Under the condonation doctrine, an elective official facing administrative charges is deemed absolved of those charges upon his reelection. The doctrine posits that when the voters reelected the official, they are deemed to have forgiven any administrative infractions earlier committed by him. The condonation doctrine does not apply to criminal offenses.
Makati City Mayor Jun-jun Binay invoked the condonation doctrine after the Ombudsman filed administrative charges against him for anomalies he allegedly committed during his previous term. When the case reached the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice expressed her disdain for the condonation doctrine, and even scolded Binay’s lawyers for invoking it. A retired Supreme Court Justice opined that the scolding was uncalled for. In the end, the Supreme Court abandoned the doctrine.
In other words, the reelection of an official no longer absolves that official of any administrative cases pending against him. This means that an elective official who is found to have committed an administrative offense may be suspended from office, even if that official is subsequently reelected by the people. Fortunately for Binay, the new doctrine was not given retroactive effect.
The Commission on Elections has twice ruled that Senator Grace Poe is disqualified from running for president in the May 2016 elections. According to the poll body, Poe cannot run because she is not a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, and the Constitution explicitly requires that the President of the Philippines must be a natural-born citizen.
Poe’s rabid supporters like Rex Gatchalian and Isko Moreno insist that Poe should be allowed to run because it is unfair to discriminate against foundlings. They also insist that the voters should be the ones to decide if Poe should be president or otherwise.
Their arguments have been repeatedly refuted in the past. Enforcing the Constitution, even if it means prohibiting a foundling like Poe from running for president, is non-negotiable under a government of laws. To those who insist that Poe cannot be disqualified under international law—put it first in the Constitution! If the voice of the people is important, and it is, then the Constitution must be followed because it was ratified by the voice of the people. In fact, the Constitution begins with the phrase, “We the sovereign Filipino people …”
What has Poe’s woes got to do with Mayor Binay? Well, Binay allegedly committed an infraction of administrative rules. In Poe’s case, however, to allow her to run for president is to allow a violation of the Constitution. Which one is more objectionable—allowing a mayor to remain in office despite his violation of an administrative regulation, or allowing someone to run for public office in violation of the Constitution?
Unlike administrative regulations, the Constitution enjoys the direct approval of the sovereign Filipino people. Considering that the Supreme Court has ruled that the voice of the sovereign Filipino people, acting through the ballot, cannot condone any violation of any administrative regulation committed by the candidate of their choice (like what happened to Mayor Binay in the elections of 2013), with more reason should it be postulated that the sovereign Filipino people, acting through the ballot, cannot condone a violation of the paramount law of the land.
Another public figure seeking the presidency is Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte, a no-nonsense figure who made his city, once the hotbed of crime and lawlessness, a showcase metropolis of law and order. Although Duterte entered the presidential race at the last minute, he quickly became the top pick in the recent surveys conducted in both Metropolitan Manila (where he does not reside), and throughout the Philippines. So far, Duterte has a double-figure lead over Poe and another presidential candidate, Vice President Jejomar Binay.
Actually, Duterte is a substitute candidate for president of the PDP-Laban Party, which earlier fielded a certain Martin Diño for the same office. After Diño withdrew from the race, the party replaced Diño with Duterte within the deadline allowed by law for the substitution of candidates who withdraw.
A famous election lawyer said that Diño filed a certificate of candidacy not for president but for a local government post, and that for this reason, Duterte cannot validly substitute for Diño as a presidential candidate.
Perhaps it is precisely because Duterte is leading in the surveys that some people obviously opposed to a Duterte presidency are asking the Comelec to disqualify the fiery mayor on the ground that there is a defect in his CoC. They argue that since Diño’s CoC is defective to begin with, the same is void, and a candidacy filed under a void CoC cannot be the subject of a valid substitution.
Some of Duterte’s supporters maintain that the CoC issue against their candidate involves a mere clerical error which, like all clerical errors, can be corrected. For instance, if the entries in a usually indefeasable public document like a birth certificate are clearly erroneous and are proved to be so, then corrections are allowed by law. That principle ought to apply to Diño’s CoC. At the end of the day, it is substance, not form, which matters.
Since Diño filed his CoC within the deadline set for candidates for president, his intention to file a CoC for president, and not a local government post, may be established. It is also possible that Diño originally planned to run for a local government post and changed his mind at the last minute, but used the wrong CoC. Thus, if it is established that Diño made a clerical error in his CoC, then a correction is in order.
Poe’s disqualification, on the other hand, does not involve a mere clerical error. It is a violation of the Constitution which, aside from being beyond correction, is obviously more objectionable than either an infraction of an administrative rule as in the case of Mayor Binay, or a clerical error as in the case of Mayor Duterte.