Corona Impeachment Trial Live Stream: DAY 23, February 23 (VIDEO)

The impeachment trial continues today, February 23 at 2 PM. Please wait for the live feed from GMA News.

Earlier: The impeachment trial of Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona starts tomorrow. The Senate, acting as an impeachment court, will start hearing arguments for and against Corona’s impeachment in a trial that is expected to last, at least, three months. In a nation where politics is a way of life, the trial is expected to grip the attention of Filipinos both here and abroad. Watch the Corona impeachment trial live online. Live stream of the impeachment trial is posted above courtesy of GMA News and YouTube. VIDEO Replays of the days’ events will also be posted on this site for those who will miss the live coverage.

On December 12, 2011, 188 members of the House of Representatives signed an impeachment complaint against Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona based on the following articles of impeachment.

• Article 1. Respondent betrayed public trust through his track record marked by partiality and subservience in cases involving the Arroyo administration from the time of his appointment as Supreme Court chief justice and until his dubious appointment as midnight chief to the present.
• Article 2. Respondent committed culpable violation of the constitution and/or betrayal of 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 of the 1987 Constitution.
• Article 3. Respondent committed culpable violation of the constitution and betrayed the public trust by the failing to meet and observe the stringent standards under Art. VIII, Section 7 (3) of the constitution that provides that “a member of the judiciary must be a person of proven competence, integrity, probity, and independence” in allowing the Supreme Court to act on mere letters filed by a counsel which caused the issuance of a flip-flopping decision in final and executory cases; in creating an excessive entanglement with Mrs. Arroyo through her appointment of his wife to office; and in discussing with litigants regarding cases pending before the Supreme Court.
• Article 4. Respondent betrayed the public trust and/or committed culpable violation of the Constitution when he blatantly disregarded the principle of separation of powers by issuing a status quo ante order against the House of Representatives in the case concerning the impeachment of then Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez.
• Article 5. Respondent betrayed public trust through wanton arbitrariness and partiality in consistently disregarding the principles of res judicata in the cases involving the 16 newly-created cities, and the promotion of Dinagat Island into a province.
• Article 6. Respondent betrayed public trust by arrogating unto himself, and to a committee he created, the authority and jurisdiction to improperly investigate a Justice of the Supreme Court for the purpose of exculpating him. Such authority and jurisdiction is properly reposed by the constitution in the House of Representatives via impeachment.
• Article 7. Respondent betrayed public trust through his partiality in granting a temporary restraining order (TRO) in favor of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and her husband Jose Miguel Arroyo in order to give them an opportunity to escape prosecution and to frustrate the end of justice, and in distorting the Supreme Court decision on the effectivity of the TRO in view of a clear failure to comply with the conditions of the Supreme Court’s own TRO.
• Article 8. Respondent betrayed public trust and/or committed graft and corruption when he failed and refused to account for the judiciary development fund (JDF) and special allowances for the Judiciary (SAJ) collections.

---

DISCLAIMER: Views expressed in this section are those of the readers and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of The Manila Paper. Manila-Paper.net does not knowingly publish false information and may not be held liable for the views of readers exercising their right to free expression.