SC to tackle appeals on Poe’s DQ case

4

The Supreme Court (SC) has set for Tuesday in Baguio City en banc deliberations on appeals made on whether Sen. Grace Poe is fit to run for the presidency.

Advertisements

Tuesday marks the start of the SC’s en banc sessions in the country’s summer capital throughout the entire month of April.

The motions for reconsideration were filed after the tribunal decided in favor of Poe on petitions to disqualify her over citizenship and residency issues.

The High Court voted 9-6 on March 8, setting aside a ruling of the Commission on Elections (Comelec) canceling the senator’s certificate of candidacy for President.

It cited the Comelec committing grave abuse of discretion in its decision against Poe, who leads pre-election surveys on voters’ preferred candidate for the country’s highest post.

Two sets of appeal were filed before the SC, the first by private respondent and lawyer Estrella Elamparo and the second by former senator Francisco Tatad, Professor Antonio Contreras and lawyer Amado Valdez, who jointly submitted an Urgent Plea for Reconsideration.

In their pleading, they insisted that the High Court erred in “declaring that petitioner is a natural-born citizen by statistical probability, presumption and as a measure of equal protection or the law/social justice.”

The petitioners said they also believed that the tribunal erred in declaring that foundlings are natural-born citizens under the 1935 Constitution and under the international law.

Poe is a foundling who would later be adopted by famous movie stars Fernando Poe Jr. and Susan Roces.

The petitioners cited as grounds for their appeal alleged errors committed by the High Court when it declared the reacquisition of citizenship under Republic Act 9225 vested natural-born status upon Poe, that the senator had complied with the 10-year residency requirement, that Poe did not commit an intent to mislead when she declared in her COC that she is a natural-born citizen and that she also had complied with the minimum residency requirement to run for President in the 2016 elections.

JOMAR CANLAS

Share.
loading...
Loading...

Please follow our commenting guidelines.

4 Comments

  1. It is about time the SC justices tackle this urgent issue. “Masyado silang makupad”. The elections will be held soon, and time is of the essence. The last thing the country needs is a constitutional crisis just because we have a bunch of justices who have their own personal agenda, and just willfully ignored and trashed the Constitution that they are supposed to defend and protect. It is unfathomable that they would also use, among other bases, statistics and probability to decide on the question of “natural-born citizenship”. In western countries such as Canada, the USA, Australia, et al, statistical analyses are used to overturn an invalid, illegal or unconstitutional state or federal law on grounds of discrimination based on sex, religion, age, etc. For example, a law in the state of Arizona which mandated that male teenagers should pay more for car insurance than female teenage drivers was challenged, found to be discriminatory, and illegal and thus, taken off the books. In the case of Grace Poe-Llamanzares, those justices who bought into the pleadings and representations of the “tribune of the people” Sol-Gen Hilbay effectively decided that the citizenship provisions of the 1935 Constitution are “discriminatory”. Yet, they did not declare the provisions to be void, illegal or unconstitutional! There is no order for the provisions to be taken off the Constitution. So what is the point of using statistical analyses except to ensure that their favored candidate is allowed to run? The decision is a misuse of statistical analyses for legal purposes and is symptomatic of the justices’ lack of knowledge of the appropriate use of statistics in court cases and proceedings.

    By the way, Mr. Canlas, glad to see you are back reporting. I hope the SC threat of “contempt charges” failed and did not cause you to reveal your sources re: bribery offers to the justices to “disqualify” Mrs. Poe-Llamanzares. What I found intriguing is the SC decided to question your report, but not the one where 100 million pesos bribes were offered by a fixer (representing a businessman now believed to be Danding Cojuangco) to several justices in exchange for supporting her petition before the SC.

  2. HerculeanBreed on

    I don’t seem to understand the people complaining to SC’s decision on Poe’s Presidential bid. It looks like these are the people vouching for or die-hard supporters of other candidates. I don’t favor any presidential candidate yet, but giving Poe a chance on her candidacy is just proper considering it’s the people’s mandate that will decide who the next President will be. The constitution is vague on foundling’s natural born identity. Let’s respect the SC’s wisdom and judgment on this.

    Ultimately, the will of the Filipino people will justify if SC’s decision is right or wrong. Let the people decide on election day. That’s the essence of our democratic processes.

  3. opinionated bum on

    The majority of Filipino people, such as the petitioners understand that the Supreme Court Justices are only human beings that make mistakes everyday. Their mistakes were pointed out by the petitioners and the Filipino people are hoping the Justices will rectify their mistakes.

    Most of the Justices based their decisions on Statistics and Probabilities, and it is like a THEORY, an idea that is suggested or presented as possibility true but that is NOT known or proven to be true.

    Uneducated and opinionated bum like myself can offer another theory, and that is the “Dynamics of Money”. MONEY can turn impossible things into favorable, whoever have this mighty element. In the Philippines, everybody has a price, including the Supreme Court Justices.

  4. It’s the moment of truth in the epic battle between some members of the High Court and the document we hold dear called “Constitution.”