My Exclusive
By Raïssa Robles
According to a Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN) he filed in 2003, Chief Justice Renato Corona got what he described as a “cash advance” of P11 million pesos from a company he identified as his “wife’s family corporation”.
What he didn’t say in his SALN was that the lender company had its registration revoked by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in 2003, the same year he got his cash advance. What this means is that the company – Basa-Guidote Enterprises, Inc. – ceased to operate legally by 2007 or three years after revocation. The law gives a three-year grace period for revoked companies to wind up their affairs.
CJ Corona’s SALNs after 2003 indicated he was paying back the “cash advance” which he listed under “LIABILITIES (Loans, Mortgages, Etc.)”
At least I assumed he was paying it off because the “cash advance” amount in his SALNs from 2004 to 2009 kept shrinking. By 2009, the amount was down to P3 million and it disappeared altogether in the 2010 SALN – the year he became Chief Justice.
CJ Corona’s SALNs were filed as evidence last week in his ongoing impeachment trial.
NOTE: I have posted the first pages of his SALNs below, after this story, so you can examine his liabilities yourself.
I would also like to disclose that my hubby Alan walked me through the construction of this highly complicated story. My heartfelt thanks to him.
The family corporation of CJ Corona’s wife was no longer registered when I went to the SEC last week, asking to see its GIS (General Information Sheet) and financial reports. Instead, I was given this print-out:
When I asked why the company registration had been revoked, the guy at the SEC counter named Joey speculated it might have been because the company did not file or did not annually disclose its financial activities to the SEC.
When I asked WHEN the license was revoked, Joey told me the SEC had resorted to a “mass revocation” of registration. The public was given due notice of this in ads placed by the SEC – for instance on April 25, 2003 in the Philippine Daily Inquirer.
Joey said that since Basa-Guidote was initially registered as a corporation in 1961, the date of revocation of its license was May 26, 2003. It was given the chance to revive its registration by paying penalties.
But Joey said that since their records today show that Basa-Guidote’s status as a company was still “REVOKED”, it means it never tried to update its records and pay the corresponding penalties. He gave me the table of penalties below:
Then Joey added that as of last year 2011, the company’s 50-year existence as a corporation had also lapsed under the law.
CJ Corona had obtained a “cash advance” from a corporation that had legally ceased to exist on the very year the transaction took place. Perhaps this transaction took place just before the corporation’s registration was revoked. But then he had liquidated the “cash advance” over a period.
With whom, when the company no longer existed?
To answer this question and others that came to mind I talked with several lawyers.
But first – on the face of it – from what I know of his background, CJ Corona knows more about financial transactions than the average Filipino. Fresh from Harvard law school, CJ Corona became special counsel at the Development Bank of the Philippines; senior vice-president and general counsel of the Commercial Bank of Manila (Combank); and then senior officer of the Tax and Corporate Counseling Group of the Tax Division of the country’s largest audit firm, Sycip Gorres and Velayo (SGV & Co).
CJ Corona is in fact mentioned in SGV’s coffee table book as one of those who made the company proud.
What CJ Corona’s defense lawyer told me
First I talked to CJ Corona’s defender, Atty Ramon Esguerra.
When I asked him how his client could have obtained a “cash advance” from a corporation that had ceased to exist in the eyes of the law, Atty. Esguerra replied:
I really do not know. I’m not in a position to answer that. We are not in that particular point. I cannot answer anymore.
But he added:
It does not mean the company (Basa-Guidote) can no longer operate even as an unregistered corporation. Puwede pang mag-business kahit walang corporation.
[Please note: I am giving you the exact quotes because I do not want my translation to get in the way of the nuances of the words.]
I asked Atty Esguerra about Basa-Guidote Enterprises. He said:
That’s a family corporation of Mrs Corona. My understanding is that this is actually 98% owned by Mrs Corona already. My recollection is that there was some sort of intra-corporate controversy among the stockholders.
I asked Atty Esguerra whether he was a corporate lawyer. He laughed and said:
I’m a lawyer.
Then I asked him – you said it’s 98% owned by Mrs Corona and the corporation is unregistered, does that mean he made utang to his own wife?
Esguerra replied:
Hindi naman to his own wife. To her corporation.
Simply analyze what is stated in the SALN. The SALNs should speak for themselves. To look beyond the SALNs is beyond me already. If you want me to interpret and speculate wala na ako doon. I’d be incompetent as a witness.
He also said:
We also adopted as our exhibits the copies of the SALNs that were produced by the witness (Supreme Court Clerk of Court Enriqueta Vidal) whom the prosecution called with a subpoena issued by the Senate.
Those copies of the SALN of the CJ on file with the official custodian who is the clerk of court is our evidence to show that the chief justice, the respondent, actually filed in compliance with the law.
By the way, I also asked Atty Esguerra why CJ Corona did not indicate in his SALN from 2003 to 2006 that his wife Cristina was employed as a board director of John Hay Management Corporation.
Atty Esguerra replied:
Hindi naman obligasyon yon. Joint SALN ito (na) finile ng mag-asawa.
I asked him why Mrs Corona did not affix her signature on the space provided for in the SALN. He said:
It doesn’t have to be signed by both. There is no requirement there.
I pointed out to him that there was a line that specifically required the spouse’ signature. Atty Esguerra replied:
No, no. I don’t know where you got that. Very limited ang knowledge ko dyan. I don’t recall anything in the law that requires that.
What other lawyers told me
The next lawyer I talked to was Prof. Rowena E.V. Daroy-Morales of the University of the Philippines College of Law, a former Law Associate in Sycip Salazar Gatmaitan Law Firm and currentluy director of the Institute of Judicial Administration. I asked her what she could make out of CJ Corona’s financial transaction with his wife’s company.
She raised the following points:
It’s true there can be a corporation that exists unofficially. But that will also mean it’s not subject to the regulatory processes of government and it raises the question whether they’re paying taxes. They’re outside the radar.
She said the fact that the corporation might no longer have existed legally around the time CJ Corona took out the “cash advance” and then paid it back in varying amounts over several years raised other questions:
Kanino ba talaga umutang si CJ? Whether to the wife or the corporation?
Can a wife lend to a husband that amount? Sure, why not. Pero kailan ang bayaran noon? Does he owe it to Mrs Corona or to the corporation?
Hindi lang yon. Paano siya nagbabayad? Is it payable to Mrs Corona or to the corporation?
Prof. Morales noted that the impeachment for now was focusing on the assets and acquisitions of CJ Corona, not on his liabilities.
Tingnan din natin ang validity ng declaration of liability. Look at the veracity of the entry of the liabilities. Whether there is indeed an obligation. Are they real liabilities? Was his cash advance really a loan from a corporation?
When we look at the SALN, we don’t just look at the assets but also the liabilities, whether or not these are fictitious.
