Posted on

The Supreme Court Acts on the COMELEC Request of Bongbong Marcos

supreme court

welcome By: Elena Grace Flores

Bongbong Marcos received a notice from the Supreme Court or PET to require the COMELEC and Leni Robredo to comment on his request that the election must not be allowed to have temporary prior custody of the ballot boxes and other election paraphernalia. This is allegedly needed in the election protest of Abdusakur M. Tan vs. Mujiv S. Hataman for the position of ARMM Governor.

Youtube video by;
[VIDEO]: The Supreme Court sitting as Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET) has started the ball rolling on the electoral protest of former Sen. Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. and the counter-protest of Vice President Leni Robredo.

Marcos is Pleased

The camps of Marcos and Robredo met for the first time to discuss things with PET. This is to resolve the issues in the protest and counter-protest. Marcos was present. He said that he was pleased that the process on his protest is now set in motion. The former senator is also thankful of the Supreme Court’s readiness to tackle the issues.

Smoot-Sailing Prelim

The Supreme Court has started the ball rolling on the electoral protest of Marcos and the counter-protest of Robredo. Eight Justices led by Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno were present during the preliminary conference. All motions are set aside to avoid the delay of the immediate recount.

Justices are for Recount

“What is clear with the justices is that they are very interested in proceeding to the arguments and finally to the revision of the counting of votes. We are thankful that the justices are also interested on how to speed up the process so that our people will really know the real count of votes,” Marcos said.

Robredo Camp’s Hope

Robredo’s lawyer challenges the Marcos camp if they can accept the result of the automated election system. She quoted the high court justice statement that it is difficult to separate the results of the VP race from the Presidential election. He said that; “one cannot surgically remove the result of the vice president on the result for other positions from President to the counselors.” However, Marcos clarified that they have evidence to prove cheatings against him.

3 thoughts on “The Supreme Court Acts on the COMELEC Request of Bongbong Marcos

  1. I think BBM is not idiot to protest if there’s no valid reason,

  2. it seems the fvp’s lawyer’s are as dumb as their client that they are hanging on to leonen’s words. that they don’t know what the protest is all about i.e. between the PROTESTANT and the PROTESTEE AND NO ONE ELSE as what Atty Glenn said and i quote> Kung may protesta, ang markadong balotang ito ay hindi na bibilangin. Pero, ang pagsawalang-bisa ng markadong balota ay may epekto lamang sa mga partidong magkatunggali sa protesta – ang nagprotesta at ang prinotesta. Ikakaltas ito sa botong kanilang nakuha sa halalan. Hindi maaapektuhan ang boto ng lahat ng iba pang mga kandidato na hindi partido o hindi kasali sa protesta. Ito ang desisyon ng Korte Suprema at mga election tribunals sa lahat ng kaso ng markadong balota.
    Ang markadong balota ay maihahalintulad natin sa certificates of canvass na iniluwa ng automated election system. Ang tahasang paglabag ng Comelec at Smartmatic sa mahahalagang probisyon ng batas at pagkalikot sa sistema sa kalagitnaan ng pagbibilang ng mga boto ay malinaw na “marka” o bahid sa nasabing certificates of canvass.
    Kung hanggang dito lamang ang istorya, hindi pa ito sapat. Pero kung makita natin ang mga tangkang pagpapadala ng resulta (transmission attempts) mula sa Camarines Sur isang araw bago ang halalan, ito ay malinaw na “marka” o bahid pabor sa piling kandidato.
    Ang “markang” ito ay malinaw na hindi para kay Pangulong Duterte dahil nilampaso siya doon. Ang “markang” ito ay para sa kandidatong humatak ng husto ng mga boto. Sino pa? Alam mo na!
    Kaya kung kukwestiyunin man ni BBM ang integridad ng automated election system at ang certificates of canvass na produkto ng nasabing sistema, ang epekto nito ay aabot lamang sa dalawang magkatunggali. Walang epekto ito sa ibang mga kandidato, talo man o nanalo.
    Mas lalong hindi dapat idamay dito si Pangulong Duterte dahil unang-una, hindi siya kasali sa protesta at wala siyang pagkakataon na sumagot sa mga isyu. Pangalawa, malinaw na hindi siya nakinabang sa “markang” ginawa ng mga salarin.
    Ang tangkang ito na idamay si Pangulong Duterte ay isang palatandaan ng matinding pangamba ng kampo ni Robredo.
    Nga pala, may mali sa report na ito. Hindi pa inaprobahan ang hiling ni Robredo na ipagpaliban muna ang pagbayad ng last installment ng kanyang cash deposit. Sinabi lang ng mga mahistrado na pag-usapan pa nila ito.

  3. Very apt & good clarification, Atty Chong.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.