In his column today, former Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio is at it. Again.
The issue he discusses is perjury without direct reference to Bongbong Marcos for reasons of libel and slander. Of course, Carpio knows better than to have a libel case filed against him unlike Maria Ressa, who doesn’t know any better.
He cites the false answer to Question No. 22 in the Certificate of Candidacy a candidate fills up to submit to the Comelec which officially marks his or her entry into the roster of candidates and his or here name printed on the ballot.
He actually hits two birds with one stone as the following is a quote from a statement made by Sara Duterte previously “Today, politics in our country has so degenerated that a one-time presidential aspirant, who is now running for vice president, infamously remarked: “Walang isang kandidato diyan na hindi nagsisinungaling, kaya hindi dapat nagiging issue ang honesty ngayon.” (There is not one candidate who does not lie today, so they should not be making an issue out of honesty now).”
His column is actually a rejoinder to the statement of Marcos’ Chief of Staff, Atty. Vince Rodriguez who claimed that the petition for disqualification filed by opposition stalwarts against his principal is nonsense because it is tantamount to asking the Comelec to declare the ruling of the Court of Appeals on Marcos’ tax evasion case as null and void since it doesn’t have jurisdiction. Technically, only the Supreme Court has that power if a petition was filed before it.
Carpio cites how the decision he penned in Aratea v. Comelec, led to the formulation and inclusion of Question No. 22 in the Certificate of Candidacy to wit: “To implement this directive in the Aratea decision, the Commission on Elections (Comelec) added to the COC Question No. 22, which asks: “Have you ever been found liable for an offense which carries with it the accessory penalty of perpetual disqualification from public office, which has become final and executory?” A false answer renders the COC void ab initio, as if the candidate never filed his COC, thus disqualifying the candidate. In addition, a false answer constitutes perjury, a separate crime involving moral turpitude which also disqualifies a perjurer from holding any public office.”
This point of his begs the question, should the Comelec file a case against Bongbong Marcos for perjury on the basis of his answer in Question No. 22, which is the result of its opinion on the issue of disqualification based on moral turpitude? As Comelec Spokesperson James Jimenez said, a convicted candidate is not automatically banned from running for public office under the Omnibus Election Code.
This is why the process of legislation is not as simple as most of us would think. There are loopholes created by provisions in other laws which is also why there is that colatilla that any law passed which is contradictory to the newest law is deemed superseded.
Carpio is guilty of obfuscation because he doesn’t provide the legal remedy for the Comelec. His column today is obviously meant to challenge Marcos’ legal team to review his claim again and is actually a tip to the opposition’s lawyers which filed the petition against Marcos before the Comelec.
This is probably also one reason why the President threw a fit at the turn of events which had Inday Sara running as Veep to Marcos. A Marcos candidacy is very divisive and it is automatic that the opposition and other parties who have reason to oppose a Marcos Presidency will do anything and everything to prevent him from even being a candidate to begin with.
This is very evident in 2016 when exit polls showed that Marcos would win over Robredo by at least 200,000 votes. We all know what happened overnight until the count was completed. Until now, Robredoo has yet to find the voter base which elected her to the Vice-Presidency.
Marcos’ day of reckoning at the Comelec is on November 26. We can only wait till then and wait further until the Second Division rules on the petition. Those who are virulently anti-Marcos run the risk of reinforcing his underdog image, which in turn, only serves to further his popularity with voters.
The opposition must realize that claims of historical revisionism isn’t sellling for the simple reason that they have not much to show as achievements when they were in power. That is the glaring disconnect. It doesn’t help also when their candidate, Leni Robredo, continues to use gimmickry to woo voters instead of presenting a congent governance platform to the public which maps out her agenda if she is elected President.
Comments