Congress – marichulambino.com

The schedule of the elections and the expiration of the terms of the President and the Vice President are mandated by the elections, as follows:

“1987 Constitution, Article VII, Section 4. The President and the Vice-President shall be elected by direct vote of the people for a term of six years which shall begin at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following the day of the election and shall end at noon of the same date, six years thereafter. The President shall not be eligible for any re-election. No person who has succeeded as President and has served as such for more than four years shall be qualified for election to the same office at any time.
“No Vice-President shall serve for more than two successive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of the service for the full term for which he was elected.
“Unless otherwise provided by law, the regular election for President and Vice-President shall be held on the second Monday of May.
“The returns of every election for President and Vice-President, duly certified by the board of canvassers of each province or city, shall be transmitted to the Congress, directed to the President of the Senate. Upon receipt of the certificates of canvass, the President of the Senate shall, not later than thirty days after the day of the election, open all the certificates in the presence of the Senate and the House of Representatives in joint public session, and the Congress, upon determination of the authenticity and due execution thereof in the manner provided by law, canvass the votes.
“The person having the highest number of votes shall be proclaimed elected, but in case two or more shall have an equal and highest number of votes, one of them shall forthwith be chosen by the vote of a majority of all the Members of both Houses of the Congress, voting separately.
“The Congress shall promulgate its rules for the canvassing of the certificates.
“The Supreme Court, sitting en banc, shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of the President or Vice-President, and may promulgate its rules for the purpose.”

In other words, the incumbent President and Vice President have no authority to sit in office beyond noontime of June 30, 2016, and absolutely have no authority to sit in any hold-over capacity of any kind.

As to “postponement” of the presidential elections, the Commission on Elections has no authority whatsoever to postpone the date of the presidential elections – only Congress is authorized do that, but not later than the date that allows for counting and canvassing up to noon of June 30, 2016.

The Comelec chair wrote the Supreme Court on Sunday that the TRO on the “no bio no boto” policy (no biometrics registration, no right to vote) imperils the holding of the elections as scheduled. Presumably, the Comelec chair could not wait for the Sol-Gen to file the necessary responsive pleading in the Supreme Court and took it upon himself to write the Supreme Court.

Can a litigant write the justices or judge presiding over the case about the merits of a pending case or proceeding? Sure, any person has the right to petition for redress of grievances. A judicial proceeding however is governed by the Rules of Court in order to ensure that the rights of all parties are observed, such that the arguments are course thru counsel in the manner provided by the rules with copies furnished on the opposing party.

The letter of the Comelec chair is a form of extrajudicial communication sent directly to the Court. Writing the Supreme Court justices on a matter pending before them is a way of extrajudicially influencing them, to the detriment of the opposing party who has no access to the extrajudicial communication. That is why the other side is put at a disadvantage when one party is allowed to extrajudicially communicate with the Court without notice upon the other party and without copies of the communication furnished to the other party. Normally, the judge, or the justice, or the clerk of court, who received the letter would direct the litigant to course his/her plaints to his/her counsel, in this case, the Solicitor General. But we all know by this time that some of the Supreme Court justices may have read the letter or may have been made aware of its contents, the Comelec chair having granted interviews on it.

At the very least, petitioners-opposing party, the Kabataan partylist, should be allowed access to such letter.
But the damage has been done. The Comelec chair has foisted a threat — The threat that they would not be able to conduct orderly elections because of the TRO issued by the Supreme Court. This is a threat.
The Comelec chair said in an interview that: “The problem is that we are now in limbo on what to do with the 2.4 million no bio voters. The project of precincts (the precinct assignment of voters) is scheduled on Dec. 15.”

In reality however, the TRO on the deactivation simply means that the Comelec has to proceed with election preparations without deactivating the 2.4 million voters that it wants to methodically disenfranchise. Comelec is not being put “in limbo”, they are simply directed not to disenfranchise 2.4 million voters pending review of the matter but that they should proceed with election preparations upon the status quo or without disenfranchising the 2.4 million voters. News reports show that a few days before the deadline and on the day of the deadline for biometrics registration , Comelec refused to service more than 50 per cent of the voters who had lined up. Comelec argued that the applicants should have lined up earlier and that the number of Comelec personnel and computers was not enough to service them. Note however that these voters and applicants complied with the law and the rules when they lined up a few days before, or on the day of the deadline. Refusing to register them, causing deactivation of their records, when they were in line within the deadline , is illegal – it is a methodical form of disenfranchisement. The Comelec should have devised a procedure whereby all those who had queued, up to the day of the deadline, be allowed to register – these voters complied with the deadline, they had the right to be registered.

There is a precinct assignment scheduled on Dec. 15; the voters list and list of candidates have to be finalized. The TRO means these preparations should push thru without, in the meantime, disenfranchising the 2.4 million voters, pending review of the merits. (The Comelec can take cue from experienced managers, administrators, directors, even editors, who, when faced with two contingencies, prepare for both, or make preparations for both).

But alas, the Comelec chair has already foisted a threat, and a threat by way of an extrajudicial communication directed at the Supreme Court justices at that. Mabait ang Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court is set to vote on the constitutionality of the so-called “Development Acceleration Program” today, according to news reports.

During the oral arguments in the Supreme Court last January 28, the executive branch through the sol-gen all of a sudden announced that it had abolished the so-called DAP, and argued therefore that the petitions should be dismissed for mootness.

