Rowena Guanzon —MARIANNE BERMUDEZ
MANILA, Philippines — The Commission on Elections (Comelec) will not count retiring Commissioner Rowena Guanzon’s vote in the eventual decision of its First Division on three disqualification cases against presidential candidate Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr.
Guanzon, who presides over the three-member First Division, has accused Commissioner Aimee Ferolino of trying to exclude her vote by delaying the promulgation.
Ferolino is the appointed “ponente” or writer of what will be the First Division’s ruling on those three disqualification cases.
Another disqualification case, filed by a group of martial law activists from the Marcos family’s home province of Ilocos Norte, is pending with the Second Division — which dismissed on Jan. 17 a petition by the Task Force Detainees of the Philippines and other activist groups to cancel Marcos’ certificate of candidacy.
On Monday, which was the last working day of her seven-year term as election commissioner, Guanzon released an undated 24-page “separate opinion” on the disqualification cases brought by Akbayan and other activist groups, the Campaign Against the Return of the Marcoses and Martial Law (Carmma), and a group claiming to be original members of Marcos’ adopted political party, Partido Federal ng Pilipinas.
Like Guanzon, Comelec Chair Sheriff Abas will also end his seven-year term on Wednesday, while Commissioner Antonio Kho Jr., who joined the poll body in 2018, has completed the remainder of Abas’ term of office as commissioner.
The petitions argued that Marcos’ conviction for tax offenses while he was vice governor and later governor of Ilocos Norte from 1982 to 1985, the final years of his father’s dictatorship, was punishable by perpetual disqualification from holding public office under the 1977 National Internal Revenue Code.
Guanzon wrote that while the Court of Appeals did not impose disqualification when it upheld Marcos’ conviction for failure to file income tax returns, the former senator’s “repeated violation of the law” involved moral turpitude, which is a ground for a candidate’s disqualification.
“Instead of setting a good example for his constituents to emulate, [Marcos] acted as if the law did not apply to him. Thus the inevitable conclusion is that he knowingly and deliberately chose not to comply with a positive duty enjoined by law,” she said further in her opinion.
She added, “Taken together, all of these circumstances reveal that his failure to file his tax returns for almost half a decade is reflective of a serious defect in one’s moral fiber.”
Not part of records
Before releasing a copy of her opinion to the media through Comelec spokesperson James Jimenez, Guanzon challenged Ferolino through Twitter for both of them to “resign together” before Feb. 3, “since the integrity of the Comelec is now in question.”
Last week, Guanzon claimed that an “influential” senator was interfering in the Marcos disqualification cases, but she has yet to name that lawmaker.
In a hastily called press briefing on Monday afternoon, Jimenez said Guanzon’s separate opinion would not be part of the records of the case.
“I cannot put a label on the value of it but it is obviously very important to know what the commissioners think right now, what Commissioner Guanzon thinks right now, having the opportunity to actually hear the case. But in terms of the disposition of the case, what is crucial and what really matters is the main decision,” he said.
Asked if Guanzon’s opinion will not be part of the eventual decision, Jimenez replied: “That is possible because she is about to retire, so there is that thing hanging over our heads. But at least she would have made her opinion known.”
He said that once Guanzon retires before the promulgation, her vote will no longer be included in the decision.
“The ones who will decide the case should be members of the commission and that point of decision is when the main decision comes out,” he stressed.
‘Erroneous’ decision
Also on Monday, Ferolino released to the media her response to Guanzon’s Jan. 28 memorandum ordering her to explain the delay in the promulgation.
“There is nothing to explain because I do not submit to your pronouncement that there is a delay in the release of my ponencia on the Marcos cases,” Ferolino wrote, as she recalled Guanzon’s words to former Comelec Chair Andres “Andy” Bautista: “I am not your subordinate.”
She said the three disqualification petitions were raffled off to her office on Jan. 10 and were submitted for resolution in just four days.
Ferolino said, however, that she was taking her time to review the case records to avoid releasing an “erroneous” decision like Guanzon’s.
“While you have the privilege and liberty to take down your [social media] posts and correct it, I am not afforded the same opportunity should I release a flawed resolution especially when it has already been promulgated,” she said.
“The only reason for the unavailability of the resolution after [15] days is that I am reviewing three consolidated cases, among others, thoroughly to craft an objective resolution,” she added.
Ferolino also denied that she stood to benefit from any decision in the Marcos cases, telling Guanzon “whether your vote is supported or defeated, it will not benefit me in any way.”
“As a coequal member of this Commission, I am asking you to please stop conditioning the minds of the people that there is a delay [in the resolution] because there is none,” she said, pointing out further that the Second Division took more than a month since the Nov. 26 preliminary conference before it resolved the case.
“More importantly, I am asking you to spare the Commission from all these controversies because you are destroying the credibility of the agency which you claimed to have previously served with integrity and candor,” Ferolino said.
‘Put into question’
Several groups continued to clamor for the immediate disclosure of the First Division’s ruling.
The UP Women Lawyers’ Circle said: “The Comelec must strictly observe its own rules and procedure and ensure that its independence is not compromised.”
Carmma, in its statement, said that “[w]ith every day that our petitions remain undecided, the independence of the Commission on Elections is further put into question.”
The Marcos camp, meanwhile, maintained that he did not commit moral turpitude as Guanzon had concluded in her opinion.
Marcos’ spokesperson, lawyer Victor Rodriguez, cited a 2009 ruling by the Supreme Court on the appeals court’s 1997 decision, in which the high court said a mere failure to file an income tax return does “not… constitute a crime involving moral turpitude.”
The Second Division of the Comelec also cited that ruling in throwing out the petition to cancel Marcos’ certificate of candidacy.
RELATED STORIES
Public has right to question delay in resolving Marcos DQ case – Philippine Bar Association
Comelec releases Guanzon’s separate opinion on DQ cases vs Marcos Jr.
Guanzon: Senator behind Marcos DQ case delay ‘close’ to Duterte; to reveal name ‘in due time’