VP Leni Robredo’s lawyer, Romulo keeps on hitting Bongbong Marcos for allegedly failing to abide by what was agreed upon during the preliminary conference. The limit of witnesses is to expedite the procedure of his election protest against Robredo. However, Marcos said that the 51 witnesses are substantial to prove the first part of the protest. This is about the digital fraud of the entire automated election. Therefore, Atty. George Erwin Garcia has to remind the elderly, Macalintal that the Supreme Court rules to facilitate the recount first.
Youtube video by; ManilaSpeak
[VIDEO]: Atty. Romy Macalintal and Bongbong Marcos’s lawyer, Atty. George Erwin Garcis on the PET Protest
Keeps on Hitting Marcos
Among those cited by the Robredo camp is agreeing on identifying and limiting the number of witnesses. For his first cause of action, the Marcos camp agreed to limit their witnesses to only 25. For his second cause of action, Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa suggested that they limit the number of witnesses to only three per precinct to which both parties agreed.
51 Witnesses Must be Intact
But in his comment, Marcos insisted on presenting 51 witnesses for his first cause of action and with made reservations to the presentation of three witnesses per precinct.
Macalintal said the Marcos camp should stop blaming their camp for allegedly delaying the process. “For it is clear that whatever ‘delay’ there is in his protest is because of Marcos’ flip-flopping position on how he wants to proceed with his protest,” Macalintal added.
First Election Case of Its Kind
Atty. Garcia has to remind Macalintal that the Supreme Court already decided to move on to the recount because the digital fraud is a longer and more complicated process. His questions on the number of witnesses are not yet relevant. Also, Macalintal cannot compare the length of the Binay-Roxas case because they have not reached the recount and it did not involve an automated election process. Bongbong Marcos’ electoral protest against Robredo is the first of its kind. So, previous patterns do not apply.
Atty. Vic Rodriguez of the Marcos Camp already stated that delay is the name of Robredo’s game. The legal team of Vice President Leni Robredo resorts to delaying tactics as their lawyers particularly Atty. Romulo Macalintal subsequently questions Bongbong Marcos’ courses of actions to prevent the election recount from happening immediately. Radio commentator, Erwin Tulfo recently blasted Robredo asking why block the recount if she is sure of her win?
Youtube video by; DU30 News
[VIDEO]: BISTADO NA NI ERWIN TULFO ANG TACTICS NI LENI ROBREDO PATUNGKOL SA PET RECOUNT NI BONGBONG MARCOS.
Bongbong Marcos’ spokesperson said: “If Robredo has nothing to hide, why resort to all these delaying tactics? It’s not enough that her camp cheated their way to the vice presidency. Now they want to cheat again by depriving Senator Marcos of his day in court. We want the truth to come out. That’s all.”
Afraid of the Truth
Atty. Rodriguez added: “Their actuation on the protest has been consistent: They are afraid of the truth because it would reveal how much they tarnished and debased the true will of the Filipino people in the vice presidential race.” This is unanimous with Tulfo’s call to Robredo. He said, why not just let the recount take its course and judge for herself?
Tulfo explains that if the Liberal Party bets and Robredo really won the 2016 elections, they are the first ones who must be in favor of the recount. He urges them to let the recount of the votes begin immediately to stop speculations against Robredo. This way, they can both move on and public interest will be satisfied.
No Recount, No Trust
The majority of the Filipinos including those who are overseas voters are not convinced that the VP is the legitimate occupant of the 2nd highest public office in the land. This doubt has grown intensively as her lawyers try to question Marcos’ every move just to delay the recount. There’s definitely no closure if the VP continues her dirty tactics.
An impeachment complaint is already filed against the Commission on Elections chairperson Andres Bautista. This is on the ground of the betrayal of public trust. Plus the culpable violation of the Constitution over allegations of ill-gotten wealth. This development clears the way for the recount required on Bongbong Marcos’ election protest which is on the second part.
Youtube video by; GMA News
[VIDEO]: Andres Bautista, sinampahan ng reklamong impeachment dahil sa betrayal of public trust.
Former Negros Oriental Rep. Jacinto Paras with his lawyers Ferdinand Topacio and Manuelito Luna filed the impeachment complaint at the House of Representatives’ Secretary General’s office against Bautista. Deputy Speaker Gwen Garcia, Kabayan Rep. Harry Roque, and Cavite Rep. Abraham Tolentino endorsed the impeachment complaint. It fulfills the first requirement for an impeachment complaint to be duly endorsed by a member of the lower House.
Bautista faced an impeachment complaint about betrayal of public trust and culpable violations of the Constitution for not declaring his true wealth in his Statement of Assets and Liabilities Networth (SALN). Graft and corruption for allegedly receiving commissions from Divina Law Offices, the legal counsel of Venezuelan election technology supplier and Comelec’s biggest contractor Smartmatic are also featured.
