VP Robredo asks PET to affirm results of ballots recount in 3 provinces; junk Marcos protest

Vice President Maria Leonor “Leni” Robredo on Tuesday, November 24, asked the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET) to affirm the results of the recount and revision of ballots in the three pilot provinces named by former Sen. Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. in his electoral protest.

Once the results are affirmed, the PET should immediately dismiss Marcos’ election protest, Robredo stressed.
 
The 41-page reply filed by Robredo’s legal counsels, Romulo Macalintal and Ma. Bernadette Sardillo, asked the High Court to issue a resolution that will “affirm the result of the revision, recount, and re-appreciation of ballots” in the three pilot provinces of Camarines Sur, Negros Oriental, and Iloilo.

It is also sought the dismissal of Marcos’ protest for failure to comply with PET Rule 65, which mandates that the protestant “make out his case” by establishing “any substantial recovery in his pilot provinces.” 

The manual recount done by PET increased Robredo’s lead over Marcos by more than 15,000 votes.

She beat Marcos by 263,473 votes in the 2016 elections.She cited the Oct. 15, 2019 PET resolution on the recount and revision of ballots in three pilot provinces – Iloilo, Camarines Sur, and Negros Oriental -- named by Marcos.

The resolution stated: “Thus, based on the final tally after revision and appreciation of the votes in the pilot provinces, protestee Robredo maintained, as in fact she increased her lead with 14,436,337 votes over protestant Marcos who obtained 14,157,771 votes. After the revision and appreciation, the lead of protestee Robredo increased from 263,473 to 278,566.”

In a pleading filed with PET, composed of all Supreme Court (SC) justices, Robredo pointed out that Marcos failed to justify his election protest because her winning margin even increased in the three pilot provinces.

To allow a review of the election results in the provinces of Lanao del Sur, Maguindanao and Basilan will give Marcos a total of six pilot provinces in violation of PET’s Rule 65, Robredo said.

She said that under Rule 65, an election protest may be dismissed without consideration to other provinces if the protestant failed to make out his case from the three pilot provinces named in the protest.Marcos filed his election protest immediately after the 2016 vice presidential election.

His protest has three causes of action -- annulment of the proclamation of Robredo; recount and revision of ballots in 36,465 protested clustered precincts; and annulment of election results for vice president Vice President in the provinces of Maguindanao, Lanao del Sur and Basilan on the ground of alleged terrorism; intimidation and harassment of voters as well as pre-shading of ballots in all of the 2,756 protested clustered precincts.

He named the provinces of Camarines Sur, Iloilo, and Negros Oriental as his pilot areas for the recount and revision of ballots.

“To now allow the technical examination of the Voter’s Registration Records and the Election Day Computerized Voter’s List  from the provinces of Lanao del Sur, Maguindanao and Basilan will be a complete deviation from established rules and jurisprudence,” Robredo said in her reply to the comments filed by the Commission on Elections (Comelec) and the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG).         

She insisted that before the PET resolves the issues pertaining to Marcos’ third cause of action, the PET must resolve first the issue on whether the results in the revision and appreciation of votes renders unnecessary the consideration of the third cause of action.Robredo’s lawyers cautioned against Marcos’ motion to declare an annulment of elections.

They pointed out that based on previous rulings, an additional requirement for the annulment of elections in protested areas is that “there must be clear and convincing evidence to show that the protestee is the one responsible for the acts complained of.”

“While the Honorable Tribunal may have jurisdiction, the remedy of Annulment of Elections must be exercised with caution so as not to disenfranchise voters,” the reply said.

“There is no allegation in the Election Protest or even the witnesses that protestee Robredo is directly responsible for the alleged incidents complained of,” it added.

Robredo’s camp questioned how Marcos can prove this requirement if it was never alleged in his election protest that the vice president was a party to the alleged miscount of votes.