At end of the day I don’t care whether he owns a P14 million condo pero zero pala ang net worth.
I could follow her explanation because of a short course that the Asian Institute of Management (AIM) had given foreign correspondents like me to enable us to understand financial statements. Among the things we had been taught was the formula of the balance sheet, which is what the SALN basically is:
Assets – Liabilities = Net Worth
Using this formula, we can see that in 2003, while CJ Corona had P18.3 million in Assets, his Net Worth was dramatically reduced to P7 million because of his P11 million “cash advance” from his wife’s company.
Prof. Morales told me:
At end of the day, the SALN has to be seen from the point of view of the Net. At end of the day, we are looking at the Net.
CJ Corona’s Net Worth grew more than threefold in eight years – from P7 million in 2003 to P22.9 million by the time he became Chief Justice in 2010.
The next lawyer I talked to was UP law Professor Victoria Avena who teaches Evidence and is a former Commissioner of the Presidential Commission on Good Government. I asked her the following question: Under the law, may a corporation still transact business even if its registration has been revoked?
Prof. Avena replied:
When the SEC revokes the charter of a corporation (in your words, cancels its registration as a corporation), it may no longer continue the business for which it was created and registered. After SEC revocation, its only power is to wind up its affairs (i.e., liquidate its assets for payment and distribution to its creditors and stockholders, including bringing to collect and defending suits). If this winding up will take more than 3 years, the corporation should appoint an assignee or receiver, who will be the one to continue (collection, distribution, etc.) in behalf of the stockholders, because at the end of 3 years, the corporation absolutely ceases to exist and therefore cannot do any act or enter into any transaction even for the purpose of winding up.
I then asked her that if the corporation had ceased existing by 2006, to whom did CJ Corona pay back the rest of his “cash advance” from 2007 to 2009?
Prof. Avena declined to answer my question. She instead gave this general reply:
It is a valid question on your part to ask to whom the corporation is paying after its charter has been revoked. As I said, after revocation of its charter, the corporation has no right to operate its business anymore so it has no right to transact business, but for the three year-period after its dissolution due to revocation of charter, it may receive payments because that is part of liquidation of assets and liabilities which is the essence of winding up. However, after the 3-year period, it ceases to exist absolutely so the act of anyone supposedly receiving payment in its behalf is null and void. Payment after the 3-year period should be made to its assignee or receiver.
I also talked to two lawyers who offered to tell me more provided I did not name them
Lawyer X – a veteran corporate lawyer – told me that “technically” it’s true a firm with a revoked license can continue doing business:
There are instance na nakasuhan sila, o napabayaan, narerevoke yan. Unless the corporation is wound up, they can continue doing business. Except that they no longer have any legal personality to continue the business.
Technically, it’s true they can continue but it’s so unusual.
What’s so unusual, I asked him.
He said –
It’s so unusual. Corporations have a life of 50 years. There’s something really unusual here: Why a corporation can continue even after its own registration is revoked (by SEC).
He said the continuation of its business activities was indicated by the fact that CJ Corona seemed to be paying back the cash advance.
That could mean may bank account yan.
I asked Lawyer X how it could do business. Could it continue issuing official receipts?
He said:
You see, if you go to the BIR (Bureau of Internal Revenue), it doesn’t know if the (company) registration is revoked or not. You can get OR.
He also said:
From a common sense point of view, it (CJ Corona’s transaction) raises some issues, like tax issues. If there’s money that was loaned out, there’s the interest component. If this is an arms length transaction (between CJ Corona and Basa-Guidote company), that means it (the cash advance) is being charged interest, if there’s a loan.
Dapat nagbabayad siya (CJ Corona) ng interest (for the cash advance). And the company should be reporting the interest income and paying taxes on this income to the BIR (Bureau of Internal Revenue).
If no interest is being paid (by CJ Corona for the cash advance) then it’s an accommodation to the wife. Because she’s the controlling shareholder, it creates a fringe benefit tax issue indirectly for the wife.
I asked him to explain some more this fringe benefit tax. He said:
It’s the corporation that would be subject to a fringe benefit tax. If the wife is the president (of the firm) clearly, she derived a benefit because a loan was made to her husband without interest being paid (by CJ Corona).
He advised me to check the BIR regulations. He said the tax was normally paid by companies which gave expatriates and senior executives fringe benefits such as housing. He said the tax was often 32% of the value of the fringe benefit.
I found this website maintained by a young CPA which explains the fringe benefit tax. Click on this link.
He added:
If he (CJ Corona) was repaying (the cash advance), where did he repay by way of check?
It (the repayment) must have gone into the account of the corporation. The corporation could still be maintaining a bank account.
Here’s something interesting
The impeachment court could actually subpoena the bank accounts of the family corporation of CJ Corona’s wife.
According to a former senior official of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s administration whom I’ll call Lawyer Y, this has become a “valid inquiry” for the impeachment court because CJ Corona stated in the SALN, submitted as evidence, that he obtained an P11 million “cash advance” from his wife’s company.
Lawyer Y said:
It’s a valid inquiry also. They can inquire into bank accounts of Basa-Guidote. Kung nagbabayad si CJ, pumasok dapat yung amount sa Basa-Guidote. It’s a big amount. More than one million (pesos) a year on the average. And when you pay the corporation, the corporation has to issue receipts. Asan yung resibo?
If the corporation earned (from giving out the cash advance), where is the corporate income tax? How can it escape paying tax on that? Don’t tell me nagpautang ng P11 milion loan, walang interest. Yung interest tinatax ng gobyerno. Kailangan meron dapat binayad na tax on the percentage of the interest.
That’s why the inquiries into the affairs of Basa-Guidote, that’s very possible. Through subpoenas to the bank and the BIR.
But would the bank comply without a court order and what about the bank secrecy law, I asked.
Lawyer Y replied:
Impeachment case is an exact exception to the Bank Secrecy Law under Republic Act No 1405.
I looked up RA 1405 and it said in:
Sec. 2. 1 All deposits of whatever nature with banks or banking institutions in the Philippines including investments in bonds issued by the Government of the Philippines, its political subdivisions and its instrumentalities, are hereby considered as of an absolutely confidential nature and may not be examined, inquired or looked into by any person, government official, bureau or office, except upon written permission of the depositor, or in cases of impeachment, or upon order of a competent court in cases of bribery or dereliction of duty of public officials, or in cases where the money deposited or invested is the subject matter of the litigation.
I’m posting below the first pages of CJ Corona’s SALNs so you can see how he liquidated his “cash advance” of P11 million by 2009.
