The impeachment trial is getting more interesting as more documents purported to be the evidences of the prosecution against Chief Justice Renato Corona are identified by the former’s witnesses and marked for the prosecution. What is even more intriguing is that, as Internal Revenue Commissioner Kim Jacinto-Henares stated under oath, there were documents which came to the witnesses’ possession through the media. This galvanizes Sen. Gregorio Honasan’s remarks in open court last Thursday that the trial outside proceeds faster than that in the impeachment court.

Is it not a fact that news networks are getting exceedingly zealous to the point of discussing in front of the reeling camera salient matters unravelling in the impeachment trial including the substance of the evidences presented to the court and how these will work towards the conviction or acquittal of CJ Corona? Is it bizarre for news commentators to inject legal opinion on major points of the trial creating popular view usually taking side with one of the litigating parties? If no, is it ethical? If it is morally sound, is it lawful?

Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago is also getting her top blown up with the antics of prosecution lawyers, particularly private lawyer Arthur Lim. She could not hold her rant for the gestures of the private prosecutor (who should be litigating for the prosecution without professional fee from the prosecution fund) in being “sententious” and verbose. She reproached the lawyer not to be such “because every hour counts.”

This in every detail of it is relevant, considering the surrounding circumstances that make this impeachment trial a so-called box office hit. The media plays a very important part in this political activity in the aspect of letting the people know what is going on in the impeachment trial. However, there are certain individuals who take advantage of the media mileage for their pretentious cause. This is what the lady senator must be signifying.

Earlier during her first appearance in the impeachment court as juror, Sen. Santiago commented that without cameras flashing and reeling around the court, the impeachment trial could be over in one week. She insinuated on certain participants in the impeachment proceedings who are utilizing the live coverage and media play up of the impeachment trial for their political gain. This statement of the female lawmaker caused the Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile to overreact and challenge for his replacement as presiding judge. No one, nevertheless, budged a bit. Therefore, Enrile remains the neutral presiding judge of the impeachment court.

In last Thursday’s trial, BIR Commissioner Henares was made to express her personal opinion on the relation between the income tax returns and statements of assets, liabilities and networth of CJ Corona. Prosecution chief counsel Iloilo Rep. Niel Tupas, was quoted of his opinion that the value of the purported properties were “manifestly out of proportion.” However, some Senator-judges who stood up after the cross examination on Comm. Henares remarked otherwise.

Not to pre-empt any party’s next move, the people should also understand that the judges and justices of the Supreme Court are likewise receiving additional income called the Special Allowance for the Judiciary which amount is equal to their respective monthly salary. This is on top of the other allowances and bonuses they could also be receiving as part of the judiciary’s fiscal autonomy. This fiscal autonomy, incidentally is a provision in the so-called “fundamental law of the land” which was amended and ratified to be the 1987 Philippine Constitution during the term of the late Pres. Corazon Aquino, mother of Pres. Noynoy (PNoy). This fiscal autonomy, months before the impeachment of CJ Corona, was among the crucial points battered in the tussle between Malacañang Palace and the Supreme Court. The budget of the judiciary, in spite of the Constitution’s command is one part of the judiciary’s operation that Malacañang Palace allegedly wants to have a hold over.

Vis-à-vis all these things to ponder, there are still a lot of factors to consider before the public could pass judgment on this impeachment proceedings and before judging CJ Corona of guilt in all the eight Articles cited in the Impeachment Complaint.

Remember the Biblical “Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.”

By: Eileen Nazareno-Ballesteros