SC asks Comelec, BBM to comment on VP’s motion on shading of ballots

BAGUIO CITY — The Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET) asked the Commission on Elections (Comelec) and then Sen. Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. to comment on the motion of Vice President Maria Leonor “Leni” Robredo to reconsider the ruling that only ballots which were shaded at least 50 per cent on the oval space should be counted as valid votes in the contested 2016 vice presidential elections.

During the full court session here on Tuesday, the PET, composed of all the justices of the Supreme Court (SC) led by Acting Chief Justice Antonio T. Carpio, said the comment should be filed in 10 days from notice. The PET resolution reads: “In the matter of PET Case No. 0005 — Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. v. Maria Leonor “Leni Daang Matuwid” G. Robredo, the Supreme Court, acting as the PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL, directed the protestant (Marcos) and the Commission on Elections to COMMENT on the protestee’s (Robredo) Motion for Reconsideration dated April 19, 2018 on the requirement to observe a 50 per cent threshold percentage on the recount within ten (10) days from notice.”

In seeking the use of the 25 per cent threshold on the shading of a ballot, Robredo cited the Random Manuel Audit Visual Guidelines and the Random Manuel Audit Report and that “Rule 43 of the 2010 PET Rules has been superseded by the 2018 Revisor’s Guide.”

But the PET, in a ruling handed down here on April 10 said Robredo’s “claim that the Comelec, as purportedly confirmed by the Random Manual Audit Guidelines and Report, applies the 25 per cent threshold percentage in determining a valid vote is inaccurate.”

It said it “is not aware of any Comelec Resolution that states the applicability of a 25 per cent threshold; and the Tribunal cannot treat the Random Manual Audit Guidelines and Report as proof of the threshold used by the Comelec. In fact, Comelec Resolution No. 8804, as amended by COMELEC Resolution No. 9164, which is COMELEC’s procedure for the recount of ballots in election protests within its jurisdiction, does not mention a 25 per cent threshold.”

Aggrieved by the PET ruling, Robredo filed a motion for reconsideration.

She cited a 2016 Comelec letter stating that while voters were instructed to shade fully the ovals in the ballots, “the shading threshold was set at about 25 per cent of the oval space.”

“In other words, when a mark covers at least 25 per cent of the oval, said mark is supposed to be considered a vote by the system,” her motion stated quoting from the supposed Comelec letter.

This means that the PET, composed of all the justices of the Supreme Court (SC), knew of the 25 per cent threshold, she insisted.