House, SC on Collision Course Over Jurisdiction

By Maricel Cruz | Posted on Jul. 16, 2013 at 12:02am | 2,393 views

CONGRESS and the Supreme Court appeared headed for a collision Monday after Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. told the justices to back off and let the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) do its job to settle election-related cases against lawmakers.

“The Supreme Court and the Commission on Elections should allow the HRET to exercise

its exclusive mandate to hear election protests against members of this (16th) Congress,” Belmonte said.

Belmonte’s remarks came after the Court on Friday barred the HRET from acquiring jurisdiction over the disqualification case filed against elected Marinduque Rep. Regina Reyes, ruling that the Comelec retained authority over the case even though she was proclaimed the winner in the May 13 polls.

The Supreme Court said the HRET, the body tasked to resolve electoral cases against members of the House, had no jurisdiction over Reyes, who had not yet officially started her term.

But Mandaluyong City Rep. Neptali Gonzales II said the Court should recognize the powers of HRET to hear electoral protests against lawmakers, as guaranteed by the Constitution.

“The Supreme Court cannot encroach on the powers of the HRET. That is very clear in the Constitution, which created the HRET,” Gonzales said.

Gonzales maintained that the Court in several previous cases decided that once a House member is proclaimed, the HRET acquires jurisdiction over questions on his or her election.

The ruling of the Comelec to disqualify Reyes was based on a complaint filed by a private citizen claiming that Reyes was a US citizen.

The ruling was allegedly aimed at benefiting her opponent, former Marinduque Rep. Lord Allan Jay Velasco, a son of sitting SC Associate Justice Presbitero Velasco, Reyes said.

In affirming the Comelec ruling, the Court said Reyes does not become a member of the House until she completes three stages specified in the law—valid proclamation, proper oath taking and official assumption of office at noon of June 30 after the polls.

But Reyes said her camp was considering filing an impeachment complaint against the justices for the “culpable violation of the Constitution and a betrayal of public trust.”

“I beseech Presbitero Velasco to stop using his unelected post to further the interest of his family,” Reyes said in a news conference. Reyes was with her counsel, Harry Roque Jr.

She warned that his interference would give rise to “yet another constitutional crisis where Congress may be compelled to ignore a ruling of the Court reversing jurisprudence to benefit one of its own.”

Roque said they would file the impeachment complaint before the House committee on justice as soon as Congress opens next Monday.

Roque said they would use the dissenting opinion of Associate Justice Arturo Brion questioning the “undue haste” in dismissing the petition filed by Reyes seeking to stop the Comelec from disqualifying her.

Brion’s dissenting opinion was supported by Justices Antonio Carpio, Martin Villarama and Marvic Leonen.
Justice Jose Perez, who wrote the majority decision, was supported by Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno and Justices Teresita Leonardo-De Castro, Lucas Bersamin, Mariano del Castillo, Roberto Abad and Bienvenido Reyes.

Velasco and Justices Jose Mendoza and Estela Perlas-Bernabe inhibited themselves from the case.

But Reyes denounced Velasco, alleging he influenced his fellow justices to favor his son.

“It was you (Justice Velasco) who sparked this constitutional crisis because instead of upholding the supremacy of the Constitution, the decision in Reyes versus Comelec undermined and made a mockery of the Constitution. This is clearly the impeachable offense,” Reyes said.

The magistrate branded Reyes’ statement as baseless and malicious.

Lawmakers said Monday the HRED acquires sole jurisdiction over any election protest that may be filed against a proclaimed winning candidate.

“Reyes remains a member of the House until the HRET decides otherwise,” one lawmaker said.

The younger Velasco, on the other hand, denounced Reyes and accused her of unethical and improper conduct in breach of the Code of Professional Responsibility and her oath of office by making “irresponsible, unethical and malicious statements” in connection with her disqualification case.

He added that Reyes violated the sub judice rule in which a party is not allowed to talk about the merits of the case while it is still under judicial consideration or determination.

Although the Court has already ruled on the case, its decision is not yet final, Velasco said. With Rey E. Requejo