[ad_1]
The Attorney General’s Office (OSG) said Tuesday that the Supreme Court, constituted as the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET), has the power to overturn the outcome of the latest vice-presidential elections in three Mindanao provinces if it can be proven that there were massive irregularities. that affected the outcome of the contest between former Senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. and Vice President Leni Robredo.
Attorney General José Cálida uncovered his position in his 40-page comment presented to the CS in compliance with his directive issued on September 29.
In a resolution issued last September, the Court requested the positions of the Electoral Commission (Comelec) and the OSG on certain issues related to the third cause of action of the electoral protest filed by Marcos.
Marcos’s protest has three causes: the annulment of Robredo’s proclamation; counting and review of ballots in 36,465 precincts grouped in protest; and the annulment of the results of the elections for vice president in the provinces of Maguindanao, Lanao del Sur and Basilan for alleged terrorism, intimidation and harassment of voters, as well as the previous shadowing of the ballots in the 2,756 precincts grouped in protest.
The PET has dismissed Marcos’s first cause of action for being “nonsensical and nonsensical.”
On the other hand, the PET decided to release the report of the review committee and vote counting in the three pilot provinces, Iloilo, Negros Oriental and Camarines Sur, which involve 5,415 electoral districts.
At the same time, PET shifted its focus to the third of the action after it ordered the opposing parties to present their respective memoranda on the issues raised there.
In addition, both Comelec and OSG received additional instructions to comment on whether the court is empowered by the Constitution to declare the void of elections without special elections and declare the elections unsuccessful and order the holding of special elections.
It also asked Comelec and GSO to comment on whether the court’s declaration of failure of the elections and then the order for special elections, will violate Comelec’s mandate and power provided for in Article IX (C) (Section 2) of the Constitution.
Calida said that while the PET has the power to annul elections, or declare the elections failure, it does not have the power to order the holding of special elections.
He noted that the power of the PET to declare the annulment of the elections, or the failure of the elections, is provided in Section 4 (7) of Article VII of the 1987 Constitution.
Jurisprudence, according to Calida, has also established and recognized PET’s sole and exclusive power to hear electoral protests involving the president and vice president.
Likewise, Calida said that the Constitution allows the PET to promulgate its rules, issue subpoenas, take statements, issue an arrest warrant for witnesses to force them to appear, present documents and other evidence in order to decide electoral contests.
On the other hand, Calida said that the PET’s power to declare an election failure is also implicit in its mandate under the Constitution as the sole judge of all contests related to the election, results and qualifications of the President or Vice President with exclusion. of others.
However, Calida said that the PET does not have the power to call special elections.
He noted that the Constitution is silent on whether the PET has the power to order the holding of special elections after annulling an election or declaring an election failure.
Article 4 (7) of Article VII of the 1987 Constitution, according to Cálida, limits the jurisdiction of the PET to contests related to the elections of president and vice president.
“Therefore, it would be fair to conclude that the jurisdiction of the PET, as defined in Section 4[7], Article VII of the 1987 Constitution, would not include the power to call special elections. The reason is obvious: what if the losing candidate in such a special election again questions the outcome of the election? It will be a vicious and endless cycle, ”Calida said.
Regarding Comelec’s authority to order the holding of special elections, the Attorney General pointed out that the Omnibus Elections Code does not grant the electoral body the power to carry out any special election in cases of vacancies in the presidential or vice-presidential seats.
Calida said that the Constitution only mentions regular elections in regards to the election of the president and vice president.
He explained that Section 14 of the Omnibus Elections Code on Special Election for President and Vice President has been amended or replaced by Section 10, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution.
The provision, he said, speaks of special elections in the event of a vacancy in the positions of President and Vice President that will be called by Congress.
“In the case of the bar association, there is no doubt that although the votes cast in the provinces of Maguindanao, Lanao del Sur and Basilan are declared null and void, there is no lack of choice to speak. On the contrary, the final winner, or the one with the most [or plurality] of the valid votes, it is easily determinable, ”said Cálida.
“In total, it is respectfully presented that the Honorable Court has the power to declare the nullity of the elections or the failure of the elections without infringing the authority of Comelec, but it does not have the concomitant power to order the holding of extraordinary elections”, added. .
Marcos filed an electoral protest on June 29, 2016, alleging that the Robredo camp cheated at the automated polls in May as well of the year.
Comelec declared Robredo the winner in the race for the vice presidency in the 2016 elections after obtaining 14,418,817 votes, which is 263,473 votes more than the 14,155,344 votes received by Marcos.
