Estrada aides ask Supreme Court to explain his removal

Estrada aides ask Supreme Court to explain his removal

MANILA (Agencies): Supporters of former President Joseph
Estrada asked the Supreme Court on Monday to explain the legality
of his ouster in a step that could lead to a legal challenge to
the new president's authority.

The formal request urges the court to outline the legal basis
for its swearing in on Jan. 20 of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as
swelling street protests, which included the country's top
generals, forced Estrada to leave the presidential palace.

Estrada made a point of not signing a resignation letter. He
has said he was only incapacitated for a while and handed over
power temporarily.

"Leaving the palace is not the equivalent of resigning," said
Dan Natividad, a legal aide who submitted the request to the
court on Monday. "We are now supporting an unconstitutional
president."

He said he expects the Supreme Court to reply within 24 hours
to his "request for clarification."

Another lawyer, Oliver Lozano, who has filed a variety of
petitions in local courts backing unpopular causes, said the
Supreme Court action in declaring Arroyo president was void
because Estrada had not officially resigned.

"It is respectfully prayed that...Madame Gloria Macapagal
Arroyo be declared acting president and President Joseph Ejercito
Estrada president on leave in the interest of authentic national
reconciliation and public welfare," Lozano said in his petition.

Lozano, a staunch supporter of late dictator Ferdinand Marcos,
attracted media attention last September during military
operations against Muslim Abu Sayyaf rebels holding foreign and
Filipino hostages on the southern island of Jolo.

He announced he was the lawyer of Abu Sayyaf leader Galib
Andang and that his client was ready to surrender. Andang never
did.

The Supreme Court did not say what it would do with Lozano's
petition. Under court rules, it can either formally hear it
before issuing a decision or throw it out.

Other lawyers say they need to receive and study the Supreme
Court's legal opinion to decide whether to launch a legal battle
questioning the legitimacy of Macapagal-Arroyo's appointment.

Meanwhile, about 100 Estrada supporters rallied outside the
Supreme Court, waving large white placards with a "?" in red
spray paint. The protesters chanted support for the ousted
president and demanded an explanation of the swearing in of
Macapagal-Arroyo.

The new president, after taking a day off for golf and church,
faced more bad news on Monday as Budget Secretary Emilia Boncodin
said the budget deficit may balloon to 200 billion pesos
($4 billion) this year if the government fails to curb expenses
and improve revenue collection.

An assessment showed a budget of 725 billion pesos proposed by
Estrada's administration for this year would require a lot of
borrowing, Boncodin said.

Weak revenue collection and proceeds from privatization of
government assets resulted in a budget deficit last year of 136.1
billion pesos, way more than an original target of 62.5 billion
pesos.

Estrada faces allegations that he amassed a fortune in bribes
and kickbacks, so Macapagal-Arroyo has made clean government a
top priority.

Estrada's impeachment trial transformed into a criminal
investigation when he left office. He has been barred from
leaving the country and had a bank account frozen.

Justice Secretary Hernando Perez said over the weekend that a
new witness who was "really close" to Estrada has come forward to
testify about the former president's alleged ill-gotten wealth.
"He will show us the paper trail that we need against Estrada,"
Perez said in an interview with radio station DZBB.

Perez refused to confirm or deny news reports on Monday saying
the witness was Mark Jimenez, a wealthy businessman closely
associated with Estrada. Perez said he wanted to protect the
security of their witness, adding more people are expected to
testify against Estrada.

The United States asked the Philippine government in 1999 to
extradite Jimenez on charges of tax evasion, wire fraud,
conspiracy, giving false statements and illegal campaign
contributions to President Clinton.

Estrada's impeachment trial stemmed from allegations in
October by Ilocos Sur provincial Gov. Luis "Chavit" Singson,
Estrada's former drinking and gambling buddy, that the president
pocketed millions of dollars in illegal gambling payoffs and
kickbacks from tobacco taxes.