The trial: Is it really over?

YESTERDAY, TODAY & TOMORROW
Linggoy Alcuaz
3/5-11/2012



After the events of Tuesday and Wednesday last week at the impeachment court, is it over? Or, are they over?

After the prosecution withdrew last Tuesday, five out of the eight articles of impeachment, Is it over for them?

They claimed that they had presented enough evidence and witnesses to convict Chief Justice Renato Corona in three out of the original eight articles. They made a formal offer of these pieces of evidence last Friday. The defense has until Wednesday to make its objections.

Next week, Monday, the Senate as an impeachment court will hold a very critical caucus. That caucus will determine how liberal or strict it will be in the application of the rules on evidence.

If the senator-judges are as strict as the rules are in criminal cases, the prosecution will be left hanging, high and dry, without any evidence.

If they are as liberal as they can and want to be in the case of a trial that is called and considered “sui generis,” then the defense will have a long and hard task of presenting its own evidence and witnesses to counter the allegations, evidence and witnesses of the prosecution in the three remaining articles of impeachment.

The hullabaloo on Wednesday between Senator-Judge Miriam Defensor Santiago and private prosecutor Atty. Aguirre is a bad portent of things to come in the future for the trial, both for the court as well as the prosecution.

Miriam’s performance and style may serve to strengthen the resolve of the confused and demoralized advocates of impeachment and conviction.

On the other hand, Atty. Aguirre’s arrogance, “kabastusan” and defiance may serve to strengthen the general perception that the prosecution has been a failure.

The worst that can happen at this critical juncture is that the bias of the court and its senator judges may be tipped against the prosecution and for the defense in their appreciation of the admissibility of allegations, evidence and witnesses.

However, from the beginning, the impeachment trial and court have not been allowed to stand alone. First, there was a full month of trial by publicity even before the Impeachment trial proper started on Monday, Jan 16.

When Corona did not imitate Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez and did not resign but chose to undergo trial, a Plan B was planned and prepared for in case of acquittal. Plan B would have been a repeat of “yellow” people power ala Edsa I and II.

In the beginning, it seemed so easy to “Occupy the Supreme Court” and oust CJ Corona, The Executive Branch and the President as Commander-in-Chief command the Armed Forces, the police and most of the civilian bureaucracy.

When Marcos in 1986 and Erap in 2001 were ousted, they had in addition to these, a sizeable mass base among the civilian population.

The Supreme Court and its chief justice never commanded armed forces nor a national police. Its judicial bureaucracy is small and passive.

In better times its popularity is lacklustre. A month ago it seemed that even a midget sized people power could brush aside an acquitted Corona. After all, Taft Ave. is smaller than Edsa. Padre Faura is smaller than Ortigas Ave.

However, a month ago, on Thursday, February 9, things changed dramatically. The SC issued a TRO against the opening of Corona’s foreign currency accounts upon the request of PS Bank.

Simultaneously, the INC staged a 7,000 man mini-rally in support of Corona and the rule of law and filled Padre Faura as it had never been before.

On Monday, February 13, the Senate caucus voted 13-10 to honor the TRO.

That week, news leaked out about a mammoth INC rally to be held at the Luneta on Tuesday, Feb 28. It was originally perceived as an anti-impeachment and anti-P-Noy, pro rule of law and pro-Corona and Gatdula rally.

Malacañang denied on behalf of the INC that it would be a political rally. It was supposed to be a bible and evangelical religious prayer rally.

Whatever it would eventually be perceived, it pre-empted and overshadowed the 26th Edsa Uno anniversary celebrations and rallies. It turns out that the INC is celebrating an anniversary this year.

The gang of conspirators composed of P-Noy, the Liberal Party, “Hayop’ 10 and Evil Society and the left had laid down their plans:

1. Demonize Corona. Alienate and separate him from the rest of the Supreme Court and judiciary.
2. Since the articles of impeachment were irreparably flawed, force and shame Corona into resigning.
3. Transfer the venue of the trial from the court to media, public opinion and the streets.
4. Peak public indignation. Make use of a trigger. Call for “Occupy the Supreme Court.” Mobilize big crowds.
5. Force and shame Corona to resign. If he does not, convince the Supreme Court to do a “constructive resignation” on Corona. If it does not, declare a revolutionary government and convene an appointed constitutional commission.

The best time to climax the above would have been during the 26th Edsa Uno anniversary celebrations.

Unfortunately, the timing for Plan B had peaked much earlier and was in quick decline during the whole month of February. Instead, a counter Plan C was brewing and percolating.

However, the maestro, presiding officer Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile prevented both prosecution and defense from walking out of his venue. He deprived them of any triggers within then trial. He counter pre-empted the trial publicity that had previously pre-empted the trial proper.

When we first used the term Plan C at the Balitaan sa Rembrandt on Friday, February 15, one of the guests/resource persons proclaimed that a Plan D would overshadow Plans A, B and C.

We were tempted to accept that possibility considering that people power had entered a stalemate. C had cancelled out B. Whether the vice versa of that is also true, we still cannot say.

We have not fully perceived and understood the new realities created by the mammoth INC Rally last Tuesday. That could be as important a game changer as Edsa Uno …