasonable doubt ang Impeachment. So just a mere technicalities cant just be grounds for acquital. Ganun nga po ba?

[umi001]

But am not sure about it. Criminal trial daw is differrent to Impeachment trial..no need to prove beyond reasonable doubt ang Impeachment. So just a mere technicalities cant just be grounds for acquital. Ganun nga po ba?

Here's my thinking on this - for me, technicalities are just as important when you're talking about the impeachment of the Chief Justice. What's at stake here isn't just about one man - it is about the balance of power in the government. If, despite a miserable job presenting a faulty case with badly-crafted articles of impeachment, and supposing the defense is able to cast reasonable doubt through evidence presented, the prosecution still gets the conviction, what is to stop Aquino from impeaching the other SC justices, until he has a nice tame Supreme Court? That is why due process, in this particular case, is so important - it makes it difficult for any one man to accrue to much power. Ultimately, these "technicalities", these laws and processes, maintain civilization and prevent anarchy - after all, if you believe that a law isn't worth following because of your own personal convictions, what is to stop another person from doing the same with another law, and so on, until each person is left to just do what he wants, with no thought to what the law prescribes? There has to be an objective code that all will follow - you cannot shortcut justice just because of your convictions and beliefs.

Also, Enrile made a good point when he was admonishing the prosecution - when you are talking about stripping a man of his dignity and honor, of rendering his life's work and effort worthless and tarnishing his name in history - you need to afford that person all the possibilities allowed to defend himself, and you had better be damn sure that your decision is correct - based on what has been presented.

The shame of it is, I truly believe that Corona should be removed from office - I really think he was only appointed to cover GMA when the inevitable cases were filed. However, I believe in following the rule of law even more - and if the prosecution cannot make a strong enough case, with evidence that the defense will be unable to impeach, then Corona should not be convicted.

[niwde11]

Here's my thinking on this - for me, technicalities are just as important when you're talking about the impeachment of the Chief Justice. What's at stake here isn't just about one man - it is about the balance of power in the government. If, despite a miserable job presenting a faulty case with badly-crafted articles of impeachment, and supposing the defense is able to cast reasonable doubt through evidence presented, the prosecution still gets the conviction, what is to stop Aquino from impeaching the other SC justices, until he has a nice tame Supreme Court? That is why due process, in this particular case, is so important - it makes it difficult for any one man to accrue to much power. Ultimately, these "technicalities", these laws and processes, maintain civilization and prevent anarchy - after all, if you believe that a law isn't worth following because of your own personal convictions, what is to stop another person from doing the same with another law, and so on, until each person is left to just do what he wants, with no thought to what the law prescribes? There has to be an objective code that all will follow - you cannot shortcut justice just because of your convictions and beliefs.

Also, Enrile made a good point when he was admonishing the prosecution - when you are talking about stripping a man of his dignity and honor, of rendering his life's work and effort worthless and tarnishing his name in history - you need to afford that person all the possibilities allowed to defend himself, and you had better be damn sure that your decision is correct - based on what has been presented.

The shame of it is, I truly believe that Corona should be removed from office - I really think he was only appointed to cover GMA when the inevitable cases were filed. However, I believe in following the rule of law even more - and if the prosecution cannot make a strong enough case, with evidence that the defense will be unable to impeach, then Corona should not be convicted.

+1000
one of the best post. at sigurado kong majority ng tao ay ito ang kanyang saloobin. *thumbs up*

[tsupermario]

Here's my thinking on this - for me, technicalities are just as important when you're talking about the impeachment of the Chief Justice. What's at stake here isn't just about one man - it is about the balance of power in the government. If, despite a miserable job presenting a faulty case with badly-crafted articles of impeachment, and supposing the defense is able to cast reasonable doubt through evidence presented, the prosecution still gets the conviction, what is to stop Aquino from impeaching the other SC justices, until he has a nice tame Supreme Court? That is why due process, in this particular case, is so important - it makes it difficult for any one man to accrue to much power. Ultimately, these "technicalities", these laws and processes, maintain civilization and prevent anarchy - after all, if you believe that a law isn't worth following because of your own personal convictions, what is to stop another person from doing the same with another law, and so on, until each person is left to just do what he wants, with no thought to what the law prescribes? There has to be an objective code that all will follow - you cannot shortcut justice just because of your convictions and beliefs.

Also, Enrile made a good point when he was admonishing the prosecution - when you are talking about stripping a man of his dignity and honor, of rendering his life's work and effort worthless and tarnishing his name in history - you need to afford that person all the possibilities allowed to defend himself, and you had better be damn sure that your decision is correct - based on what has been presented.

