SC accepts Marcos payment in poll protest

6

The Supreme Court (SC), sitting as Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET), accepted the P36 million deposited by former senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. as tender of payment in connection with his electoral protest against Vice President Maria Leonor “Leni” Robredo in the 2016 elections.

In their en banc deliberations in Baguio City, the magistrates “noted” the payment made by Marcos as the first installment of the P66.2 million the high tribunal ordered him to pay.

The P36,023,000 was received by Jeffrey Raymond Atienza, assistant officer in charge of the Cash Collection and Distribution Division of the Fiscal Management and Budget Office on Monday, April 17.

In the meantime, the PET deferred its ruling on the motion for reconsideration Robredo filed on the order of payment to cover her counter protest.


Robredo has yet to pay the first installment of P8 million after her legal counsel lodged a manifestation before the PET on April 12 for a clarification on the fees that Marcos must settle and hold in abeyance the payment required of her for the 8,042 counter-protested clustered precincts.

Robredo has to pay a total of P15.4 million. The deadline for the payment of the second installment for Marcos and Robredo is on July 14.

Marcos has to pay P500 for each of the 132,446 precincts where a vote recount will be held.

Marcos, who lost to Robredo by only 263,473 votes, claimed that the vice presidential election was marred with “massive electoral fraud, anomalies and irregularities” such as pre-shading of ballots, pre-loaded secure digital cards, misreading of ballots, malfunctioning Voting Counting Machines, and an “abnormally high” unaccounted for votes/undervotes for the position of VP.

Share.
.
Loading...

Please follow our commenting guidelines.

6 Comments

  1. Leni nor her financier will not come out with the money and pay because they really know that there is massive cheating in the precints covered by BBM’s protest. Leni and co. knows she lost the election so why waste millions to fight the protest. Beside, there is likely impeachment charge that will filed against her as promised by Speaker Alvarez as soon as Congress goes back to session, so the more reason that her financier will back out to help her in the multi million fees being collected by SC.

    At this point, Atty Macalintal is just using obvious delaying tactics which is very idiotic for members of the SC to appreciate.

    • Hit the nail onthe head! Imagine until July pa ang deadline to pay ni Leni to counter act. Naku delaying tactic talaga si macalibtal. Sa mga tanga at uto unto at naka dilaw ay sold na sold ang alibi ni MAcalintal. Sa mga me Alam na tumimbang at magsaliksik ay di uubra. Tandaan ko pangalan mo.atty makalintal

  2. I think BBM will be considered in the future as a tool or symbolic figure to prove that automatic elections are easy to be manipulated. we waited only for a rich losing candidate like him in order to prove this. otherwise automated elections in the Philippines will be scammed forever.

  3. No less than the second highest post of the land is in question here, a matter of grave importance and should be decided with haste. And what did our sloppy justices do?

    They ask for a hefty some of money. Typical Filipino justice..

  4. See how expensive it is to obtain justice in the Philippines? Even in smaller cases like those filed in lower courts, the docket fee is already a fortune for those who have been a victim of any kind of fraud and wanted to file a case with damages. And during trial, you have to pay the transcript of stenographic notes the previous hearing at P10.00/page . And of course, the lawyer you have hired as counsel to protect your interest should be compensated and depending upon the rate of the lawyer, it is still no peanuts. Yet, it isn’t only expensive, it is also time consuming and may wear your patience and perseverance if you are the plaintiff. Many postponement of hearing for various reasons always contribute to delay in resolving the case. The court seems helpless in correcting this anomaly. Sometimes, they are a contributor. Shouldn’t congress craft a law to make this affordable to the poor litigants in terms of money and time? Perhaps its already time they do so.