Senate Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano's
second manifestation during CJ trial day 7
Re: Ruling of impeachment court to not treat section 2.4 as a separate article and to not accept any evidence regarding ill-gotten wealth

On the issue of Ill-Gotten Wealth

Napansin ni Senator Alan Cayetano na tila bumabalik ang diskusyon ng Impeachment Court sa paksang natalakay na at nabigyan na ng ruling kahapon. Ito ay patungkol sa isyu ng ill-gotten wealth.

Nilinaw niya na napagkayarian na na ang ill-gotten wealth ay hindi maaaring talakayin bilang isang "separate charge" sapagkat kung titingnan ang lahat ng articles of impeachment ay walang nakalagay doon na charge ng graft and corruption mula sa alegasyon ng ill-gotten wealth.

Sa kasalukuyang pagtalakay ng Impeachment Court sa Article 2 na patungkol sa non-disclosure ng SALN ng Chief Justice na nangangahulugang hindi ka nag-file o nag-file ka ng hindi kumpleto o nag-file ka na mayroong mga iniba o hindi sinama.

Ngunit sa pagtalaky ng 2.2 at 2.3 ng Article 2, kung maipakita na mayroong properties na hindi naisama sa SALN at pag napakita na ang mga properties na ito ay hindi kayang bayaran ng legitimate income ng Chief Justice, malilipat ngayon ang tinatawag ng "burden of proof" sa kabillang panig kung saan ang kailangang patunayan ay ang mga yamang nabanggit ay hindi ill-gotten.

Tulad ng napagkasunduan kahapon, lahat na ng tatalakayin patungkol dito will be in the form of a motion upang bigyan diin na ang ibig patunayan (ng prosekyusyon) sa pagkakataong ito ay ang kakulangan ng full disclosure at hindi ang alegasyon ng ill-gotten wealth.

ACTUAL TRANSCRIPT OF MANIFESTATION

We just want to place on record na sinsabi naming nina Sen. Lacson na napanood na namin to kahapon, parang nagreplay tayo. Ibig sabihin there has been some misunderstanding with the ruling. Kasi I was also surprised when the prosecution stood up to make a motion for reconsideration but at the same time the defense are also making some comments. Ibig sabihin parehong ayaw sa desisyon. Bihira pong mangyari yun.

So let me try to do my part in making some clarifications. My understanding of the agreement in the caucus, without expounding on the ruling and simply saying my understanding is ang ill-gotten wealth cannot be considered as a separate charge. Because if tiningnan niyo lahat ng articles of impeachment walang nakalagay doon na graft and corruption na ill-gotten wealth.

So this court will not be accepting evidence to prove ill-gotten wealth as far as a separate charge. But as far as Article 2 is concerned, non-disclosure means hindi ka nag-file or nag-file ka ng hindi kumpleto or nag-file ka na mayroong mga iniba or hindi sinama.

Now, in the course of proving 2.2 and 2.3, kung maipakita na mayroong properties na hindi naisama sa SALN at pag napakita na ang mga properties na ito ay hindi kayang bayaran ng legitimate income ng Chief Justice then there is a presumption in law. Because there are Supreme Court cases that said na magsshift na ngayon ang burden, magigin burden ngayon ng kabila to show that this is not ill-gotten.

So in that sense, you are not proving ang pagiging ill-gotten, you are still proving whether there was full disclosure or complete disclosure under Article 2. That is my understanding, Mr. President. I will stick to what the President said yesterday and the gentleman from Iloilo and anything we will say today will be in the nature of a motion for reconsideration maski na klaro naman ang sinabi ng ating Senate President at klaro naman clarification po ni Senator Drilon. So anything anyone says here right now, unless any of the judges are asking for a motion for reconsideration, but yesterday we were unanimous.

So ang pakiusap po sana namin ay ituloy na po natin yung hearing and let's not argue on this point because it has already been decided and we spent so much time reading your memorandum and discussing this on the floor already.