4 key issues that divide SC justices in Grace Poe case

MANILA, Philippines – The 5-hour oral arguments on Tuesday, February 2 give the public a glimpse on the issues that divide the Supreme Court justices in the disqualification cases against presidential candidate Grace Poe.

Lawyer Arthur Lim, a member of the Commission on Elections, answered questions from the justices in the 3rd round, defending the poll body’s decision to cancel Poe’s certificate of candidacy on the grounds that she “misrepresented” her residency and citizenship. In other words, Comelec said Poe was not a natural-born citizen and lacked the 10-year residency, 2 basic requirements to run for president.

In these exchanges, 4 key takeaways emerged:

1.When the count for the 10-year residency requirement starts.

Justice Mariano del Castillo, who will write the decision, raised the point that the count for Poe’s residency should start on October 21, 2010, when she “expatriated” herself before the U.S. embassy in Manila. “This was when she gave up her domicile in the US,” Del Castillo said. It was the first time in the series of oral arguments that this reckoning point was brought up.

For the Comelec, July 18, 2006 is the earliest time Poe can be considered a resident. It was at this time that she re-acquired her citizenship, as granted by the Bureau of Immigration (BI). Lim said that the Comelec “wanted to accommodate her position” but this still fell short of 10 years.

But Justice Teresita De Castro pointed out that Poe gave “false claims” to the BI, saying that she was born to Fernando Poe Jr. and Susan Roces, hiding the fact that she was a foundling.

If the count begins October 2010, Poe would have been a resident for only less than 6 years.

2. Will the Court engage in “judicial legislation?” Shouldn’t Congress pass legislation to address foundlings’ eligibility for government positions?

Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno elaborated on her earlier position that thousands of foundlings will be discriminated against should the Supreme Court say that Poe, herself a foundling, is not a natural-born citizen. Many government positions, both elective and appointive, require that holders be natural-born citizens.

For almost 3 hours, Sereno repeatedly made this point. In response, Lim kept going back to the “core issue,” saying that this is for Congress and not for the Supreme Court to resolve. “The sad plight of foundlings is not the issue here…Let’s not lose sight of the fact that Poe is seeking the highest position…Comelec doesn’t want to lose focus on what is at stake. This problem [foundling rights] should be addressed by Congress.”

He added that the Court could be engaging in “judicial legislation.”

Justice Arturo Brion, who was the last to ask questions, followed through. “If the constitutional provision on natural-born citizenship is unreasonable, what is the remedy?” To which Lim answered, “Amend the Constitution.”

Brion is one of the 3 justices who dissented in the Senate Electoral Tribunal decision saying Poe is a natural-born citizen. The other 2 are Justices Antonio Carpio and De Castro.

3. Adoption laws as a defense was not raised by Poe’s counsel before the Comelec.

Brion wanted to know if Poe’s camp used the country’s adoption laws as defense before the Comelec. Sereno had repeatedly argued that these presume foundlings to be Filipino citizens.

Lim said that Poe’s defense was anchored on international laws. To which Brion asked, “You heard it first before the Supreme Court?” He was apparently alluding to Sereno, who brought up adoption laws as defense in the last oral arguments and told Poe’s counsel to look at “rich” domestic laws when they file their expanded briefs.

Lim said he was “not sure” if this line of defense came up first in the Supreme Court.

4. In weighing evidence on Poe’s citizenship and residency, what standards will be used?

Sereno and Justice Marvic Leonen harped on this point. Sereno wanted to know what kind of proof the Comelec wanted from Poe.

Leonen pursued a similar line of questioning and asked Lim to cover this in the poll body’s brief.

Lim said that the evidence presented by Poe was “not enough.” The Comelec was after “substantial evidence.”

The justices are expected to deliberate on these key issues as decision time nears.

So far, 4 justices have kept quiet during all the oral arguments: Lucas Bersamin, Bienvenido Reyes, Francis Jardeleza and Jose Mendoza. The last appointee of President Aquino to the Court,Justice Alfredo Benjamin Caguiao has not participated in the oral arguments since his appointment. It is not clear if he will take part in the voting.

