“Now she is no longer with the Comelec.”
As of today, Atty. Rowena Guanzon is a retired commissioner of the Commission on Elections.
Last week, Guanzon prematurely announced to the media her vote in three disqualification cases against presidential candidate Bongbong Marcos filed before the Comelec’s First Division, which Guanzon heads. Guanzon revealed she voted to disqualify BBM.
What Guanzon did is illegal because the decision of the First Division was not yet officially out when she spoke to the media.
Section 3(k) of the anti-graft law prohibits a government official from releasing confidential information to the public in advance of its authorized release date. Article 154 of the Revised Penal Code penalizes a government official who releases, without proper authorization, a decision of a government agency before it is officially released.
Guanzon also announced that the ponente of the BBM cases, Commissioner Aimee Ferolino, was delaying the release of the First Division’s final decision, long enough to overtake Guanzon’s compulsory retirement on February 2, 2022.
According to Guanzon, Ferolino is waiting for Guanzon to retire so that Guanzon’s separate anti-BBM vote in the disqualification cases will be meaningless.
The law provides that a vote cast by a commissioner in a given election case is valid as long as the decision is released to the public before that commissioner retires from service.
Ferolino denies Guanzon’s accusation. According to Ferolino, Guanzon had been trying to influence Ferolino to vote against BBM. Having had enough of Guanzon’s anomalous overtures, Ferolino had been avoiding Guanzon’s overtures.
I have gone through the pertinent laws and I found nothing which requires Ferolino to release the decision of the First Division before Guanzon’s compulsory retirement.
When the disqualification cases were filed against BBM and raffled off to the First Division of the Comelec, Guanzon was fully aware of the possibility that her compulsory retirement may overtake the final resolution of those cases. Guanzon, therefore, cannot complain that Ferolino is taking so long to release the decision of the First Division.
It is also not Ferolino’s fault that Guanzon must retire on February 2, 2022.
It seems to me that Guanzon wants the First Division to work within the time frame circumscribed by the date of her compulsory retirement. The egotistical Guanzon probably thinks she is the Comelec.
Guanzon also announced that a certain senator has been trying to influence her to rule in favor of BBM. Although Guanzon did not identify the senator, she stressed that it isn’t Senator Imee Marcos.
Adding fuel to the controversy, Guanzon said that if Ferolino does not officially release the decision of the First Division before Guanzon’s retirement on February 2, Guanzon will reveal the identity of the meddling senator.
That threat is puzzling.
Assuming that Guanzon’s story about the meddling senator is true, why didn’t Guanzon expose that senator when the latter was starting to influence her vote in the disqualification cases?
Any attempt to influence a Comelec commissioner’s vote in an election case is illegal. As a Comelec commissioner, Guanzon had the legal obligation to report the meddling senator to the authorities, or at least expose the senator to the public. Why was Guanzon secretive about it to begin with? What took Guanzon so long before telling the public about this meddlesome senator?
From the way Guanzon phrased her threat, Guanzon will not reveal the senator’s name if Ferolino yields to Guanzon’s bullying and releases the decision of the First Division before February 2. Why should Guanzon’s legal duty to expose the senator’s name be dependent on whether or not Ferolino releases the decision of the First Division before February 2? Guanzon should name the senator regardless of whether or not Ferolino releases the decision before February 2.
Atty. George Briones, a lawyer of the BBM camp, asked the Comelec to investigate Guanzon for the irregularity she committed. Briones also said Guanzon should be disbarred.
In reply, Guanzon challenged Briones to a debate. She also flaunted her academic credentials, and said that she reads a lot.
Guanzon also argued that the Comelec has no jurisdiction to investigate her because she can only ousted from office through impeachment proceedings.
Briones agreed to debate with Guanzon, but he changed his mind after Guanzon threatened to report him to ex-Senator Juan Ponce Enrile, Briones’ fraternity brother in the University of the Philippines.
Guanzon also challenged Briones to the boxing ring, an act no respectable government official, especially one who is a lawyer, should be doing.
Now that Guanzon is no longer with the Comelec, criminal and administrative cases can be pursued against her.
As I said earlier, Guanzon can be charged under Section 3(k) of the anti-graft law, and under Article 154 of the Revised Penal Code.
Disbarment charges can also be filed against Guanzon for behaving in a manner unbecoming of a member of the legal profession.