3L\.

epublic of tbe
of tbe
I
:
,
,
- I,>
., ,,,
'17 fEB -6 mo :22
SITTING AS THE COURT ',:
IN THE MATTER OF THE
IMPEACHMENT OF
RENATO C. CORONA AS
CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE
SUPREME COURT OF THE
PHILIPPINES.
REPRESENTATIVES NIEL
C. TUPAS, JR., JOSEPH
EMILIO A. ABAYA,
LORENZO R. TANADA III,
REYNALDO V. UMALI,
ARLENE J. BAG-AO, et al.
,
Case; No. 002-2011
!
x ............................ - ..................................... --................ ----................................. --................. ----........ -----.. J;-x
I
MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA
I
Chief Justice Renato C. Corona ("CJ Corona"), by colunsel, and as a measure of
!
extreme caution dictated by the unusual circumstances of FS case, without waiving
,
his right to file the appropriate legal remedy to question, others, the legality of
,
these proceedings, respectfully states:
!
1. This Honorable Court's Subpoena Duces Tecum!Ad Testificandum dated 17
!
I
January 2012 to Commissioner Kim Jacinto Henares ("Cqmmissioner Henares") of
i
i
the Bureau of Internal Revenue (the "Subpoena') directed lier to bring and testify on
,
Motion to Quash Subpoena
Page 1 0/6
I
the Annual Income Tax Returns, Certificates of InJome Tax Withheld on
!
Compensation, Certificates of Income Payments not SUbidcted to Withholding Tax,
I
and Certificates of Creditable Tax Withheld at Source of C] Corona, Mrs. Cristina R.
I
Corona, Maria Carla R. Corona-Castillo, Constantino TJ Castillo III, Francis R.
I
Corona and Maria Charina R. Corona, before this Honorablf Court.
2. Rule 128, Section 3 of the Rules of Court srates that "(e)vidence is
!
admissible when it is relevant to the issue and is not I excluded by the law or
these rules."