Here is Page 1 of his SALN for 2003
Here is page 1 of his SALN for 2004
Here is page 1 of his SALN for 2005
Here is page 1 of his SALN for 2006
Here is page 1 of his SALN for 2007
Here is page 1 of his SALN for 2008
Here is page 1 of his SALN for 2009
And here is page 1 of his SALN for 2010
____________________________________
Related Stories
CJ Corona’s SALNs only declared his wife was in government post in 2007
Chief Justice Corona personally met with World Bank officials, bank documents show
Realty broker: Corona’s posh condo “a steal” at P14 million
CJ Corona’s condo is fully paid up, tax official confirms
Cash gifts & car plans – COA report shows what Corona’s wife did as a GMA appointee
PNoy government: A dictatorship inthe making or democracy in action
fz says
2002 SALN
http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/sites/default/files/others/downloads/cj2002saln.pdf
Leona says
Cash advance of P11M ? He has to show clearly authenticated documents as proofs on this loan. If he cannot, where did he get P11M? From whom? When? Very difficult if he truthfully never had such a “loan.” This issue of an alleged “loan” will be one of the many very good questions he will be asked by the prosecs or the senators-judges.
Mel says
Excerpts from Ana Basa interview with Cynthia D. Balana, Philippine Daily Inquirer
For the whole interview, read the first of two parts at Ana Basa: We were oppressed by the Coronas. By Cynthia D. Balana, Philippine Daily Inquirer
2:07 am | Tuesday, March 6th, 2012
Related Comment:
– The departed uncle, Jose Ma. Basa III, and his sibling (s) might still be vindicated and could get justice this time around, along with the impeachment trial.
– BGEI
Francisco F. Malubay, Jr. says
On a different note para maiba naman… yeah I am also following the Impeachment process… Nakakainis lang minsan talaga dahil mas napapaboran ang mga technicalidad ng depensa. Well, on the spiritual side, I heard a prophetic utterance of Cindy Jacobs about the Philippines. One of the major events that will unfold before the nation will become the wealthiest nation and to be envied all throughout the world is the cleansing of the Judiciary. God Himself will expose and expose the sins in all government and private institutions. . .we already saw this unfolding in the military, in madam gloria, and now in the SC particularly the CJ. I believe, these things are happening because, God by Himself, because of His love for our nation and His blessing to us is already long overdue, He is now making these cleansing process. He is going to use any of us who loves righteousness… Maam Raissa is one I am sure, so dont fear anyone (except God), continue the good work but dont own glory of what you are doing… it will become your own downfall….Honor God Who gave you this great opportunity. He is your Protector. You will live to see the prosperity of the nation – far beyond you can now imagine. . . you and everyone will understand that none can claim victory and glory … not even the President… no not one … ONLY GOD owns all the Glory. “Blessed is the Nation whose God is the Lord!”
Muhammad Eisa de Jesus says
I am so overwhelmed with your findings and reports. I just hope and pray that this reporting to the media and Internet won’t constitute a violation of the Impeachment Court or any court’s ruling on non-disclosure, such as when this matter was debated on the impeachment trial whereby Rep. Niel Tupas denied Prosecution as having released any info on the 45 properties to the media.
More power to all of you who present the truth.
Muhammad Eiisa
Jeddah
raissa says
This article came way before the Impeachment Court tackled this matter.
And I found it out on my own.
It wasn’t leaked to me.
Mel says
I
WITNESS SAYS:
Corona’s wife paid for P9M condo unit in ‘cash’
“MANILA, Philippines — Chief Justice Renato Corona’s wife, Cristina, allegedly paid in “cash category” a P9 million condominium unit in Taguig City, a witness said during the impeachment trial on Monday.
“The condominium unit was paid under the cash category of payment,” said Aniceto Visnar Jr., vice president of Ayala Land Inc., when he testified before the Senate sitting as an impeachment court. Visnar was referring to a condominium unit-1902 Spanish Bay Tower in Taguig City bought by Corona’s wife in October 2005.
“Asked what he meant by “cash category,” the witness said, “The unit was acquired in almost cash basis with the buyer issuing cheques for payment of the unit.”
“It is considered as normal cash payment term as compared to installment payment which may take several years,” Visnar further explained.
The first cheque amounting to P2.2 million was issued by the Chief Justice in March 31, 2004, and the second cheque amounting to P6.9 million was issued by the wife in April 30, 2004.
“Visnar was the ninth witness presented by the prosecution since the trial began last January 16, 2012.”
SOURCE: Maila Ager INQUIRER.net 6:00 pm | Monday, January 30th, 2012
WITNESS SAYS:
Corona’s wife paid for P9M condo unit in ‘cash’
II
–lot in McKinley Hill in Taguig City in the name Coronas’ daughter, Maria Charina Corona–
WITNESS SAYS: Corona, wife paid for P6.2M property
“MANILA, Philippines — A witness on Monday presented documents showing that Chief Justice Renato Corona and his wife, Cristina, paid for a multi-million peso property in Taguig City named under their daughter.
“Testifying before the Senate sitting as an impeachment court, Giovanni Ng, finance director of Megaworld Corp. produced a deed of sale for a 203 sqm. lot in McKinley Hill in Taguig City in the name Coronas’ daughter, Maria Charina Corona.”
SOURCE: Maila Ager INQUIRER.net 4:37 pm | Monday, January 30th, 2012
WITNESS SAYS: Corona, wife paid for P6.2M property
Mel says
III
— in 1 month, P9-M for Spanish Bay condo—-
‘Coronas shelled out P9-M in 1 month for Spanish Bay condo’
“MANILA, Philippines – Chief Justice Renato Corona and his wife, Cristina, paid P9.1 million in just 1 month to buy a 113.02-square-meter condominium unit at 1902 Spanish Bay Tower, Bonifacio Ridge in Taguig City in 2004, a prosecution witness said on Monday.
“Ayala Land Vice-President Aniceto Bisnar Jr. said the chief justice issued a cheque for P2.2 million on March 31, 2004 to Ayala-led Fort Bonifacio Development Corp. (FBDC) for the Spanish Bay Tower unit.
“On April 30, 2004 or one month later, Mrs. Corona issued another cheque to FBDC for P6.9 million.
“Bisnar said the chief justice also issued two separate checks amounting to P200,000 and P900,000 for the value-added tax and other transaction taxes of the real estate property.
“Bisnar said the purchase of the Spanish Bay Tower unit is considered a “cash payment term” since the unit was paid in full immediately, and not on installment basis.
“He said the unit was registered under the name of Cristina Corona.”
SOURCE: By David Dizon, ABS-CBNnews.com
Posted at 01/30/2012 6:57 PM | Updated as of 01/30/2012 6:57 PM
‘Coronas shelled out P9-M in 1 month for Spanish Bay condo’
Mel says
I,III source conflict:
I. witness: Aniceto Visnar Jr., vice president of Ayala Land Inc.
III. witness: Ayala Land Vice-President Aniceto Bisnar Jr.
Even mainstream Impeachment journalists are imperfect. Perhaps due to work pressure, 3 to 4 news reports a day… it may have taken its toll on this hardworking journos.