Doubts on the Automated Election
Cebu Representative Gwen Garcia said that she decides to endorse the complaint to clear out all speculations since the wife presented to the media passbooks which showed Bautista’s undeclared wealth. The allegations against Bautista cast doubt on the credibility of the recently concluded 2016 elections, she said. “Personally, I have always had serious doubts about the automated voting systems. I think it’s the right time now to see and check on the veracity as well as the credibility of the automated voting system, as evidenced by this very, very controversial happening,” Garcia added.
On to the Recount
Leni Robredo’s Camp always used the first part of Bongbong Marcos’ election protest as the cause for the recount delay. They said that the second part can only start after the first part is resolved. This is about the credibility of the digital election process in 2016. Now that the COMELEC Chair already faces an impeachment complaint after the evidence presented by his estranged wife, the recount must start immediately to satisfy public interest.
The supporters of Vice President Leni Robredo used a twisted version of democracy on their motion for reconsideration after the Supreme Court rejected their bid to help Robredo pay her counter-protest payment balance against Bongbong Marcos. They deny Liberal Party’s involvement but their reasoning is in line with the undemocratic ways of the party.
Youtube video by; Rappler
[VIDEO]: The Supreme Court, sitting as the Presidential Electoral Tribunal, rejects the petition of VP Leni Robredo’s supporters to help pay the remaining fee for the election protest filed against her.
Motion for Reconsideration
Supporters of Vice President Leni Robredo asked the Supreme Court that sits as PET recently to reconsider its earlier decision that dismiss their plea to accept their contribution for the payment of the balance for Robredo’s counter-protest. They support her bid to block Bongbong Marcos from the second highest office in the land – the very reason why she ran for the post.
The Piso Para Kay Leni is led by Museo Pambata chair Cristina Lim-Yuson. The other petitioners are former social welfare secretary Corazon “Dinky” Soliman, former human rights commissioner Paulynn Sicam, former Bases Conversion, and Development Authority board director Zorayda Amelia Alonzo, award-winning singer Celeste Legaspi-Gallardo and Ateneo de Manila University Press director Karina Bolasco. They are all anti-Marcos voters.
Denial of their Rights
The petitioners said the PET decision denies them of their right to protect their vote for Robredo. They allegedly have the legal standing to do so. Their proposal to pay to the PET directly is still a donation for Robredo. That is still against the law for public officials. They cannot accept donations regardless of the mode of payment.
Likewise, they argued that considering the importance of the case, the Tribunal should also exercise sound discretion even if their motion for reconsideration is filed after the 10-day period from receipt of the order. Aside from the late filing, they are banking on the twisted democracy principle that the LPs are noted for. This is for selfish reasons to favor their own goal which is contrary to the general public’s interest.
Upon thorough scrutiny of the COMELEC’s correspondence in digital copies with the Camp of Bongbong Marcos, it can be concluded that the poll body only sent the demand letter to Marcos for the payment of the overseas storage fees in compliance with the order of the Supreme Court or PET. The Protestant already replied to it saying that the COMELEC must pay them because it is their duty to do so.
Youtube video by; PTV
[VIDEO]: NEWS BREAK: Election protest ni ex-Sen. Marcos vs. VP Robredo, may basehan – PET
In compliance with the directive of the Supreme Court or PET, the Office for Overseas Voting forwards a copy of the letter dated 10 July 2017 to Marcos’ laawyer, Atty. Erwin Garica. This is from Maria Lea R. Alarkon, Director III- OFOV-COMELEC, per PET notice dated 18 July 2017 on behalf of the COMELEC
Response within 5 Days
The said letter seeks the comment of the Protestant on COMELEC’s stand for him to pay the said overseas dues. However, Marcos reiterates that it is the duty of the COMELEC to find funds for it as the guardian of the necessary election materials. It is the mandate of the election agency to safeguard such contested ballots, he said. He was given 5 days to respond which he complied with.
Retrieval of Ballot Boxes
Marcos requests the retrieval of ballot boxes from the pilot provinces he mentioned right after paying the full amount of the protest fee ordered by the Supreme Court for him to pay. However, this still awaits Leni Robredo’s comments. Besides, she has not paid her balance of 7 M Pesos yet that delayed the process.
Supreme Court Ruling
It is clear that the cause of the delay is Robredo’s non-payment of her second tranche. Although her lawyer, Romulo Macalintal said that their fees are for the counter-protest and they must wait until the PET finds substance in Marcos’ electoral protest. However, the tribunal already repeated their ruling many times that they find Marcos’ protest substantial.