Comelec set to rule on Marcos petition; orders both parties to submit memoranda

Published December 16, 2021, 3:43 PM

by Dhel Nazario

The Commission on Elections (Comelec) second division said on Thursday, Dec. 16 that no further proceedings shall be taken in connection to the petition seeking the cancellation of presidential aspirant Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. ‘s certificate of candidacy (COC).

(MANILA BULLETIN file photo)

In the six-page order promulgated on Dec. 13 and was sent to the petitioners and the respondent, Comelec denied motions filed by both parties. On November 2, Petitioners Fr. Christian Buenafe of Task Force Detainees, Fides Lim of Kapatid, Ma Edeliza Hernandez of Medical Action Group, Celia Lagman Sevilla of Families of Victims of Involuntary Disappearance, Roland Vibal of PH Alliance of Human Rights, and Josephine Lasvano of Balay Rehab Center filed a petition to cancel Marcos’ COC which according to them, contains multiple false material representations.

Comelec stated that the petitioners filed for a Request for the Issuance of Subpoena Duces Tecum dated Nov. 19, and an Ex Parte Urgent Motion for Issuance of Subpoena Duces Tecum. In the said request, petitioners sought for the issuance of a Subpoena Duces Tecum to the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) Commissioner Caesar Dulay to produce two documents relative to the petition which includes a Certified True Copy of Marcos, Jr.’s Tax Compliance Verification Records; and Certified True Copies of the Assessment Notice(s) and Demand Letter issued by the BIR in connection with the unpaid Estate Taxes for the estate of Ferdinand Marcos The petitioners also asked for the issuance of another Subpoena Duces Tecum in their motion to the Honorable Clark of Court, Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 105 to produce documents related to the case which includes a Certified True Copy of the Decision dated July 27, 1995 rendered by the Honorable Court; Certified True Copy of the Decision dated October 31, 1997; Certified True Copy of the Entry of Judgement of the Decision dated July 27, 1995 rendered by the Honorable Court, as partly affirmed by the Court of Appeals (CA) in its Decision dated October 31, 1997 and a Certified True Copy of the Proof of Payment, if any, of the deficiency income taxes due with interest at the legal rate, and the fine imposed by the Honorable Court of Appeals in its Decision and in its absence a Certification that the judgement of the Honorable Court, as partly affirmed by the CA, has not yet been complied with.

Meanwhile, the respondent asked that the case be heard face to face on the premise that the petition refers to the highest elective position in the government. These were all denied by the Comelec.

“It must be emphasized that the proceedings in a petition to deny to course and/or cancel a certificate of candidacy is summary in nature,” the document stated.

“In this case the preliminary conference had already been concluded. Accordingly, the case should now be submitted for resolution upon the receipt of both parties’ memoranda or upon the expiration of the period to do so, whichever comes sooner, unless the Commission finds it necessary to have a clarificatory hearing,” it further mentioned.

But the Comelec explained that a clarificatory is no longer necessary for the said petition and cited the petitioners’ who were “very emphatic” and prayed for an immediate issuance of an order.

Comelec said that the parties are given five days from the receipt of the order to file their respective memoranda in accordance with Comelec Resolution No. 10673. It added that the case is deemed submitted for resolution after the lapse of the said period.