Guess who got it right? Sino kaya ang tama sa kanilang dalawa.
Doki says
Thank you maam Raissa and to all of the comments, I am learning a lot of must know. In my opinion, minsan kasi tayong pinoy o madami sa atin ang walang pakialam, makapal ang mukha at kapit agad sa patalim. Specially to the people in politics and government. In connection with the case of cj corona, you connect the dots. As for now, they may have all material things money can buy, and we have nothing,but, love — for our country. Love which is pure, unconditional and will kick their a***** from which they don’t belong.
BP says
Just asking:
1. Where did the Condo in Makati acquired in 2003 reflected in 2010 SALN come from? It was not reflected in any of the previous SALNs?
2. Why the explanatory note in the 2010 SALN as if the CJ is expecting to be asked to explain his assets later?
Hope the prosecutors can present some answers to the public.
AL-FILIBUSTERISMO says
The data in the SALNs of Corona are clearly not in accord with generally accepted principles of accounting (GAAP), untruthful and were made to comply only with the mechanical act of filing but not of disclosing his assets, liabilities and networth.
Observations:
1. If he received CASH ADVANCE in 2003 or 2004 of P11M, the same should still be included in the total cash as of December 31 because not only were used to pay since the following year, the cash advanve of P11M was reduced by P1M. In other words, the cash should be atleast P10M more.
Possible defense: 1. The SALN is not required to follow GAAP.
2. The P11M Cash Advance was received in full but only by installment
from Wife’s family corporation, that is, he only actually received P1M
in 2003 or 2004 which was used as partial payment for the property
property, hence, no need to be included in CASH.
Counter-Argument: 1. If the property purchased was on installement, why was there a
Deed of Absolute Sale and the ownership was transferred on the
date of sale? Deed of Absolute Sale means that there was already
full payment of the purchase price, hence, the transfer of ownership.
2. If the P11M was not actually received in 2003 or 2004, it should not
be reported as LIABILITIES.
CONCLUSION: There was understatement of CASH in Corona’s CASH, thereby making
Corona’s filing of his SALN not in accord with the characteristics of
PROBILITY and INTEGRITY which he must always show in all his
actions, more so since only PUBLIC TRUST makes the Courts powerful.
Thus, CORONA betrays the public trust as substantially proven by the
SALNs he filed when compared to his Income as reported to BIR.
Alem Filipino says
The Constitution requires that:
“A Member of the Judiciary must be a person of proven competence, integrity, probity, and
independence.”
In ethics, integrity is regarded as the honesty and truthfulness or accuracy of one’s actions.
Probity means “Strict adherence to a code of ethics based on undeviating honesty, specially in commercial (monetary) matters and beyond legal requirements”.
On the face of the CJ Corona’s SALN, I conclude that he fails to continue possessing these characteristics or virtues, sufficient for him to be found guilty for betraying public trust, regardless the defenses he can legally raised on the matter, considering the following:
1. The discrepancies in the SALN show that Corona only filed his SALN by way of mechanical compliance with the ‘letter’ of the SALN law but not to its spirit, which is more important.
2. The discrepancies on the amounts stated in the SALN defy the generally accepted principles of accounting:
2.1. The amounts under Current Fair Market Values are not really CFMV as this term means in ordinary course of things.
2.2. He intentionally omitted stating amounts under “Acquisition Costs” when these amounts are easily determinable than Current Fair Market Values because acquisition costs are synonymous to Purchase Price/Selling Price. It must be stressed that factually, as far as real assets are concerned like lands, their Current Fair Market Values are expected to be higher than Acquisition Costs.
2.3. Where are the cars used by Corona and family? Do they used government cars even for personal purposes?
2.4. If he really obtained CASH ADVANCE from wife family corporation, why was his CASH did not increase when it should have increased because he did not utilized the full cash advance for one year.
2.5. Are the properties listed in Corona’s SALN are only his exclusive properties and do not include community/conjugal properties because the Corona’s spouse are under the complete separation of property regime stated in a pre-nuptional agreement? But will pre-nuptional agreement on property regime prevails over the requirement of SALN law. By withholding this fact, assuming not required by SALN law, does Corona follows PROBITY or INTEGRITY?
2.6. By not disclosing his other financial interests or indicating the name of his wife who is also working in GOCC, just because the EO may have exempted the wife from filing SALN, does CORONA observes INTEGRITY and PROBITY?
2.7. The CASH ADVANCE indicated in the SALN proves that CORONA acted in manner undeserving to be continue to be called JUSTICE, much less Chief Justice, because he certainly avoid paying TAXES and he transacted with a corporation who is no longer existing in the eyes of the law.
IN CONCLUSION, the SALNs do not truthfully disclose the ASSETS, LIABILITIES and NETWORTH OF CJ CORONA, and because of this, CORONA BETRAYS PUBLIC TRUST.
dk says
Curious lang baka mali po ako… bakit sobrang bumaba ang net worth ni CJ kung may loan sya. Kung nagloan sya, ibig sabhin lumaki rin dapat assets nya at nagkaron sya liabilities… unless nagloan sya at pinamigay nya yung pera???
ang general accounting equation tlga ay Assets=Liabilities+Equity(Net Worth).. so kung tumaas ang liabilities mo, dapat either tumaas rin assets mo, or may liabilities na binayaran ng bagong loan etc(pwede pa rin ibang scenario…)
Or ganito po ba tlga magcompute ng net worth sa SALN?
Tigerlily513 says
Hi DK, what or which is your focal point of “bumaba ang net worth”? Walang bumaba. Lahat tumaas. Yes, ganyan magcompute ng Net Worth, regardless of it being to be shown on SALN, Corporate financial statement, and single proprietor. Even the ITR has the same framework. And that’s the basic financial structure as recognized around the world, i.e. Assets = Liabilities + Equity
Tigerlily513 says
Pag tumaas ang asset mo, possible reasons are tumaas ang liabilities and/or equities. Pag tumaas ang liabilities, possible reasons are tumaas ang assets and/or nabawasan ang equity (and this is called equity conversion), pag tumaas ang equity mo, it’s either because tumaas ang income mo or nag-acquire ka ng additional capital. Because an equity is composed of both the result of your business/employment and/or capital savings.
DK says
Kasi po hindi nag-increase assets nya nung nagka-loan sya ng 11M, so ang effect bumaba sobra ang equity nya…
kung sana nung nag-increase ang liability nya eh nag-increase rin assets, walang effect sa net worth….
