Ibinato ang mahalagang tanong: Lorna, Chiz ginisa ang testigo sa SALN ni VP Sara — ABS-CBN News

[0:01] If anyone makes a misrepresentation, if a public officer makes a misrepresentation that he or she is a shareholder of GenCorp as internal counsel, [0:14] isn't it your duty to bring it to the attention of the company for which you are in-house sole, sole lawyer? [0:23] There is no external counsel. You're the only lawyer. You did not bring it to the attention of the company. [0:28] Your Honor, Aston answered, and it is also speculative, Your Honor. [0:32] Shaking her head, Your Honor. She answered, but she said... [0:35] Attorney Suzette, kindly answer... Yes, I've been seeing you either shaking your head or nodding. [0:41] Kindly verbalize your answers, Attorney Suzette. [0:45] Sorry, Your Honor. May we ask a ruling, Your Honor. [0:47] Same objection, Your Honor. [0:49] Move on, counsel. Move on, Attorney Lerner. [0:51] Thank you, Your Honor. [0:52] May I call your attention to the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability. [1:17] You're a lawyer of 15 years. [1:20] I assume you're familiar with this Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability. [1:27] And I call your attention, Madam Counsel, to Section 11 of the Code. [1:34] You have no copy. [1:35] I will read Section 11 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability to which all of us lawyers, in-house, external counsel, senators, congressmen, prosecution lawyers, adhere to. [1:53] It says, in Section 11, false representations of statements and a duty to correct. [2:01] If I may read here, a lawyer shall not make any false representations or statements. [2:13] And a lawyer shall be liable for any material damage caused by such false representations or statements. [2:23] Correct? [2:25] Objection, Your Honor. [2:26] Misleading. [2:26] It's misrepresenting how the provision is to be applied. [2:32] The witness already answered that it's not her obligation in respect to other entities. [2:38] And it also assumes facts not yet established in evidence, Your Honor. [2:42] Counsel, I think the question was just if she was aware of that CIPRA rule. [2:48] We're not yet there. [2:51] Attorney Suzette, are you familiar with that rule under CIPRA? [2:55] I am ready to listen, Your Honor. [2:59] I do not memorize the CIPRA. [3:01] Any false representation made, if known to the lawyer, must be corrected. [3:08] Especially if, in addition to that, it is complicated by the fact that the person who misrepresented is a lawyer herself. [3:19] The vice president being a lawyer herself, misrepresenting in her sal-en that she, or representing in her sal-en that she is a shareholder of Gencor. [3:38] What's the question, counsel? [3:41] What is the objection? [3:42] What is the question, counsel? Before the objection, what is your question, counsel? [3:47] You laid the basis. [3:48] It is the contention of your defense lawyer that Vice President Sara is not a shareholder, [3:59] incorporator, is not a shareholder, is not a board member, is not a member of any committee, [4:08] does not participate in management of Gencor because, and you affirm, her name is not in the general information sheet. [4:19] You affirm that? [4:21] Your Honor, before the witness answers, just a manifestation. [4:25] For the record, we are not the lawyer of the witness, since earlier the counsel for prosecution stated that you're lawyer from the defense. [4:34] We are not the lawyer of the witness, Your Honor. [4:37] And second, Your Honor, for the record, and to enrich the records, it is not our contention, [4:41] it was the answer of the witness through the questions that we propounded, Your Honor. [4:48] Noted. It's not an objection to the question. [4:51] Kindly answer the question, Attorney Suzette. [4:53] I confirm that the Vice President is not a stockholder as indicated in the GIS. [5:01] Yes. [5:02] Okay. So you confirm, based on your personal knowledge and the records presented by counsel for the respondent, [5:13] that she is not stated there as shareholder? [5:17] Yes, ma'am. [5:18] Okay. Why then, if you know, if she is not a stockholder, director, officer, ex-com, management, whatever committee of Gencor, [5:33] why is there a statement in the sal-en of the Vice President of this company, Gencor, [5:45] as being part of her declaration? [5:49] I cannot answer for the Vice President, ma'am. [5:55] You cannot answer for the Vice President. [5:58] Yes. [5:59] Thank you. So only the Vice President can explain why she listed herself as being a shareholder of Gencor. [6:12] Is that what you're saying? [6:14] She can answer, yes. [6:15] She can answer. Thank you. [6:17] But for now, I will ask you for now, though. [6:22] Has Gencor, as in-house counsel of Gencor, would you know if Gencor, this being a very public case, [6:34] and covered by national media, and covered by an impeachment court, [6:38] would you know if Gencor has issued any public statement stating for the record and so that the public is not confused? [6:49] Has Gencor made any public statement through you or through media denying that the Vice President [7:00] has any interest, shareholding or otherwise, in Gencor? [7:07] No. [7:08] No such statement, Madam Witness? [7:12] No such statement. [7:17] Would you know why? [7:19] No, ma'am. [7:20] No also. [7:21] Let us now go to, earlier in, on direct examination, many questions were asked about Gencor and the franchises. [7:44] Yes, ma'am. [7:45] Correct. [7:45] And in connection with the direct examination, you mentioned in answer to the Defense Council [7:54] that the Vice President has no interest or does not own any of the five franchises located in Davao. [8:06] You confirm that? [8:07] I confirm, ma'am. [8:11] Okay. [8:12] And these franchises, as you correctly clarified, are franchises not owned by any shareholder, but by the