As the record of this case shows, q Coronk has raised a continuing
I
3.
i
I
objection to Complainants' presentation of evidence on supposed acquisition of
!
wealth, and alleged acts of graft and corruption, on the grtnd that such charges are
beyond the scope of Article II of the Impeachment Compldint. Furthermore, it is C]
I
Corona's position that the continuous presentation of irrelevant and immaterial
I
evidence, which are not even based on ultimate facts, woul4 violate his constitutional
i
right to due process and to be properly informed of the chaJges against him.
I
4. A thorough examination of the Subpoena slh.ows that it also directs
i
i
Commissioner Henares to bring the Income Tax Retu:t:rs (['IRs) and other tax
certificates of the children and son-in-law of CJ Corona, are not even named in
the Verified Complaint. I
I
5. The presentation of the ITRs and tax of the Corona children
i
should not be allowed for being without basis, and immaterial to these
I
Motion to Quash Subpoena
Page2of6
p'o_. Arock II of 'he Compl'''', writt= by m=ly ch""",
C] Corona with the following: I
I
RESPONDENT COMMITTED VIOLATION OF
THE CONSTITUTION AND/OR BETRAYED THE PUBLIC
TRUST WHEN HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE TO tHE PUBLIC HIS
STATEMENT OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES AND NET WORTH AS
,
REQUIRED UNDER SEC. 17, ART. XI i OF THE 1987
CONSTITUTION. I
6. It cannot be d.enied. that CJ Corona is befng accused only of his
I
alleged failure to disclose to the public his Statement 1f Assets, Liabilities and
Net Worth (SALN), no more, no less.
7. The testimony of Commissioner Henares I on the ITRs and tax
I
certificates of the Corona children, as well as the presentation thereof, are therefore
irrelevant and innnaterial to the issue of whether or noJ CJ Corona failed to his
i
I
I
disclose his SALN to the public.
8. Furthermore, it should also be stressed that the properties and income
of the other individuals have no bearing whatsoever to C] Jorona's SALN. Section 8
!
of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 6713, otherwise known as "Co4e of Conduct and Ethical
I
Standards for Public Officials and Employees" categorically
I
i
Statements and Disclosure. - Public officials and I employees have an
obligation to accomplish and submit declarations und6: oath of, and the
public has the right to know, their assets, liabilities, worth and financial
and business interests including those of their spousesl and of unmarried
children under eighteen (18) yeats of age living in households.
* * *1 I
9. Complainants have not shown whether C] Cotona's children, as listed in
I
the Subpoena, are either unmarried, under eighteen (18) old, or stiI1living in C]
Corona's household. Neither has there been evidence to that C] Corona should
!
1 Emphasis supplied.
Motion to Quash Subpoena
Page 3 016
have enumerated the properties of his children in his SAU'j, as RA. No. 6713 clearly
provides that he does not. I
I
. I
10. Rille 128, Section 4 of the Rilles of Court states:
Relevancy; collateral matters. - Evidence must {ave such a relation
to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or non-existence.
Evidence on collateral matters shall not be allowed, excbpt when it tends in
reasonable degree to establish the probability or imP!1 obability of the fact
ill issue.
11. Evidence is relevant if it establishes directly fr indirectly the existence
or non-existence of the facts in issue.
2
Evidence is :relevanv when it relates directly to
a fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or nolexistence.
3
Relevancy or
'ali f'd' f l' . . J d . d . 1 b
maten ty 0 eVl ence 18 a matter 0 oglc, smce it is etermme SlffiP y Y
ascertaining its logical connection to a fact in issue in thb case.
4
The ITRs of the
I
Respondent's immediate relatives are INADMISSIBLE I AS EVIDENCE. It is
elementary in the Rilles on Evidence that the rights of a cannot be prejudiced by
an act, declaration, or omission of another.
s
The reason for rille is that:
... on a principle of good faith and mutual convJnience, a man's own
acts are binding upon himself, and are evidence agaihst him. So are his
conduct and declarations. Yet it would not only be righHy inconvenient, but
also manifestly unjust, that a man should be bound &y the acts of mere
unauthorized strangers; and if a party ought not to be by the acts of
strangers, neither ought their acts or conduct be used as erdence against him.
6
12. From the foregoing, it is clear that the presenrtion of the ITRs and tax
certificates of the Corona children, and Commissioner testimony thereon
I
should not be allowed. I-Ience, this Honorable Court's J11'ubpoena dated 17 January
2012 shoilld be quashed.
2 Oscar M. Herrera, Remedial Law Vol. V Revised Rules on Evidence, 1999 Edibon, p. 23.
3 Lejano v. People, C.R. No. 176389, December 14, 2010. I
I
4 Cruz-Arevalo v. Querubin-Layosa, A.M. No. R1J-06-2005, July 14, 2006. !
5 This is expressed in Section 28, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court: I
SEC. 28. Admission by third party. - The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or
omission of another, except as hereinafter provided. I
6 Tamargo v. Awingan, C.R. No. 177727, January 19, 2010, citing People l' Vda. De Ramos, 451 Phil. 214,
224-225 (2003). I
Motion to Quash Subpoena
Page 4 0[6
PRAYER
I
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, Chief 1ustice Renato C. Corona
respectfully prays that this Honorable Impeachment 90urt quash the Subpoena
Duces Ad addressed to BIR.
Henares, or m the alternative, Issue an Order prohibitlig her from tesufymg and
presenting evidence on the Annual Income Tax Returrls, Certificates of Income
Tax Withheld on Compensation, Certificates of Incomi Payments not Subjected
to Withholding Tax, and Certificates of 'Creditable TJx Withheld at Source of
I
Maria Carla R. Corona:CasLillo, Constantino T. Castilio III, Francis R. Corona
and Maria Charina R. Corona, for being witholr basis, irrelevant and
I'
immaterial to Article II of the Impeachment Complainti
!
Oth" ,dieG, ju," 0' equiubl, =d" the ,Ju=t=c", '"
prayed for.

Makati for Pasay City, 6 February 2012.
Respectfully Submitted by I
Counsel for Chief ]ustice Renato c.10rona.
I
I
PTR No. 2643183; 1/04/11; Makati City
JOSE M. R III 1!
IBP LRN 02570 August 20, 2001 (Li etime)
Roll of Att?rneys No. 37065 I
MCLE Exel1l;ption No. 1-00017
1
Motion to Quash Subpoent'

,
MANALO )
PTR No. 31745833; 2 January 2012, Makati City
IBP No. 870170; 2 January 2012, Makii City
Roll No. 40950, 12 April 1996
MCLE Compliance No. III-0009471, 26 I pri12010
Copies furnished:
House of Representatives
Batasan Complex
Batasan Hills, Quezon City
\,.
HOUSE PRosECUntN PANEL
,
FU2CEIVl;D
B ~ ~
t>,,,,TE 'J- J, L'<.lM' t:t: 04
I
Senators of the Republic of the Philippines
GSIS Building
Macapagal Highway
Pasay City
"'
,
Motion to Quash Subpoena
Page' of.t;,