Tigerlily513 says
Walang “nagkaloan” dahil andun na yung cash advance that you refer to as loan since the earliest SALN available on file. Please see graph (http://flik1206.tumblr.com/post/16403884134/observations-from-2002-up-to-2006-corona-hid) summarizing all his SALNs and the analytic on his “equity”. His equity in the graph is the balancing figure between his Assets and Liabs as the formula: A=L+N/E dictates.
Arnel Dy says
I beg to differ. This statement is wrong:
“Walang “nagkaloan” dahil andun na yung cash advance that you refer to as loan since the earliest SALN available on file.”
Refer to 2002 SALN of CJ. The LIABILITIES section is blank.
That graph starts from 2003. It does not show 2002.
So yes… Merong “nagkaloan”.
And DK – you are right. Don’t worry – the world still makes sense even if CJ’s SALN and tax records don’t. A is still equal to L + E, and 1 + 1 is still – thankfully equal to 2.
Tigerlily513 says
There’s no 2002 SALN shown in this blog entry. I actually looked for it when I did my analytics.
Tigerlily513 says
And since there’s no 2002 SALN, we can’t assume that because there’s a “blank” in 2003 or per your word, the graph starts in 2003, the loan existed only in 2003. Kaya for you, nag-ka-loan during 2003. Also, loan is not Cash Advance.
Pickers in Markham says
The table (for the life of me I can’t see a graph) shows an income instead of equity, being the difference between asset and liability. Perhaps this adds to the confusion. The Coronas do have income like salaries that were not included. It is extremely difficult to read this and draw a conclusion because income is over a period of time and therefore cumulative whereas SALN is just a snapshot Moreover the proceeds from the sale of properties were not included in the asset and it is public knowledge now that they have sold at least 3 properties in excess of P30 M
DK says
correction po pala…hindi nag-increase SIGNIFICANTLY (meron konteng change)… from total assets of 14.9M nung 2002 and 0 liabilities, nagkaron sya 18.3M total assets with 11M liabilities nung 2003… yung pagbaba ng net worth from 14.9M to 7.3M ay dahil sa di ko maintindihang 6M… san kaya napunta sa SALN yun? ano ano po ba possible reasons para mangyari yun? tapos the following years starting 2004 hanggang 2009, nag iincrease ng halos 1M ang networth habang bumababa ang liabilities… kung hindi supported ng sweldo nya lang from SC yung mga increase, san nanggaling yun?
hay… nasisira ang accounting principles na naiintidihan ko..hehe
Tigerlily513 says
Walang bumabang net worth. Yung sinasabi mong 6M ay yun ding cash advance from Basa Guidote na pinalitan ng title (in accounting terms, it’s called “reclassed” or “reclassified”) na ginawang Cash advance from Wife
Tigerlily513 says
The SALNs presented seem to be misleading. for e.g. from 2003 to 2004, there’s no change in his networth. so does it mean he wasn’t paid for? or there’s no source of income from his employment? for 2004 to 2005, the increase in his networth was computed as 83K monthly, 2005 to 2006 is 100K, 2006 to 2007 is P125K, 2007 to 2008 is P125K again. Thus, from 2004 to 2007, his monthly income looks plausible for a remuneration of someone with a job like his. However, came 2008 to 2009, where he earns P167 monthly, much less in 2009 to 2010, where P615K on a monthly basis was computed, one would note material variances. Can an SC get P615K monthly? Mas mataas pa suweldo sa Presidente or even against some people holding high posts in the government, kahit pa pagsama-samahin allowances nila.
Pickers in Markham says
I did my own spreadsheet and there is not much discrepancy unless sustaining lifestyle expenses i.e. foreign trips, cars, etc. The real issue is cashflow. It is difficult to explain unless there is unknown donor, won a lottery, etc.
MJ says
It’s possible to have a decreasing net worth eventhough he loaned 11M… that is if he used the money not to acquire assets but in various expenditures… e.g. trip around the world, watching manny pacquaio’s game etc.
Tigerlily513 says
In my perception on how to ‘account’ for SALN, although it recognizes how he used the money, the primordial concern really is ‘how much’ did he receive. Parang lifestyle check.
Diane says
Right! He might also have lost the money in gambling, pwede rin yun. Daming laban ni Pacquiao sa mga panahong pinag-uusapan eh
raissa says
Or won enough by betting on Pacquiao everytime.
Which is why he told Lance Gokongwei and Sen. Bongbong Marcos who were seated alongside me in the same table last year during a FOCAP conference that he’s never skipped a Pacquiao fight.
Baltazar says
Remember, he was about to watch the last Pacquiao-Marquez bout when he was called backby their camp to issue an overnight TRO against Tia Leila’s HDO against GMA.
Arnel Dy says
DK … sad to say that CJ did not hire an accountant to make his SALN.
Balubaluktutin man ni CJ at ng iba ang accounting principles na alam natin – hindi nila kakayanin ang ama ng pagtutuos
si Luca Pacioli.
Kaya relax lang tayo. Lilipas din ang gulong ito at – mas magiging maunlad ang propesyon ng accountancy.
Arnel Dy says
Equity conversion is really not possible for an individual.
Though it is possible for a corporation or other artificial entities.
You can’t say…
“Can I borrow P1M from you and in return you own 25% of me?”
Equity conversion cannot be an explanation for an increase in liability.
You have to explain it with:
1.) Increase in Asset,
2.) Decrease in another Liability,
3.) A net loss.
4.) Some or all of the above.
Tigerlily513 says
You can convert an owner’s equity by increasing your liability. Some calls it assignment, others as pledge.
Pickers in Markham says
I’m not sure I understand Equity conversion. Is it the same as debt to equity conversion or a conversion of an equity like in a reverse mortgage? If you are referring to the former and uses it as logic why you cannot account the increase in liability without increasing the asset, incurring a net loss or reduction in other form of liability then you are talking of apples and oranges. Of course you cannot own somebody else’s life but you can claim part or all of a person’s wealth OR the capacity to earn wealth (income). It happens everytime. A judge can put a lien on every wages, lottery winning, or every single funds due to a person. One’s property (including funds) can be garnished. Recovery from subrogation rights is also a perfect example. A person’s capacity to incur liability is limitless and can even go beyond his grave – passed on to his estate, heirs, successors, etc. On the other hand, a corporation can be dissolved and its assets liquidated, leaving present and future claimants holding the bag.
Arnel Dy says
“but you can claim part or all of a person’s wealth OR the capacity to earn wealth (income)”
In this case,
Expense…………xx
…….Liability……………..xx
A person can have a net loss of course.
You still have to report that you have a net loss in order to defend a deficit/negative networth/liabilities>assets.
How can a person who has positive networth on December 31, 2000, and a net income for 2001 declare a negative networth on December 31, 2001? It’s not possible.
