Marcos protest deemed sufficient: SC as PET
THE Supreme Court (SC), sit- ting as the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET), has affirmed that it will proceed with the electoral protest filed by former senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” R. Marcos, Jr. against his rival in the 2016 election campaign, VicePresident Maria Leonor “Leni” G. Robredo.
In an eight-page notice of resolution released only yesterday, the PET said it “has found the [p]rotest to be sufficient in form and substance,” but also added that, “as to the veracity of the protestant’s allegations, nothing yet has been proved.”
“The protestee’s ( Robredo’s) prayer to dismiss the Protest for lack of jurisdiction and for being insufficient in form and substance is denied,” the PET also said.
To recall, after an early lead in the count on May 9, election day of 2016, Mr. Marcos eventually lost in the vice-presidential race by a slim margin of about 200,000 votes to his leading rival Ms. Robredo. Mr. Marcos then filed an electoral protest before the SC, which hears his petition as the PET.
Ms. Robredo filed a verified answer to Mr. Marcos’s protest raising the issue that the PET has no jurisdiction over the protest case because it improperly challenges the authenticity and due execution of the Certificates of Canvass (CoCs).
She added that Mr. Marcos should have filed a pre- proclamation case before Congress, which acts as the National Board of Canvassers (NBOC).
The PET, in dismissing Ms. Robredo’s argument, cited “Section 4, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution, in relation to Rule 13 of the 2010 PET Rules,” which “provides that the Tribunal shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of the President or Vice- President of the Philippines.”
The tribunal added that it holds the sole jurisdiction of contests on the “election, returns, and qualifications,” which refer to “all matters affecting the validity of contestee’s ( Ms. Robredo) title, which includes questions on the validity, authenticity and correctness of the (CoCs).”
MARCOS MOTION ALSO DISMISSED
The PET also dismissed Mr. Marcos’s “Motion to Strike- Out or Expunge Protestee’s Verified Answer dated [Aug. 12, 2016]” filed by the protestant on Sept. 9, 2016.”
The Marcos camp had argued that Ms. Robredo filed her counter-protest on Aug. 15, 2016, instead of Aug. 13, 2016 or within the 10-day period prescribed under Rules 23 and 24 of the 2010 Pet Rules.
But the tribunal held that Ms. Robredo’s answer was “timely filed,” noting that she received the Summons and Election Protest on Aug. 3, 2016, and that Aug. 13, 2016 fell on a Saturday. It added that the filing on Aug. 15, 2016 “was timely because that was the next working day.”
At the same time, the PET ordered Ms. Marissa Sable of PhilPost to expound on the “conflicting restrictions that have been submitted by both protestant ( Mr. Marcos) and protestee ( Ms. Robredo) as to when the protestant actually received the prostestee’s Verified Answer and CounterProtest.”
The Marcos camp released a statement also yesterday “welcoming” the PET resolution. The Robredo camp, for its part, said in its statement the resolution was a “procedural matter.”
“It only means that the PET will proceed with the case. It does not in any way reflect the validity of merits of any allegation of fraud or irregularity contesting the proclamation of Vice- President [ Robredo],” the statement said.
However, Liberal Party President and Senator Francis “Kiko” N. Pangilinan said the PET resolution is “disheartening.”
“Despite a sound counterprotest by [ Ms. Robredo], PET emphasized that the ‘sufficiency’ of Marcos’s protest is ‘ already beyond dispute,’” Mr. Pangilinan also noted.
He further called on the Filipinos to “remain vigilant and steadfast in protecting and supporting the Vice-President that we elected.”