Close  

Tatad urges Supreme Court to consider public opinion on Poe ruling

/ 03:05 PM April 01, 2016
Former Senator Francisco Tatad and Sen. Grace Poe. AFP/INQUIRER FILE PHOTOS.

Former Senator Francisco Tatad and Sen. Grace Poe. AFP/INQUIRER FILE PHOTOS.

To further convince the Supreme Court to reverse its decision allowing Senator Grace Poe to run for President, a former Senator urged the high court to consider public opinions expressed through various media outfits.

In his motion for leave of court and admit request for judicial notice, former Senator Francisco Tatad through counsel Atty. Manuelito Luna cited articles that came out in various media outfits quoting lawyers and legal organizations assailing the high court’s ruling.

ADVERTISEMENT

Voting 9-6, the high court last month allowed Poe to run for President saying there was no material misrepresentation on the part of the Senator when she indicated in her certificate of candidacy that she is a natural born Filipino and has been a resident of the Philippines for 10 years.

Tatad, in their motion cited the statement of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) that came out in several newspapers and news websites which stated that the high court’s ruling on Poe’s case has not resolved questions on her citizenship and residency requirement.

FEATURED STORIES

“It can be concluded that the decision did not settle the matter of whether Poe is a natural-born citizen and whether she has met the residency requirement under the law,” the statement noted.

“While the decision appears to have rendered an opinion as to whether (Poe) is a natural-born as well as whether she has satisfied the 10-year residency requirement for the presidency, it should be emphasized that the dispositive portion of the decision merely orders the reversal of the decisions of the Commission on Elections granting the petitions to disqualify her… and states that she is qualified to be a candidate for president in the national and local elections on May 9, 2016,” read the one-page statement.

READ: Storm over SC decision on Poe refuses to die

Tatad also cited opinions raised by Far Eastern University Institute of Law Dean Mel Sta. Maria, Attorneys Jeremy Gatdula and Cristina Montes, former Marinduque Representative Regina Ongsiako-Reyes, columnists Raul Palabrica, Emil Jurado, Jose Sison, Yen Makabenta, Atty. Victor Avecilla, among others.

“Tatad respectfully pleads the Honorable Court to grant him leave of court and to admit request for judicial notice of the aforementioned Internet articles they being relevant to the arguments raised in respondents’  motions for reconsideration of the decision, promulgated on March 8, 2016,” Luna said.

Under Section 2, Rule 129 of the Revised Rules of Evidence, Luna said the “court may take judicial notice of matters which are of public knowledge or are capable to unquestionable demonstration or ought to be known to judges because of their judicial functions.”

He also cited the high court’s ruling in the case of Joseph Estrada v. Aniano Desierto where the high court, in ruling that the former leader has resigned from his post took note of the diary of former Executive Secretary Edgardo Angara which was serialized in the Philippine Daily Inquirer.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Moreover, the higher interest of justice sufficiently warrants grants of such plea,” he added.

Three motions for reconsideration have already been filed seeking to reverse the ruling on Poe. CDG

RELATED STORIES

Court becomes congress

Ousted solon compares case to Poe ruling

Half baked SC decision on Poe

Read Next
LATEST STORIES
MOST READ
Don't miss out on the latest news and information.
View comments

Subscribe to INQUIRER PLUS to get access to The Philippine Daily Inquirer & other 70+ titles, share up to 5 gadgets, listen to the news, download as early as 4am & share articles on social media. Call 896 6000.

TAGS: Certificate of Candidacy, citizenship, Comelec, Commission on Elections, decision, Francisco Tatad, Grace Poe, Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), ruling, Supreme Court
For feedback, complaints, or inquiries, contact us.


© Copyright 1997-2019 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. By continuing, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more, please click this link.