Well there is this movie – “Repo-men” where if you fail to pay off your debt – then your artificial organs they put in you will be “forcibly repossessed” even if it costs you your life. Even then – I’d still say the artificial heart they put in you is an asset so they are just taking back the asset to pay off your liability.
However, for corporations – well there are a lot of ways to do this.
If XYZ Corp. issues convertible bonds (bond certificates with an option to be converted to stock/equity) then the holder can very well opt to convert these debt instruments to equity instruments at the stated terms.
You also have debt restructuring for companies in debt trouble whereby the company in debt and their creditors agree that the creditor forego their liens on the company for a percentage of ownership instead.
In partnerships, I can see a way by which a partner decides to pay off his debt to the firm by agreeing to reduce his equity/stake in the firm.
So for artificial entities – equity conversion is possible. But for an individual – well there’s Article III (Bill of Rights) Section 3 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution:
“Section 20. No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of a poll tax.”
Pickers in Markham says
“How can a person who has positive networth on December 31, 2000, and a net income for 2001 declare a negative networth on December 31, 2001? It’s not possible.” While we are drifting away, I’ll spare my 10 cents on this statement. Increased liability in 2001. Again, you are mixing income with asset. Income is what you earn over a year (or reporting period) while asset is what you have ANYTIME of the year. Networth is to balance sheet while income is to income statement (the purview of your ITR). Now that I see that you actually meant debt to equity conversion being not applicable to individuals you were literally implying anatomical ownership. If you don’t find this statement absurd none of my explanation would. For body corporate, a person or entity can lay claim over a company’s ownership (shareholders), assets (lienholder), profits (bondholders); revenues (bank or financers) or specific receipts (royalties). For natural persons, all of the above except ownership of his/her body. You equate networth to equity for individuals and that is fair, but you have to describe the context otherwise that statement distorts facts when used to logically explain your accounting equation. The bottomline is you can claim ownership of one’s property rights or ability to generate or acquire wealth. You trade your old car for a new model without declaring the lien. The bank can repossess the old vehicle off the dealer’s yard or from anybody who subsequently bought it.
Tigerlily513 says
Arnel and Pickers, you forgot to consider correction of error..
JiroArturo says
Kung nangutang ka ng P11M liability mo yon. At the same time naging asset mo ang P11M either in the form of cash or real property. For example if someone loan you P9M cash and P2M automobile. Mmeron ka ngayon P9M cash and P2M automobile. Kung ginasta mo ang P5M pambili ng condo meron ka ngayon P4M cash, P2M automobile and P5M condo. Ang liability mo P11M pa rin. Asset=Liability+Equity. Simple lang yon
Pickers in Markham says
What if he borrowed P11M to fund his kids education, or foreign trip, paid his medical bills or gambling debts for betting on Pacquiao’s opponents, or simply buying properties and put them under somebody’s name? How will it increase the assets? Was there an increase in income as well? It is not that simple.
DK says
@Arnel- Thanks po. Akala ko talaga mali na ang naaalala kong principles. LOL
@raissa- Agree! His winnings would account for the increases in networth since his earnings per ITR cannot explain it… Hirap lang isipin na kung natalo nga sya nung 2003, kinaya nya pala itaya sa sugal ang malaking part ng worth ng ganun ganun lang. Kung hard-earned money yun, hindi madali isugal yun.
@tigerlily- Thanks pero naguguluhan ako sa ilang points na ni-raise mo. Sa discussion, pareho lang liability ang cash advance at loan. At sana isama mo rin sa analysis mo yung 2002 SALN.
@Pickers – You should always account for the money that has gone thru your name, kahit dumaan lang ang pera. If you made a loan and donated it, there would be supporting papers and taxes for that. If you paid for your children’s education then the unconsumed part should be treated as asset. If you lost it in gambling, should be a loss and decrease in networth (pero malamang hindi naman ito aaminin ni CJ). If its for medcal bills and trips abroad, yes should be a decrease in net worth but this networth should be analyzed side by side with the ITR. How can someone lose money that ‘s not been received?
DK says
@Pickers- I think I understand your point on med bills and travels now… Yes these would lower the net worth and can be supported with receipts, medical/ travel records etc. Med bills can be a logical “palusot” but foreign leisurely travels cannot. Why would CJ borrow that huge money just to travel?
Tigerlily513 says
Per your point of view of the discussion, pareho. For me, hindi. Cash advance is different from loan. Don’t assume that a Cash Advance is Loan. That’s why you get confused. Unless you’re referring to a Cash Advance through a Credit Card. I can include an analysis for the 2002 SALN provided you can post it in here.
Pickers in Markham says
@DK -“How can someone lose money that ‘s not been received?” Sounds like a common sense logic. But basically you have to understand the definition of money. Cash is money but money is not cash. It is a medium that can be exchanged for goods and services. Here in North America, people are generally cash-strapped but it doesn’t mean they lack buying power. Credit is being leveraged and is the main currency. People don’t see these credits as a measure of wealth that could be reflected in your bank account So, yes when the bank either picks up the tab or guarantees your debt – not only to buy goods but also services that do not translate into assets – you did not receive the money. Of course you received (or avoided to receive something you do not want) some benefits and because you incurred liabilties, your networth takes a hit. What you are talking about is basic bookeeping concepts and are generally correct. But bookeeping is far too inadequate to understand the concept of wealth, let alone more confusing when used to account for it.
Arnel Dy says
You just consistently pick on the principles of accounting and yet you’ve shown a consistent lack of knowledge of it.
“But basically you have to understand the definition of money. Cash is money but money is not cash.”
Blah blah blah… much ado about nothing. Unless you are in an inflationary economy – money is cash and vice versa.
“So, yes when the bank either picks up the tab or guarantees your debt – not only to buy goods but also services that do not translate into assets – you did not receive the money. Of course you received (or avoided to receive something you do not want) some benefits and because you incurred liabilties, your networth takes a hit.”
When the bank picks up the tab – you owe the bank.
When the bank guarantees your debt – you don’t owe the bank anything. A bank guarantee to a debt does not create an accounting entry.
What’s your point? Are you even discussing anything of merit anymore? Or just
“What you are talking about is basic bookeeping concepts and are generally correct. But bookeeping is far too inadequate to understand the concept of wealth, let alone more confusing when used to account for it.”
Basic bookkeeping concepts are the foundation of Accountancy – an art that has existed since the time of the Babylonians – a thousand years before Christ. When you are talking about concepts of wealth – where else do you go to for the answers than… Accountancy!
The SALN uses basic bookkeeping. When you file your ITR you better know a few concepts in accounting. Heck, the common peddler in the streets know the basic concepts of accounting – even if he might not know the terms WE use.
Stop disparaging practice of Accountancy. If you have any other way of measuring wealth then by all means tell us – don’t go into generalities that are baseless, and irrelevant.