In the nick of time or so the DBM thinks.

Mootness? More than 72 Billion Pesos in public funds were juggled then swung around to augment items that were NOT in the budget or the General Appropriations Act (GAA). (And, as revealed by some senators in privilege speeches, press conferences, and interviews, a minimum of fifty million pesos to 100 million pesos were juggled their way in the heels of the Corona impeachment, as borne by official records that can be taken judicial notice of)

The Constitution authorizes only Congress to allocate public moneys to fund items in the different offices and departments of government thru the General Appropriations Act.

The fundamental issue here is: Whether or not the DBM can impound funds from departments, national agencies, local governments, GOCCs, previously allocated to these institutions, and juggle them to fund other items NOT provided so in the GAA.

Where is that 72 Billion Pesos now? The Official Gazette, the official repository of all official enactments, stated that in 2011, the DAP involved 72.11 Billion Pesos (According to GMA News, 11 Sept. 2013, the official Philippine government gazette said that the development acceleration program involved P72.11 billion from appropriations that have not been spent by various government agencies.)

To argue that the juggling of 72 Billion Pesos in public funds to items not provided so in the GAA had become moot just because it was suddenly stopped, is to inveigle the Supreme Court to agree that the 72 Billion Pesos suddenly disappearing from items found in the national budget, and appearing in other items not provided so in the budget, is not an unauthorized sleight of hand but a display of accounting and book-keeping prowess.

(image by Nevit Dilmen published here non-commercially under the Creative Commons Attribution License)

DBM officials and Malacañang officials should consider a career in the Cirque du Soleil.

More important however, 72 Billion Pesos disappearing from one hat then appearing in another hat has serious legal consequences on the nature of those disappearing-and-appearing public funds, on the projects and items from which those funds were taken, on the projects and items so-funded by juggling, and on the senators, undersecretaries, middlemen, “NGO networkers”, contractors, who benefited from those juggled funds. The 72 billion pesos exist — now you see them — then disappeared — now you don’t see them — then reappeared — now you see them — as they continue to exist in different pockets in a state of constitutional limbo as to their nature. These flying public funds constitute 72 billion unresolved, active constitutional and legal issues.

The 72 Billion Pesos in public funds juggled and divided up are still floating in the air and their beneficiaries still swinging as acrobats – that can never be moot.

Tag: Congress

Comelec chair’s letter to SC on merits of a pending case w threat that TRO may cause postponement of elections is a form of extrajudicial communication to extrajudicially influence the Court

The schedule of the elections and the expiration of the terms of the President and the Vice President are mandated by the elections, as follows:

In other words, the incumbent President and Vice President have no authority to sit in office beyond noontime of June 30, 2016, and absolutely have no authority to sit in any hold-over capacity of any kind.

As to “postponement” of the presidential elections, the Commission on Elections has no authority whatsoever to postpone the date of the presidential elections – only Congress is authorized do that, but not later than the date that allows for counting and canvassing up to noon of June 30, 2016.

But alas, the Comelec chair has already foisted a threat, and a threat by way of an extrajudicial communication directed at the Supreme Court justices at that. Mabait ang Supreme Court.

issue SC en banc, today: P72 B juggled to out-of-budget items thru #DAP never moot

The Supreme Court is set to vote on the constitutionality of the so-called “Development Acceleration Program” today, according to news reports.

During the oral arguments in the Supreme Court last January 28, the executive branch through the sol-gen all of a sudden announced that it had abolished the so-called DAP, and argued therefore that the petitions should be dismissed for mootness.

In the nick of time or so the DBM thinks.

The Constitution authorizes only Congress to allocate public moneys to fund items in the different offices and departments of government thru the General Appropriations Act.

The fundamental issue here is: Whether or not the DBM can impound funds from departments, national agencies, local governments, GOCCs, previously allocated to these institutions, and juggle them to fund other items NOT provided so in the GAA.

DBM officials and Malacañang officials should consider a career in the Cirque du Soleil.

The 72 Billion Pesos in public funds juggled and divided up are still floating in the air and their beneficiaries still swinging as acrobats – that can never be moot.

The schedule of the elections and the expiration of the terms of the President and the Vice President are mandated by the elections, as follows:

In other words, the incumbent President and Vice President have no authority to sit in office beyond noontime of June 30, 2016, and absolutely have no authority to sit in any hold-over capacity of any kind.

But alas, the Comelec chair has already foisted a threat, and a threat by way of an extrajudicial communication directed at the Supreme Court justices at that. Mabait ang Supreme Court.

click any social media icon below to share

The Supreme Court is set to vote on the constitutionality of the so-called “Development Acceleration Program” today, according to news reports.

During the oral arguments in the Supreme Court last January 28, the executive branch through the sol-gen all of a sudden announced that it had abolished the so-called DAP, and argued therefore that the petitions should be dismissed for mootness.

In the nick of time or so the DBM thinks.

The Constitution authorizes only Congress to allocate public moneys to fund items in the different offices and departments of government thru the General Appropriations Act.

The fundamental issue here is: Whether or not the DBM can impound funds from departments, national agencies, local governments, GOCCs, previously allocated to these institutions, and juggle them to fund other items NOT provided so in the GAA.

DBM officials and Malacañang officials should consider a career in the Cirque du Soleil.

The 72 Billion Pesos in public funds juggled and divided up are still floating in the air and their beneficiaries still swinging as acrobats – that can never be moot.

click any social media icon below to share