The next oral arguments will take place February 9. – Rappler.com

SC nixes Comelec plea for more time to answer Gordon petition

THE Supreme Court (SC) denied the plea of the Commission on Elections (Comelec) to be given more time to answer the petition filed by former Sen. Richard Gordon seeking to compel the poll body  to issue receipts for votes cast during the May 9  elections.

At a media briefing, SC Spokesman Theodore Te said the Court denied the Comelec’s motion during its regular en banc session on Tuesday, and decided to maintain their earlier order for the poll body to respond to the motion within five days.

“The Court denied respondent Comelec’s motion for extension of time to submit comment. The Court’s order of February 23, 2016, gave respondent Comelec an inextendible period of five days within which to comment,” Te said.

It will be recalled that, in his petition for mandamus, Gordon, who is also running for the Senate in this year’s elections, said the poll body should implement Section 7 (e) of Republic Act (RA) 9369, or the automated election law, which states that the Voter Verification Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) is one of the minimum systems capabilities of the automated-election system and a major security feature of the vote- counting machine.

Gordon noted that the VVPAT allows every voter to confirm whether the machine cast the vote correctly based on the choice of the voter, thereby ensuring the integrity of the elections.

He pointed out that VVPAT is a “critical and indispensable” security feature of the automated-voting machine, one that the Comelec must implement.

Gordon said the Comelec must not be allowed to violate the law, as it has done so in the 2010 and 2013 elections, adding that this is one of the reasons there are those who questioned the credibility of the automated-election system, owing to the failure of the poll body to implement the safeguards, such as presenting the source code for review and disabling the use of digital signatures.

Comelec Chairman Andres Bautista said the poll body has decided against printing the receipt, because it might be used for vote- buying, and that it would result to the vote-counting process being extended from six to seven hours, since it takes about 13 seconds to print a receipt, meaning each machine would have to run for that long for the receipts.

Gordon hits back at Macalintal

THE main author of the landmark election automation law, comebacking Sen. Richard Gordon, hit back at election lawyer Romulo Macalintal on Tuesday for saying the law did not mandate the issuance of receipts to voters.

Gordon, who last week filed a petition asking the SC to compel the Comelec to activate the Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) for the May 9 elections, said Macalintal should check his facts before dishing out “selective arguments.”

Gordon was reacting to Macalintal’s published reaction, criticizing Gordon for filing a “misleading and speculative petition.”

The former senator, who once also chaired the Congressional Oversight Committee on Poll Automation, drew attention to RA 9639’s Sections E, F and N, governing the required documentation and verification system after the country scuttled manual elections.

“Depriving voters of a chance to verify through a receipt if their votes were accurately reflected means you are asking them to put their full and exclusive trust in a machine which can be monkeyed around with,” Gordon told the BusinessMirror.

The issue here, he added, “is guaranteeing the integrity of the polls, and letting people have full confidence in the outcome of the elections.”

This will be crucial, Gordon stressed, in ensuring political stability, especially in light of indications this will be a tight race. “If a winner is declared on a small margin, imagine how hard it will be to assure people that the vote is clean, especially if they don’t have receipts and were forced to blindly trust the machines.”

At the same time, Gordon observed that the Comelec never even activated the onscreen verification, which is now being touted as a possible replacement for VVPAT.

He pointed out that the law contemplates receipts, a paper audit trail, and it is time to enforce that, lamenting that it was taken lightly along with other security features in the 2010 and 2013 elections.

Gordon shot down arguments that a paper trail would invite vote buying, noting the hypocrisy of those who say people should be forced to trust the system enough without demanding receipts while, at the same time, accusing them of being a party to vote-buying.

The comebacking senator also noted that the earlier SC decision being cited by Macalintal was rendered even before the country held its first automated elections in 2010.

He noted that in 2010, neither the VVPAT nor onscreen verification was activated. That year the Comelec was also blasted by critics for also failing to put into action a source-code review and for not compelling its watchdog, the Parish Pastoral Center for Responsible Voting, to seriously carry out the random manual audit in timely fashion as required by law.

To buttress his argument, Gordon further cited specific requirements in the law which mandates “provision for voter verified paper audit trail; system auditability which provides supporting documentation for verifying the correctness of reported election results; and, provide the voter a system of verification to find out whether or not the machine has registered his choice.”

source:  Business Mirror