Your comments remind me of this line from Good Will Hunting:
“Do you have any thoughts of your own on this matter? Or do you, is that your thing, you come into a bar, read some obscure passage and then pretend – you pawn it off as your own, as your own idea just to impress some girls, embarrass my friend? ”
Good day.
Pickers in Markham says
And your point is….??? Listen, nobody can pull you out of the hole if you don’t give it a try. You will be surprised there’s a lot to learn on finance than simply bookeeping.
Arnel Dy says
1.)
Cash…………………………………………………………………………………….11M
,,,,,,,,,Liability……………………………………………………………………………………11M
~~to record loans of P11M made from XXX Bank~~
2.)
Educ Expense/Travel Expense/Medical Expense/Gambling losses…11M
………Cash……………………………………………………………………………………….11M
~~to expenses paid in cash~~
After entry 1 and 2: zero increase in assets, P11M increase in liabilities, P11M increase in expense thus a DECREASE in net income by P11M.
3.)
Liability……………………………………………………………………………………11M
,,,,,,,,,Cash………………………………………………………………………………………..11M
~~to record payment of loan from XXX Bank~~
After entry 1,2, and 3: P11M decrease in Cash, P0 increase in liabilities, P11M increase in expense thus a DECREASE in net income by P11M.
Any other questions?
Jose says
Wow!Its more fun reading your articles Raissa!
Just my two cents.
1. I believe the liabilities (Cash Advance) in the SALN totalling 11M is a mere decoy to understate the assets or conceal some of his assets. Proof: applying the accounting formula ASSETS=LIABILITIES + CAPITAL, an increase in liabilities will also increase ASSETS. The reverse is also true, a decrease in LIABILITIES will also decrease ASSETS.In the 2004 SALN compared to 2003 SALN, it is clear as daylight that there is no declared increase nor decrease in ASSETS. If we go further, there is also no increase nor decrease in Corona’s assets from 2003-2009.
But I am troubled by the choice of words used in the SALN “CASH ADVANCE”. When I hear it, the first thing I think of, is liquidation. Remember, Corona’s wife has 98% ownership of the mentioned closed corporation. When assets of a closed corporation are liquidated, the creditors are paid and the advances of the owners are settled and what remains, if any, goes to the owners.Are you thinking, what I am thinking???I will leave it up to you what is the intent of the 11 million cash advance.
2. Copy and Paste. If you look closely at the SALN from 2003-2009, the assessed value and fair market value of Corona’s properties did not increase. From 2003-2009, all the same.I dont believe that the Assessed Value and Market Value did not increase for 7 consecutive years. I believe, the one who prepared the SALN just copied and pasted the amounts.The only way to check, if the disclosure is accurate is to examine the annual real property tax payment by the Corona’s from the City Assessor’s Office.
3. Cash and Investment. From an accountant’s perspective, they should not be grouped together unless the investment is a cash equivalent. What is my point? It would be easier to gather evidence if cash is separated from investment. Of course, you can still check the bank accounts for cash, and the corresponding certificates for investment.
4.Installment.At some point, the SALN failed to disclose LIABILITIES from property acquisition by Installment. This liabilities may be in the form of a loan.Again using the formula, ASSETS=LIABILITIES + CAPITAL, an increase in ASSETS has a corresponding increase in LIABILITIES.Unfortunately, there is none in the SALN with respect to property acquisitions via installment.
5.Properties sold.The sale of 2 properties were mentioned but the proceeds from the sale were not disclosed in the SALN.The selling price and the corresponding gain derived from the sale of the 2 properties can be traced to the capital gains tax declaration with the BIR.
I smell something fishy in the SALN.
raissa says
Thank you for your very detailed analysis.
I’m sure others will be reading this.
nakita says
natawa ko dun sa article nio po ma’am . . yung interview nio sa lawyer … … abogado talaga … i mean … palaging may sagot … and it seems na indi na importante kung may sense o tama o mali yung sagot … as long as may palusot …
no offense sa mga lawyers na matitino …
pero ngayon ako naniniwala kung bakit hindi uunlad ang pilipinas … imaginin mo yung taga-pagtanggol natin ng batas … sila pa yung … binubudo ang taong indi nakakaintindi ng batas … … read between the lines … the interview says it all … labo … kawawang pilipinas
Tigerlily513 says
Observations:
From 2002 up to 2006, Corona hid the fact that his wife is a Director in a government-owned and controlled corporation. R.A. 6713 Rule VII Public Disclosure Sec. 1 F. says: (f) Married couples who are both public officials or employees may file the required statements jointly or separately. Therefore, the SALNs above are Separately accounted for Justice Corona only. Being that, the following are my observation:
1. The movements of his “monthly income” derived per computation in the graph can be considered fairly stated except in 2010 that it appears he “earns” around P614,998 due to the pay-off of the cash advance.
2. It’s a basic knowledge that a Corporation has a separate personality from its owners or stakeholders. Therefore, it doesn’t follow that he can be allowed to obtain a “cash advance” as it was called in his SALNs if he’s the husband of 1 of the major owners. One has to be a legitimate “part” of the Corporation before one can be allowed such kind of advances.
3. If we will establish the definition of “cash advance” the definition will not meet the amount and the length of time it was outstanding as disclosed in the SALN. Cash advance pertains to “revolving cash” in order to support the day-to-day transactions of a business. The largest amount for a “Cash advance” that I’ve seen during my more than 15 years experience in audit is P100,000. In a certain network industry, such amount (P100K) is normally being used to cover expenses for a day’s shooting. As to the term or the length of time that it’s expected to be outstanding, Cash Advances should be liquidated at least on a monthly basis. The longest however could take a year, wherein, as discussed by the Lawyers above, it might expose the Company to some BIR requirements that it had to be imputed with interests and should be reclassifed as “Advances to Employees/Officers/Related Party as necessary. The reclassification of Cash Advances to “Advances to Employees/Officers/Related-Parties” would entail detailed documentation.
4. The Cash advance was reclassified into “Cash Advance from Wife’s Family Corporation” in 2006, in which case it implies that the wife acted as the Receiver of the Corporation of the Cash Advance that is not legitimate by its nature as the Accounting and Tax definition dictate in the first place.
Conclusion:
The SALN’s disclosed above are not fairly stated.
Please see for the graph: http://tigerlily513.tumblr.com/post/16403884134/observations-from-2002-up-to-2006-corona-hid
raissa says
Your link doesn’t seem to work.
