[ad_1]
The Elections Commission (Comelec) opined that the Supreme Court, constituted as the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET), has the power and jurisdiction to annul the result of the election in the Mindanao provinces if it was marred by fraud, as stated former Senator Ferdinand. “Bongbong” Marcos Jr.
Marcos filed an electoral protest against Vice President María Leonor Robredo, alleging electoral fraud.
In its 30-page comment filed with the higher court, the electoral body said that the PET has the power to order the nullification of votes under the 1987 Constitution and the 2010 PET Rules without holding special elections.
Marcos questioned the integrity of the elections in 2,756 precincts grouped in protest in Lanao del Sur, Maguindanao and Basilan. He asked the PET to annul the votes for the alleged “massive” fraud.
Comelec cited Article VII, Section 4 of the 1987 Constitution, which establishes that the Supreme Court en banc “shall be the sole judge of all contests related to the election, results and qualifications of the President or Vice President and may promulgate rules for the purpose. “
He added that under the 2010 PET Rules, the court has express and implicit powers and “other powers that are inherent, necessary or incidental to the fulfillment of its purposes and functions.”
The commission added that the votes can be annulled if the evidence shows that more than 50 percent of the votes were cast illegally or if it is impossible to determine the legal and illegal ballots and if the “Protestant is responsible for the illegal acts.”
Comelec clarified that annulling the electoral results is totally different from declaring a failure of the elections, which is one of the functions of the commission.
He pointed out that the nullity of the elections will be done “only to determine who of the candidates obtained the majority of the legal votes cast.”
Marcos lost to Robredo by only 263,473 votes. He alleged “massive electoral fraud, anomalies and irregularities” in the race for the vice presidency, such as the pre-shading of the ballots, preloaded SD or secure digital cards, incorrect reading of the ballots, malfunction of the VCM or counting machines of votes and an “abnormally high” unaccounted number of votes. / undervotes.
[ad_2]
