The camp of Migz Zubiri is batting for “partial special elections (i.e., for senatorial only)” and therefore calling for declaration of failure of elections. In other words, its lawyers are saying: well, maybe there was failure of elections there in the sense that maybe people were just herded or did not vote but the local candidates had been proclaimed because they are unopposed therefore even if they got only one vote each they can be validly proclaimed, and that is valid under the “lone candidate rule”. So, therefore, partial special elections only, for the senatorial only, should be held.
Why are they advancing this theory (partial special elections)? They don’t want to antagonize the local leaders who are literally, not just figuratively, kings and royalty in their province.
But the COC’s did not say “one vote only”, did they? The proclamation did not say by virtue of the lone candidate rule, it said they were duly elected with stated number of votes.
The camp of Koko Pimentel is arguing that the COC’s were manufactured and should be set aside (i.e., not counted), i.e., that there were/ there must have been elections but along the way the COC’s were tampered with.
Before their proclamation, GO senatorial candidates and their followers argued that the Maguindanao election results were “statistically improbable” and elections did not take place, some of them even produced witnesses in the form of unnamed BEI members alleging no elections in Maguindanao took place and that they (the BEI’s) were brought to a banana farm to fill up election returns. Why is this not being raised now by the opposition? Not favorable to Koko Pimentel’s case. (to be fair, the latter is not legally bound by his coalition mates’ previous pronouncements.)
The Lente lawyer said the Maguindanao COC’s should be set aside and no special elections should be held there, a teacher who was an election officer was killed the other night and therefore it cannot be expected that the Comelec can preside over “meaningful elections” in that place. Lintang Bedol testified this morning that the dog ate the municipal COC’s. (well, actually, what he said was that: the municipal COC’s were lost, somebody took them from city hall, he cannot possibly guard them 24/7 because he was in charge as well of elections in Sharif Kabunsuan. But that’s equivalent to saying the dog ate the COC’s. ) If you tried to explain this to my 3-year old Fil-Am nephew you wouldn’t hear the end of it, whenever we see puppies he’d argue: BUT WHERE’S THE DADDY DOG?
But the Comelec heard the end of it. The problem with the Comelec is, it is high-handed with opposition candidates like Alan Cayetano but soft, almost maternal, on those known to be associates and partners of Garci. Lintang Bedol and those election officers who failed to appear today will get away with it, will get away with everything, no matter that the Comelec has contempt powers, disciplinary powers, arrest powers, suspension powers; it has enough powers to punish its own officers but it doesn’t do that. It nevers asks…. BUT WHERE’S THE DADDY DOG?
The lawyers of the opposition argued this morning that the Comelec has no jurisdiction. You could see that they are laying the basis for a cause of action for a petition for certiorari and prohibition in the Supreme Court. (you need to get a TRO to stop the Comelec; if you could show the Supreme Court what the rules of court call “grave abuse of discretion”, “irreparable damage” and violation of a clear legal right, you might get a TRO.)
Comelec jurisdiction. That’s because before a failure of elections could be declared, a verified petition (and therefore an evidentiary hearing) is required.
Here’s their legal basis:
Omnibus Election Code: “Sec. 6. Failure of election. – If, on account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or other analogous causes the election in any polling place has not been held on the date fixed, or had been suspended before the hour fixed by law for the closing of the voting, or after the voting and during the preparation and the transmission of the election returns or in the custody or canvass thereof, such election results in a failure to elect, and in any of such cases the failure or suspension of election would affect the result of the election, the Commission shall, on the basis of a verified petition by any
interested party and after due notice and hearing, call for the holding or continuation of the election not held, suspended or which resulted in a failure
to elect on a date reasonably close to the date of the election not held, suspended or which resulted in a failure to elect but not later than thirty days
after the cessation of the cause of such postponement or suspension of the election or failure to elect.”
How will the Comelec answer this? You know, there are really these problematic catch-all provisions in the Constitution that grant the Comelec broad powers. The Comelec will invoke its broad investigative powers, then it will say, wait, we have not yet declared a failure of elections. What we issued is just a show-cause order. And now we are investigating whether there were indeed elections held in Maguindanao. We have not made conclusions of law.
I’m not saying i agree with the Comelec, i’m just telling you that’s how it will argue it has jurisdiction over what it is doing.
Show-cause order, failure of elections. Show-cause orders are usually issued preparatory to contempt citations or preventive suspension orders. Show-cause order for failure of elections. That’s new to me.
In other words, what the Comelec should have issued to its election officers is a show-cause why they should not be cited in contempt for failure to obey the orders of the Comelec.
Fraud, terrorism, violence, for a declaration of failure of elections, are matters of evidence, not judicial notice; those cannot be concluded on the basis of documents. Well… that’s just me, i could be wrong.
But does a defectively worded order issued to its election officers oust the Comelec of its jurisdiction? Gosh, am i spoiling someone’s case. I better stop. STOP STOP STOP.
Not to worry, the lawyers already raised it this morning. Maybe wait just a teeny-weeny bit before giving hints; just say, “without prejudice” or “we reserve the right etc.” … Jurisdiction is conferred by law. And it cannot be waived. Wait for the Comelec to make its big mistake. Don’t give hints like this morning because it will try to cure and theorize. You want the big mistake not the little ones.
Wait. Then pounce. After you pounce, the next day or few days, before it could cure, you better have the TRO. (You need a TRO; the Comelec will not stop until there is a twelfth senator. It’s like the Terminator part 1 part 2 part 3 rise of the machines. )…
“BUT WHERE’S THE DADDY DOG?!!”