corporation? [8:29] Yes, ma'am. [8:30] Not a single shareholder of Gencor owns the franchise. [8:38] Yes, ma'am. [8:38] Correct. [8:38] So, if it is Gencor that, through a series of transfers of corporations, if it is Gencor that ended up with five Jollibee franchises, [8:54] it is then Gencor, the company, that owns the franchises. [9:01] Yes, ma'am. [9:02] Correct. [9:02] And if it were true, since no denial has been made by Gencor, nor by the Vice President, admitted through silence, [9:16] if it be true that Gencor owns the five franchises, and if we were to accept the theory of our forensic expert, [9:33] that she, the Vice President, has made, has a 20% interest by analogy, and the reasoning is in the report. [9:49] But if it be so, based on the reasoning made by the forensic expert of the prosecution, that even if she is not stated in the GIS, [10:05] since she made an admission, or she made an admission, or she made a statement in the SAL-N, that she is a shareholder, [10:14] then, by reasoning, if there are five franchises owned by the company, then the Vice President herself, through the company, owns the franchise. [10:32] Correct? [10:32] Your Honor, the question was quite long. May I just ask that it be repeated? [10:37] So, I would know. I got lost in the middle. May I ask that it be repeated, Your Honor? [10:46] Can we do so, Attorney Lorna? [10:47] I will shorten the question. [10:49] Yes, please. [10:49] Gencor owns the five franchises, correct, Madam Witness? [10:55] Yes, ma'am. [10:56] And if Gencor owns the five Jollibee franchises, the shareholders own. [11:07] The Gencor has shareholders, correct? [11:10] Gencor has shareholders, yes. [11:12] And if these five franchises earn money, the shareholders are entitled to the earnings or dividends from these franchises, correct? [11:21] They would have an interest. [11:25] The corporation is an artificial entity. [11:31] The corporation is owned by shareholders. [11:34] And in the franchise situation, the franchises are owned by the corporation, correct? [11:42] So, if this is the question now, attorney, if the Vice President declared in her salen that she is a shareholder of Gencor, then therefore, she has a financial pecuniary interest in the franchises which are owned by the company of which she is a shareholder, correct? [12:15] Objection, Your Honor? [12:16] Objection, Your Honor. [12:17] No basis, speculative and misleading. [12:20] The witness has already previously answered that the Vice President has no interest and is not a stockholder and has no interest in these franchises, Your Honor. [12:31] Your Honor, please, that is not... [12:33] I think Council is not objecting to the question. [12:36] I am objecting to the question, Your Honor. [12:38] That is not the question, Your Honor. [12:40] The question is, since the Vice President herself, by her own admission, stated in her salen that she is a shareholder of Gencor, then she is a shareholder of the company that owns the five franchises. [12:56] It is just direct reasoning, logic, it's just logic. [13:02] Do you see the logic of that question, attorney? [13:05] Allow me, allow me, Councils, so that we can move forward. [13:09] Attorney Suzette, nilagay po kasi ng ikalawang pangulo sa salen niya na stockholder siya ng Gencor. [13:15] Kung ano man po ang basihan nun, kung ang basihan man nun, ay meron siyang interest, meron siyang loose investment, ika nga nang sinabi niyo, o meron siyang gustong ibalik o return of capital, nilagay po niya ron ang stockholder siya ng Gencorp. [13:32] Hindi po niya in-specify na yung Jollibee lang sa Times Square. [13:38] Bagaman nilagay niya sa kanyang salen na Gencorp formerly known as Times Square B. [13:45] Pero Gencorp pa rin yung kumpanya ang sinabi at hindi nagbanggit ng branch. [13:53] Kaya po bilang abogado, kung yun po ang nakita niyo, stockholder sa Gencorp, [14:01] reasonable bang interpretasyon na kasama dun lahat ng pag-aari ng Gencorp? [14:06] O pwede mo bang ilimita lamang sa isang branch tulad ng sinabi niyo? [14:10] Kung ang makikita niyo lamang ay yung deklarasyon ng Vice President na stockholder siya ng Gencorp? [14:16] Her unilateral declaration, Your Honor, will not make her a stockholder. [14:27] That's her answer, counsel. [14:29] What do you mean by unilateral? [14:32] What concept is unilateral? [14:34] Her own... [14:35] Madam Witness. [14:37] Her own... [14:38] Her own declaration, you're saying? [14:41] How would you characterize... [14:42] May I finish my answer, Your Honor? [14:44] No, no, no, no, no, no, no. [14:46] How would you characterize a statement made by the Vice President in her salen? [14:55] I would characterize it as an admission. [14:59] And you are saying what? [15:00] It is a unilateral declaration? [15:03] Counsel, allow me. [15:05] Before I recognize Senator Judge Luxon, unilateral vis-a-vis Gencorp. [15:10] But not unilateral in relation to whatever admissions the Vice President may have made in her salen. [15:18] Senator Judge Ping Luxon, please. [15:21] What is your pleasure, sir? [15:22] Thank you, Mr. President, sir. [15:24] This is getting to be interesting but also confusing. [15:27] From a layman to a lawyer, Attorney Susset, between an admission against interest, notarized, [15:37] and official public documents like the GIS, which has more admissibility and probative weight. [15:52] The SEC records, Your Honor. [15:54] SEC records? [15:55] Are you sure? [16:00] For me, the SEC records, Your Honor. [16:02] I will refer you to Section 27, Rule 130, Rules of Court. [16:11] Are you familiar? [16:14] I do not memorize the Rules of Court, Your Honor. [16:17] Ang alam ko, mas may probative weight or admissibility weight yung admission against interest. [16:24] Correct. [16:25] Meron nga akong kakilala sa TV lang nag-admit, nakulong eh. [16:31] Ito, notarized pa ito, itong salen. [16:35] Maraming salamat, Mr. President, officer.