The shame of it is, I truly believe that Corona should be removed from office - I really think he was only appointed to cover GMA when the inevitable cases were filed. However, I believe in following the rule of law even more - and if the prosecution cannot make a strong enough case, with evidence that the defense will be unable to impeach, then Corona should not be convicted.

the impeachment trial is a political process, it is not a criminal trial.

since it is not a criminal trial, proof beyond reasonable doubt does not apply. it is closer to an administrative case where substantial evidence is enough. still it is a political exercise.

due process was observed, cj corona is given the opportunity to face and answer the charges.

in administrative proceedings, technical rules of evidence and procedure are not strictly applied. the concern should be on the weight of evidence rather than its admissibility.

in the end the question should be, is corona fit to continue being the cj of the sc?

[galant E SS]

the impeachment trial is a political process, it is not a criminal trial.

since it is not a criminal trial, proof beyond reasonable doubt does not apply. it is closer to an administrative case where substantial evidence is enough. still it is a political exercise.

due process was observed, cj corona is given the opportunity to face and answer the charges.

in administrative proceedings, technical rules of evidence and procedure are not strictly applied. the concern should be on the weight of evidence rather than its admissibility.

in the end the question should be, is corona fit to continue being the cj of the sc?

yes, i do believe that he's fit enought to be our CJ.

[tsupermario]

yes, i do believe that he's fit enought to be our CJ.

i believe i read somewhere that:

Judges must adhere to the highest tenets of judicial conduct. They must be the embodiment of competence, integrity and independence. A judge’s conduct must be above reproach. Like Caesar’s wife, a judge must not only be pure but above suspicion. A judge’s private as well as official conduct must at all times be free from all appearances of impropriety and be beyond reproach.

A judge should personify judicial integrity and exemplify honest public service. The personal behavior of a judge, both in the performance of official duties and in private life should be above suspicion.

Judges should make sure that their acts are circumspect and do not arouse suspicion in the minds of the public. When they fail to do so, such acts may cast doubt upon their integrity and ultimately the judiciary in general.

etc. etc. etc.

unless we evaluate cj corona by a different standard since he is after all a supreme court justice, a chief justice at that and not a mere trial court judge..

[glenn manikis]

i believe i read somewhere that:

Judges must adhere to the highest tenets of judicial conduct. They must be the embodiment of competence, integrity and independence. A judge’s conduct must be above reproach. Like Caesar’s wife, a judge must not only be pure but above suspicion. A judge’s private as well as official conduct must at all times be free from all appearances of impropriety and be beyond reproach.

A judge should personify judicial integrity and exemplify honest public service. The personal behavior of a judge, both in the performance of official duties and in private life should be above suspicion.

Judges should make sure that their acts are circumspect and do not arouse suspicion in the minds of the public. When they fail to do so, such acts may cast doubt upon their integrity and ultimately the judiciary in general.

etc. etc. etc.

unless we evaluate cj corona by a different standard since he is after all a supreme court justice, a chief justice at that and not a mere trial court judge..

GENERALLY IT applies to all GOVErment institutions sir....

[wowiesy]

i believe i read somewhere that:

Judges must adhere to the highest tenets of judicial conduct. They must be the embodiment of competence, integrity and independence. A judge’s conduct must be above reproach. Like Caesar’s wife, a judge must not only be pure but above suspicion. A judge’s private as well as official conduct must at all times be free from all appearances of impropriety and be beyond reproach.

A judge should personify judicial integrity and exemplify honest public service. The personal behavior of a judge, both in the performance of official duties and in private life should be above suspicion.

Judges should make sure that their acts are circumspect and do not arouse suspicion in the minds of the public. When they fail to do so, such acts may cast doubt upon their integrity and ultimately the judiciary in general.

etc. etc. etc.

unless we evaluate cj corona by a different standard since he is after all a supreme court justice, a chief justice at that and not a mere trial court judge..

I agree in all respects.. but due process should still be accorded...

[wowiesy]

the impeachment trial is a political process, it is not a criminal trial.

since it is not a criminal trial, proof beyond reasonable doubt does not apply. it is closer to an administrative case where substantial evidence is enough. still it is a political exercise.

due process was observed, cj corona is given the opportunity to face and answer the charges.

in administrative proceedings, technical rules of evidence and procedure are not strictly applied. the concern should be on the weight of evidence rather than its admissibility.

in the end the question should be, is corona fit to continue being the cj of the sc?

I agree, ultimate question is if corona fit to continue being CJ... I agree that the OUTCOME of Impeachment is political in nature and not criminal... pero yung PROCESS... I beg to disagree.. the highest standards of procedure should be done.. to ensure that due process is observed...

Nagiging political sya, as a consequence na ang mga gumagawa ng decision (Impeach or Acquit) ay mga politiko (vs judges).