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.