The camp of former Senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. on Wednesday expressed doubts if Vice President Leni Robredo indeed gained more votes following the conduct of manual recount in three pilot provinces.
Lawyer George Garcia, counsel for Marcos, said if ever Robredo gained more votes from the manual recount, the additional votes would have certainly been the product of electoral fraud.
“They [Robredo] got more votes, according to them. But that is presumption because the tribunal has not yet released the result,” Garcia said in an interview.
“What we were saying, even if there was an increase on [the] part of Leni camp, take note there was increase so meaning the machines did not function properly, that is the irregularity and fraud,” Garcia stressed.
Garcia made the statement after the Supreme Court, acting as Presidential Electoral Tribunal, ordered the release of the report on the manual recount of votes chosen by Marcos.
The PET also required both the camps of Marcos and Robredo to file memorandum on the former’s motion to nullify the results in Basilan, Lanao del Sur, and Maguindanao.
At the Supreme Court, Chief Justice Lucas Bersamin said if he had his way, he would not have taken part in the voting by the high court to avoid suspicion that he orchestrated the outcome of the voting of the magistrates.
In fact, Bersamin said he would have wanted to prolong the deliberation since he did not want to participate in the voting due to speculation he was manipulating the outcome of the PET’s voting.
“I wanted to delay the vote. I did not like to take part in it because I did not like the media speculating I cooked or orchestrated the result but I always told you it is impossible to have manipulations in the SC because there are many [factors] that are involved,” Bersamin, who is retiring as chief justice on Oct. 18, told reporters.
“But the Banc prevailed on me to take the vote yesterday and after some deliberation we were able to conclude that it was timely for the parties to be asked for their respective comments on the report generated by Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa who was the justice-in-charge,” he said.
The PET voted 11-2, with Associate Justices Antonio Carpio and Caguioa dissenting, while Associate Justice Jose Reyes Jr. was absent.
The tribunal ordered to give copies of the committee report on the revision and appreciation of ballots in the three pilot provinces to both Marcos and Robredo camps.
“It was clear that majority of the (members of the) Court wanted action to be taken on the report. Before we could take any action, we had to solicit the comment of the parties. That is only a fair part of due process and so we came out with that resolution to require the parties to comment,” the retiring top magistrate pointed out.
According to him, by giving the parties copies of the report on the revision and appreciation of ballots, the PET is asking both parties to comment about the findings. “Findings are more or less conclusions. It would not be good if we did not allow or let the parties to comment first before we officially act on the report. It’s a unilateral report,” Bersamin said.
When sought for comment both camps of Robredo and Marcos are claiming victories, Bersamin said: “That is their opinion. That did not come from the court. After we release our result it’s up to them whatever they say, they may even distort what we have decided.”
On June 29, 2016, Marcos filed an election protest against Robredo. He filed three causes of action.
He asked the PET to declare Robredo’s victory as null and void, that was later denied by the PET.
He asked to conduct a recount of ballots in all of the 36,465 protested clustered precincts in 30 cities and provinces; and to declare the election results in Lanao del Sur, Maguindanao, and Basilan as null on the grounds of terrorism, intimidation, and harassment of voters.
Out of the 30 provinces, Marcos was allowed to designate three pilot provinces namely Iloilo, Camarines Sur and Negros Oriental that would best exemplify election fraud for the manual recount, that would be used by the Tribunal as basis on whether they would proceed with the recount on all protested areas.
The PET brought in revisors and three commissioners to go through the clustered ballot boxes from the 2016 elections. Last Sept. 9, SC Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa submitted the report on the recount and revision on the three pilot provinces.
According to Garcia, even without substantial vote recovery in three pilot provinces, Marcos’ protest could proceed because seeking a manual recount and his bid for vote nullification in Basilan, Lanao del Sur, and Maguindanao were two different courses of action.
“Let’s say they dismissed our second cause of action [referring to the revision of ballots on pilot provinces] but it doesn’t mean that it is the dismissal of the entire election protest,” Garcia argued.
Meanwhile, retired Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban agreed with the new action of the PET on the Marcos election protest against Robredo, describing it as “prudent.”
Panganiban was referring to the PET’s order for Marcos and Robredo to comment on the report on a manual recount of votes from Camarines Sur, Iloilo, and Negros Oriental, Marcos’ pilot provinces, and for both parties to submit a memorandum on issues relating to Marcos’ bid for the annulment of 2016 election results for vice president in Lanao del Sur, Basilan, and Maguindanao due to alleged terrorism, pre-shading of ballots, and vote substitution, among other grounds.
Panganiban, who served as chief justice from Dec. 21, 2005 to Dec. 6, 2006, interpreted the actions of the electoral tribunal as an integral part of the PET’s procedural due process.
According to him, this was the PET listening to the parties before deciding so that there would be no question on due process when the court eventually would resolve the poll protest.
The former chief justice stressed the PET had to resolve whether or not it would decide the case on the basis of the results of the recount in the three pilot provinces or still proceed to the three Mindanao provinces for Marcos’ supposed third cause of action.
Under Rule 65 of the 2010 PET Rules, the tribunal may dismiss the case if it is convinced that the protestant or counter-protestant will most probably fail to make out his case based on the examination of ballots from the pilot provinces.
If Rule 65 of PET is invoked, Panganiban said in Filipino: “Pagka gano’n ang desisyon ng Supreme Court, siyempre mananalo na si Leni, ‘di ba? Sapagkat sabi nga nila, kung totoo man, ‘yung lamang ni Leni na 263,000 votes, nadagdagan pa ng ng 15,000. Mananalo na talaga siya.”
Robredo had claimed that the initial recount results confirmed her 2016 victory, her lawyers even saying she gained 15,000 more votes.
But the PET called her assertion “premature” and the figures she cited “speculative.”
The PET now has 14 members following the mandatory retirement of Associate Justice Francis Jardeleza last month, but by the end of October, the PET will only have 12 members due to the upcoming retirement of Chief Justice Lucas Bersamin and Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio this month.
President Rodrigo Duterte has 90 days to fill each vacancy in the high court.
Panganiban said the Supreme Court would continue to deliberate and resolve the poll protest since there were still 12 associate justices, but he agreed that there was a need to speed up the resolution of the election protest.