I FOR ONE COMMEND THE FIRM STAND MADE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE SECRETARY LEILA DE LIMA FOR STANDING HER GROUND AS THE WITNESS OF THE PROSECUTION TEAM AGAINST THE CHIEF JUSTICE RENATO CORONADO CORONA WITH REGARDS TO ARTICLE 7 OF THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL ALLEGEDLY SHOWING THE IMPARTIALITY OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE RENATO CORONA IN THE ISSUANCE OF TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER TO FORMER PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL ARROYO ET.AL. IN THE BEGINNING OF THE TRIAL, SECRETARY DE LIMA NARRATED THE STORY OF HOW THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHOW HIS IMPARTIALITY IN THE IST, 2ND AND 3RD EN BANC RESOLUTION BUT SHE RELIED HEAVILY ON THE DISSENTING OPINION OF ASSOCIATE JUSTICE SERENO TO PROVE HER ALLEGATION. ALTHOUGH HER NARRATIVE STAND AS IT IS BUT IT CANNOT BE USED AS EVIDENCE BECAUSE IT FALLS UNDER THE CATEGORY OF HEARSAY EVIDENCE BECAUSE SHE IS NOT BODILY PRESENT AND HAD NO DIRECT PARTICIPATION WHATSOEVER IN THE DECISION MAKING OF THE SAID RESOLUTION. THE DILEMMA OF DE LIMA WENT INTO DEEPER WHEN THE
This is how I describe my life. A wanderer, a man without definite purpose and destination. As I move forward, I left behind some foot prints for you...!