4 Comelec execs can decide appeals on cases vs Marcos

TRUST: The Akbayan party-list group, led by its chair, Etta Rosales, has urged Commissioner Aimee Ferolino to inhibit from the Comelec en banc discussion on their appeal of the First Division decision.  (Photo by MARIANNE BERMUDEZ / Philippine Daily Inquirer)

MANILA, Philippines — The appeals on three petitions against the presidential candidacy of Ferdinand Marcos Jr. that had been junked are now with the Commission on Elections (Comelec) as a whole.

But with three vacancies in the poll body created by recent retirements, can the remaining four commissioners make decisions on the fate of these petitions?

According to both Comelec spokesperson James Jimenez and election lawyer Romulo Macalintal, four commissioners constitute a quorum.

A quorum is the minimum number of commissioners that could make decisions.

In a ruling authored by Commissioner Aimee Ferolino on Feb. 10, the First Division threw out three petitions for Marcos’ disqualification.

These petitions were filed separately by Campaign against the Return of the Marcoses and Martial Law (Carmma), Akbayan party list and a faction claiming to be the legitimate members and officers of Partido Federal ng Pilipinas (PFP), which adopted the son and namesake of the deposed dictator as its standard-bearer.

Another petition, which was junked by the Second Division on Jan. 17, had asked the Comelec to invalidate the certificate of candidacy (COC) of the former senator for allegedly lying about being disqualified.

It was filed by a group of survivors and victims of the dictator’s martial rule, including Task Force Detainees of the Philippines, which asked the en banc, or the commission as a whole, to overturn the division’s ruling.

The fourth disqualification case filed by Pudno Nga Ilocano (Real Ilocanos), a group of activists from Marcos’ home province of Ilocos Norte, is pending in the Second Division.

Carmma, Akbayan appeals

The PFP petitioners asked the First Division on Monday to reconsider its decision on its disqualification petition.

On Tuesday, Carmma and Akbayan went straight to the en banc to appeal the First Division’s ruling.

All five petitions were anchored on grounds that Marcos was “perpetually disqualified” from holding and running for public office after his conviction by the Quezon City Regional Trial Court (RTC) of tax evasion and of not filing his tax returns when he served as vice governor and later governor of Ilocos Norte from 1982 to 1985.

The perpetual disqualification from public office was a penalty imposed by the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC), the petitioners said.

They also said he was convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude.

Victor Rodriguez, a spokesperson for Marcos, said Akbayan and its chair emeritus former Rep. Etta Rosales, should respect the decision of the Comelec’s First Division and “stop the abuse of our courts and tribunals by filing cases that are all lies.”

“We want to remind Akbayan and Ms Etta Rosales that it was clear from the unanimous decision of the Comelec 1st Division that they were the ones who lied,” Rodriguez said in a statement.

The First Division ruled that the decision of the Court of Appeals on Oct. 31, 1997, did not specifically impose the penalty of perpetual disqualification on Marcos.

It also overturned the trial court’s decision convicting him of not paying taxes but upheld his conviction of not filing tax returns and penalized him with a fine.

‘Record of lying’

“Contrary to Petitioners’ assertion, the penalty of perpetual disqualification by reason of failure to file income tax returns was not provided for under the original 1977 NIRC,” the First Division said, adding that this penalty was enforced only on Jan. 1, 1986.

The First Division believed that failure to file tax returns was not “inherently immoral.”

“The failure to file tax returns is not inherently wrong in the absence of a law punishing it. The said omission became punishable only through the enactment of the Tax Code,” it added.

In their appeal to the en banc, Akbayan said only two commissioners ruled on the petition and this did not suffice to constitute a division, which normally has three members, and therefore its resolution should not be treated as a valid ruling.

“It is nothing more than a document issued by two commissioners, but certainly not a resolution or decision that should be treated as having been issued by the Comelec,” it said.

Akbayan leaders called on Ferolino to inhibit from the Comelec en banc discussion on their appeal, citing the accusations of recently retired commissioner Rowena Guanzon.

Guanzon said that Ferolino deliberately delayed releasing the resolution after her retirement so that her vote against Marcos would not be counted.

Reacting to Rodriguez’s stinging remarks, Akbayan said that it was Marcos that had “a long track record of lying.”

“He lied about his fake diploma. He lied about [his family’s] stolen wealth. He lied about paying his taxes. And lied about his qualifications to run in the election,” Akbayan said.

In a statement later, Rosales said of the dictator’s son: “If he feels no compunction in performing his duty as governor of a province, how much more can we trust him as Chief Executive of the Republic of the Philippines?”

—WITH A REPORT FROM INQUIRER RESEARCH

RELATED STORIES

Marcos critics taking DQ bid to Comelec en banc

Comelec exec justifies verdict on Marcos Jr. DQ cases: We’re not saying failure to file ITR is okay