The Supreme Court (SC), sitting as the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET), is expected to hand down a ruling favorable to former senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., who questioned the election victory of Vice President Maria Leonor “Leni” Robredo.
Vice President Maria Leonor “Leni” Robredo. & Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr
Unimpeachable sources told The Manila Times on Monday that the justices would finally vote on the draft ponencia of Associate Justice Benjamin Caguioa during the en banc session today, October 15. Caguiao’s 54-page draft resolution seeks the outright dismissal of Marcos’ poll protest for lack of merit.
But sources said an overwhelming majority of the justices believe that the case should proceed to the next stage to determine if the vice presidential race was indeed marred with fraud.
Unless they will have a sudden change of heart, sources said nine to 12 justices would side with Marcos. Rejecting the Caguioa draft would mean that the tribunal would allow the next course of action — the reception of evidence on the issue of annulment of votes in Mindanao provinces, including Basilan, Maguindanao and Lanao del Sur.
There are 14 justices because the post left by Associate Justice Francis Jardeleza is yet to be filled.
“The elbow room will be nine to 12 justices for Bongbong Marcos. After the Justices rendered their reflections, we can see their inclinations already,” one source told The Times.
The source added that Chief Justice Lucas Bersamin, Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio and Associate Justice Amy Lazaro Javier submitted their opinions on the draft ruling. Based on their “reflections” Bersamin and Carpio may clash during the voting because the latter sided with Caguioa while the former did not.
The source said Carpio backed Caguioa’s recommendation that the electoral protest be dismissed outright on the basis of Rule 65 of the PET rules that the protestant did not make any recovery during the revision of ballots in the pilot provinces of Camarines Sur, Negros Oriental and Iloilo.
On the other hand, Bersamin and Javier wanted to pursue the third cause of action, which is the continuation of the election protest on the basis of the annulment of votes in Mindanao. This would allow the tribunal to observe due process until the final determination of the case since the revision of ballots can stand independently from the issue of annulment of votes in Mindanao provinces.
Meanwhile, the source said Associate Justice Mario Victor Leonen wanted the tribunal to issue a unanimous ruling on the second cause of action. He also batted for oral arguments before proceeding with the third cause of action.
The source explained that the reception of evidence for the annulment of election results in Mindanao would be separate from the revision of ballots. Also, Robredo’s camp will be given the chance to proceed with the revision of ballots in her pilot provinces for her counter protest.
Once the Caguioa draft is “defeated,” the justices will allegedly elect among themselves a new ponente who will be tasked to write the draft for the next round of action.
Not all justices will attend the en banc session. Leonen will be on wellness leave beginning today, while Associate Justice Jose Reyes is abroad.
Appeal
Robredo’s lawyers on Monday asked the tribunal to uphold its rules in resolving the election protest filed by Marcos.In a manifestation, Robredo’s legal counsels Romulo Macalintal and Maria Bernadette Sardillo emphasized that the vice president “has the highest respect to the honorable tribunal that the rules will not be changed in the middle of the game.”
Macalintal and Sardillo stressed that Rule 65 states that the election protest must be dismissed if Marcos fails to prove his allegations of fraud and irregularities in three pilot provinces.
“Clearly, the issue on whether the election protest can proceed will hinge on whether protestant Marcos was able to show substantial recovery in his pilot provinces,” they added.
Macalintal said setting aside Rule 65 was a “form of discrimination” against the vice president.
“For the PET to deviate from Rule 65 is a violation of Robredo’s right to due process and equal protection of the law,” he added.
“It will even violate the constitutional mandate that all bona fide candidates should be free from any form of discrimination, because if Rule 65 will not be applied, then there will be a case of discrimination against the vice president in the application of the rules.”
The Marcos camp, however, said Robredo’s appeal was “mere propaganda.”
In a statement, Vic Rodriguez, Marcos’ spokesman, said their camp had been calling for a just and expeditious determination of the case.
“We treat her manifestation, though meant purely for propaganda purposes, serves nonetheless as an affirmation of what Sen. Bongbong Marcos have long demanded for her and the chairman of the election protest to observe, respect for the Rule of the Presidential Electoral Tribunal,” the statement said.
ALSO READ: A Doctor's Open Letter to Robredo: "You are not fit to be Vice President"
In his protest, Marcos assailed the election results in 39,221 clustered precincts. He said the 2016 vice presidential race was marred by “massive electoral fraud, anomalies and irregularities.”
Found this article interesting? Share it with your friends! 👍🏼
This article first appeared on The Manila Times. Written by JOMAR CANLAS, TMT.
No comments:
Post a Comment