sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/february2012/notice.pdf

sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/february2012/notice.pdf

CJ CORONA IMPEACHMENT

“In Re: Production of Court Records and Documents and the
Attendance of Court officials and employees as witnesses under the
subpoenas of February 10, 2012 and the various letters for the
Impeachment Prosecution Panel dated January 19 and 25, 2012.

Decretal of the resolution of the Supreme Court issued on Feb. 14, 2012.
x----------------------------------------------------------------------x


"x x x.

WHEREFORE, on the basis of the above-cited laws, rules,
jurisprudence and principles, the Court resolves the matter of the House
Impeachment Panel’s letters through as follows:

A. 1. On the letters dated January 19 and 25, 2012 sent in behalf of
the House Impeachment Panel, the Court cannot grant the
requested examination of the FASAP v. PAL38 rollo as this is
still a pending case and the rollo contains privileged and
confidential materials. The Court, however, can issue certified
true copies of the Decisions, Orders and Resolutions it issued in
the case and which have been released to the parties, and
certified copies of the parties’ pleadings and the letters of Atty.
Estelito Mendoza.

2. On the letter of January 25, 2012, regarding the examination of
the rollo of Navarro v. Ermita39 (Dinagat case), the Court —
although the Dinagat case is closed and terminated — cannot
grant the requested examination as the rollo contains privileged
and confidential information. The Court, however, can issue
certified true copies of the Decisions, Orders and Resolutions it
issued in the case and which have been released to the parties,
and certified copies of the parties’ pleadings.

3. On the letter of January 25, 2012, regarding the examination of
the rollo of the case of Ma. Merceditas N. Gutierrez v. The

House of Representatives Committee on Justice,40 this is a
closed and terminated case. However, the court cannot still
allow examination of the rollo as it contains materials that are
still covered by privilege or are still considered confidential.
The Court, however, if requested by the Prosecution Panel, can
issue certified true copies of the Decisions, Orders and
Resolutions that are now matters of public record, as well as
certified copies of the parties’ pleadings.

4. On the letter of January 19, 2012 in behalf of the Prosecution
Panel in the case of League of Cities v. COMELEC,41 this is still
a pending case and the Court cannot allow the examination of
the rollo. The Court, if requested by the Prosecution Panel, can
provide certified true copies of its Decisions, Orders and
Resolutions that have been furnished the parties, and certified
copies of the parties’ pleadings.

B. On the subpoena duces tecum et ad testificandum in the FASAP v.
PAL case that is the subject of the subpoena, the case is still pending.
Therefore, all the requested documents cannot be produced as discussed
above.

The witness can consequently provide certified true copies to the
Impeachment Court of the Decisions, Orders and Resolutions furnished to
the parties, as well as certified copies of the parties’ pleadings and the letters
of Atty. Estelito Mendoza.

The Court cannot as well waive the privileges attendant to the
proposed testimony of Clerk of Court Enriqueta E. Vidal and of the other
Court officials and employees on matters covered by privilege and
confidentiality.

The documents directed to be produced by the subpoena duces tecum
in the GMA and Arroyo cases (G.R. Nos. 199034 and 199046) are listed in
the attached Annex “A” hereof, and are resolved in accordance with this
listing. The witness can only testify on the documents or records allowed
under this listing.

C. The Clerk of Court is hereby DIRECTED:

1. to PHOTOCOPY the non-confidential documents and records
requested in the letters of the House Impeachment Panel, if
requested by the Prosecution Panel. She shall as well provide
these certified copies to the Impeachment Court pursuant to the
subpoena duces tecum, but shall exclude therefrom the
documents and records considered as confidential or privileged;

2. to SERVE a copy of this Resolution immediately to the House
Impeachment Panel and to the Impeachment Court;

3. to REPORT to the Court the results of its actions, under (1) and
(2) above, as soon as they are completed and no later than the
deadline imposed by the Impeachment Court.

D. The Court’s Internal Rules and Revision of Rules Committees
shall forthwith meet for the alignment of the above discussed laws, rules and
policies with the Internal Rules of the Supreme Court and the Rules of
Court, and to further discuss these rules and policies to the end that the needs
of transparency can fully meet, and be harmonized with, the requirements of
confidentiality.”

Given by the Supreme Court of the Philippines, this 14th day of
February 2012. JJ. Leonardo-De Castro, Brion, Peralta, Bersamin, Del
Castillo, Abad, Villarama, Jr., Perez, Mendoza and Reyes, concurring;
Notice of Resolution - 28 - February 14, 2012

Presiding Officer Carpio and J. Sereno, concurring under Separate
Opinions; Chief Justice Corona, inhibiting; JJ. Velasco, Jr. and Perlas-
Bernabe, on official leave of absence.”

x x x."
law and justice foundation,law and justice symbol,law justice and morality,law or justice 1988,relationship between law and justice,difference between law and justice,law and justice careers,law and justice essay law and justice foundation,law and justice symbol,law justice and morality,law or justice 1988,relationship between law and justice,difference between law and justice,law and justice careers,law and justice essay