Tigerlily513 says
Sorry. Re-sending:
http://flik1206.tumblr.com/post/16403884134/observations-from-2002-up-to-2006-corona-hid
jorgebernas says
Napakasinungaling niyang si thief justice corona at siyempre kasama mga anak at asawa… ha ha ha nakakaawa na kayo dahil sa maling kagagawan ni thief justice renato corona, nagpaka TUTA kasi at nagpaka gahan sa Pera….ilabas kong ano ang totoo at huwag gamitin ang butas butas na batas para magpa lusot…
keanleogo says
dear Raissa,
My humble suggestion; those contributors with bogus email addresses should be deleted from our discussion because they are not accountable and not going to be responsible for what they wrote in this blog-site.
raissa says
I will consider it.
Seriously
Mr Croc says
Almost ALL POLITICIAN’S SALNs are fake. So what’s new??? It just happens that Corona is targeted for destruction (too bad for him). I challenge the so called NOT CORRUPT Aquino administration to investigate the SALN’s of his allies also!
The attitude of Filipinos + attitude of our media = all hell breaks lose
raissa says
And you don’t want that to change?
Hanep.
kurapbuster says
Hey crook, why not go to congress and file an impeachment against those politician who you think have false SALN.
You are in the wrong venue mate. Barking on the wrong tree. Tuta ka talaga…
johnny lin says
100% si Mr Croc government employee or businessman affected by corruption exposure based on specifically pinpointing and highlighting POLITICIANS and NOT CORRUPT. He has proof of corruptiion.
Nina says
Exactly why we should set an example now. We now have the perfect opportunity to set a message to all public officials. That the practice of making false declarations on your SALN is not ok. That we are not tolerating it. That you can and will be held accountable.
Beth says
Hi Ms. Raissa,
Just want to share my observations on CJ Corona’s SALN:
1. networth increase per year:
2003 – 7,359,080.00
2004 – 7,359,080.00
2005 – 8,359,080.00 increase of 1M from 2004
2006 – 9,559,080.00 increase of 1.2 M from 2005
2007 – 11,059,080.00 increase of 1.5M from 2006
2008 – 12,559,080.00 increase of 1.5 from 2007
2009 – 14,559.080.00 increase of 2M from 2008
2010 – 22,938,980.00 increase of 8.4M from 2009
2. In 2010 SALN, the increase in his networth is due to the decreased in liabilities by 3M and increase in his assets by 5.4M. Based on the movement in his assets & liabilities, I would assume that the increased in networth is due to his NET INCOME.
3. Based on my theory that 2010 networth increase is from his NET Income, then he should have paid at least 2.7M in income taxes (23% of 8.4M). Can you please look into his Income Tax Return for 2010? I would expect that his Net Income is not just 8.4M. The 8.4M is just part of his net disposable income na he was able to invest and form part of his Assets. Since he is an individual tax payer, his personal expeses are not part of his Income Statements. So his Net Income should be more than 8.4M.
Hope my analysis helps.
Arnel Dy says
Please please please include his NW for 2002:
2002 – 14,968,000
percy1007 says
I am bothered by the legalese in the impeachment proceedings and I believe that the people must really understand how the final judgement is made. It just so happened that the Senate today have several lawyers among them and can participate actively in the trial. Some senators may or may not have the same level of understanding to come to a proper conclusion. I think the framers of the Constitution did not foresee a situation wherein a senate don’t have a lawyer amidst them. So in an impeachment trial with few or no senator-lawyers, the rules and procedures should be what a layman can understand.
Atty Cuevas muddes the proceedings that confuses the people on why the truth is being suppressed.
Laurence says
First, I would like to commend on a great work on this article Ms. Raissa!
You’ve spotted a possible financial red flag in Corona’s SALN. This is a good point to start in the examination of the Chief Justice’s finances. I agree that the SALN is a balance sheet. Having that, it suffers from the limitation that it only reflects the financial position of CJ Corona for the particular reporting day intended – December 31 of the reporting year. I hope the prosecutors do all they can to exhume all documents and papers needed in order to reconstruct a sort of “income statement” (a little note for those not acquainted in accounting: an income statement reflects the result of operations of a business like the revenue earned and expenses made. the income statement reports on a certain period unlike a balance sheet that reflects information for a particular day only) of the Chief Justice in order to paint whether his financial activities can in fact lead to the preparation of these SALNs.
johnny lin says
Miriam says Corona could be censured because according to her the prescription in impeachment is NOT TO GO BEYOND REMOVAL IN OFFICE.
I believe many constitutionalists would disagree with her because impeachment is removal in office by itself nothing more, nothing less. What “not to go beyond removal” means is the CJ could not be jailed or fine for any crimial or civil offense for the impeachment charge. After removal from office, then other charges criminal like graft and corruption or tax evasion could be instituted against him in proper court.
Censure is a slap on the wrist. It was not in the constitution. Censure applies to disciplinary measures, not impeachment.
Miriam is going to International Court, she is putting herself to ridicule by other lawyers. She should temper her legal jargon. I am not a lawyer but I will bet her she is wrong in her opinion. Philippine law on Impeachment was based from US Constitutions. US judges were charged by impeachment for simple perjury and censure was not even mentioned as punishment. Its always removal from office.
Surprising, Miriam, a prominent lawyer and Senator is talking about censure as punishment alongside of impeachment of officials. In US history during Clinton impeachment or Justice Porteous impeachment by US Congress in 2010, the word censure was unheard of.
12th Angry Man says
Mirriam Aggressor is way toooo intelligent…in an idiotic way…just my observation…
Also the Antique Cuevas is a brillant lawyer only in technicalities. that’s all – iyun ang pasiklad niya. But I admire him – dresses like a playboy godfather, and really plays the role of a lawyer to godfathers.
Pickers in Markham says
To impeach means to indict or charge, therefore impeachment is just an indictment. Corona has already been impeached. If any of the charges was proven, the maximum penalty is removal and perpetual disqualification from holding public office. That is what Miriam was referring to. Once removed, Corona can be charged in the judicial court for graft, corruption, etc. (he could even be charged now as he has no immunity) Any charge that involves a potential deprivation of life or liberty is within the jurisdiction of the judiciary except in Martial Law or dictatorial regime
Wheng says
Thanks Raissa :) …I’m an accountant too so I’m really looking forward kung ano maging end story ng questionable SALN na eto. LOL
van says
Great read!
Please never stop. We need voices like yours.
Bernard Dino says
Big TV networks already picked up this piece and has given the defense another Damocles sword. I think your unwrapping of this angle will be the second envelope in the corona case so I expect that they will throw all the legal books to stop the merit of this angle.
In the meantime please stay out of legal trouble considering how the judiciary was pique by this issue and you are now in their cross hair.
raissa says
And what would you suggest I do to stay out of legal trouble?
[email protected] says
ms robles,
many thanks! i’v e learned a lot from your blog.Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago once used the term CULTURE OF CORRUPTION. i would appreciate it verty much if someday you’ll find time to write an article about it.more power to you and god bless!
raissa says
You’re welcome.
I will.