 All public officers are required to file their Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth on or before 30 April of every year. This is provided by RA No. 6713, otherwise known as the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees. The rationale for the filing of the same is to enable the public to find out if there has been an appreciable increase in the net worth of a public officer on a year-to-year basis. In turn, under the provisions of the Unexplained Wealth Act, any property that appears to be disproportionate to the annual salary of a public officer is prima facie presumed to be ill gotten and is subject to forfeiture in favor of the state. This is one very rare instance where the law presumes property of a public officer as ill-gotten. Cleary, the requirement to file the SALN is complimentary to the intent of the law to deprive pubic officers of the fruits of graft and other corrupt practices. It is a tool to determine if the net worth of a public officer is within his means as a public officer.I am sure that this is why the prosecution panel in the impeachment of Chief Justice Renato Corona decided to begin introduction of their evidence on Article 2 instead of Article 1 of the impeachment complaint. Stated differently, since the public prosecutors have told the nation that the Chief Justice has very valuable real estate registered in his name, property whose value appears to be beyond his annual income as an Associate Justice and later, as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, these may be deemed ill-gotten. One of the grounds for the Chief Justice’s impeachment, in turn, is graft and corruption.Moreover, the filing of the same is mandatory and required to be under oath. Any failure to file the same, or a failure to declare all assets owned by the public officer in the same, will amount to a violation of a public officer’s duty to uphold the laws of the land. This is also betrayal of the public trust. This is because a public office is a public trust and a public officer’s breach of an existing law is also a breach of the trust reposed in the public officer.
The Constitution further requires that the SALN “shall be disclosed to the public in the manner provided by law.” RA 6713 provides for the manner of public disclosure of a public officer’s SALN. Section 8(C) of said law provides: “(C) Accessibility of documents. — (1) Any and all statements filed under this Act, shall be made available for inspection at reasonable hours. x x x“(2) Such statements shall be made available for copying or reproduction after ten (10) working days from the time they are filed as required by law. x x x (4) Any statement filed under this Act shall be available to the public for a period of ten (10) years after receipt of the statement.” The crux of the controversy is while the Chief Justice maintains that he has filed his SALN according to law, no one, except for the Court Clerk of Court, has seen them. This is because in an attempt to guard against harassment, the Court, by an en banc resolution, has ruled that these SALN should not be made public and will only be released on “good grounds.” A legal issue to be resolved by the Impeachment Court is whether the Chief Justice, relying on a court resolution, can claim immunity from Section 8C of the law as quoted above. The House prosecutors obviously believe that he cannot and the refusal to make such SALN public is already a violation of the law — hence, an impeachable offense, that of betrayal of public trust. Corona maintains otherwise. But a startling event happened yesterday when the Clerk of Court of the Supreme Court refused to turn over Corona’s SALN to the Senate despite a subpoena issued for them. Obviously, much of Article 2 of the impeachment complaint may be proven by the production of Corona’s SALN’s in the custody of the Clerk of Court. But the Clerk, alleging that the Supreme Court as a co-equal branch of government with its own internal rules, initially refused, pleading that the Court en banc must give her authority to surrender them to the Senate. A constitutional crisis was averted when Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile rightfully ordered the Clerk of Court to surrender the SALN to the Senate. If this is a portent of things to come, we’re bound to have many more potential constitutional crises in the course of this impeachment. The lesson is clear: let us elect a President who will make responsible appointments particularly to the Judiciary. Never again should we allow a person with no mandate to govern. And by God, let’s make our elections clean and safe especially from high-tech cheats! |
SALN
Advertisement
The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://harryroque.com/2012/01/19/saln/trackback/
Dear Harry,
You scored another ace! The people will remembe that you were there when it mattered most. It is a pity that you are not one of the prosecutors, but with your erudition they will pick from you, anyway. Thank you and best regards! yours truly, nelson
Salamat po
yeah agreed. But sir roque the matter of whether or not Corona failed to disclose his SALN was never proven in this early stage. First, the En Banc resolution clearly prohibited the release of this SALN subject to some specific which are reasonable grounds if we may say. Can Coreona be faulted to follow a 23 year old practice via this internal resolution. The fact of the SALN submitted to the Clerk of Court is in itself compiance with the requirement of the law. People who argues that Corona never disclosed his SALN is confusing the fact of its being submitted or release to requesting public. These are two different things. Secondly, while they may have been some apparent errors in the entries in the SALN, there appears to be some credible explanation. In fact, the supreme court has allowed the SALN to be re-submitted and corrected in case of discrepancies in some of the entries, resulting some acquittals in decisions rendered by the COURT. Third, is it wrong for a chief justice to buy condominium units for his family. I am no fan of Corona, who I find really as not so intelligent justice based on myu readings of decision, even the manner of his speaking, he cannot even speak english properly and to thing he has reached his stature. But certainly, the unpreparedness of the prosecution and their their theory of piecemmeal findings is unfair to the chief Justice.
Cant disagree on issue of preparedness!
Atty. Harry another brilliant commentary. Art. 2 conviction of Corona will remove the barrier for all government employees appointed/elected from hiding their or cheating on their SALN especially the Supreme Court who have exempted themselves from showing it to the public. Moreover it will be a shining moment to the current Senators as they themselves cannot hide or cheat on their SALN once Corona is convicted.
Thanks as always! Are you a law student or a lawyer?
Its a message to everyone in government
I think the prosecutors should also give more time in proving that the assets are under valued. That would further emphasize the glaring discrepancies in CJ’s income and accumulated assets.
agree