House panel okays resolution on HRET power over poll cases

MANILA, Philippines - The House committee on suffrage and electoral reforms has approved a resolution reiterating the exclusive authority and jurisdiction of the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) over electoral protest cases.

Passed by the panel was House Resolution No. 597 “reiterating adherence to the time-honored principle on the exclusivity of jurisdiction of the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal over all contests relating to the election, returns and qualifications of its members to preserve the integrity, dignity and reputation of the House of Representatives and its members.”

It was filed by Oriental Mindoro Rep. Reynaldo Umali and co-authored by 171 other lawmakers.

The filing of the resolution stemmed from the decision of the Supreme Court (SC) declaring Lord Allan Velasco the winner during the 2013 congressional race in the lone district of Marinduque, and not Regina Reyes, who was the one proclaimed by the local Commission on Elections (Comelec) after the canvassing.

Umali said the HRET should handle and hear the election protest of Velasco against Reyes and not the SC as the latter already took her oath as Marinduque representative.

Reyes was earlier proclaimed by the poll body as the winner with a margin of over 4,000 votes against Velasco, son of SC Associate Justice Presbitero Velasco.

On Tuesday night, Cavite Rep. Elpidio Barzaga, Velasco’s partymate in the National Unity Party, took the cudgels for the defeated congressional candidate, saying not respecting the decision of the SC could trigger a constitutional crisis.

He said the SC upheld the decision of the Comelec’s First Division to cancel Reyes’ certificate of candidacy for allegedly making material misrepresentations on her residency and citizenship.

The SC, according to Barzaga, “has spoken with finality. I appeal to reason and sense of fair play of every member of this honorable chamber to uphold the rule of law and the Constitution. I urge everyone, regardless of political affiliation, to abide by that final decision of the Court.”

Umali and Reps. Doy Leachon and Josephine Sato immediately stood up and contradicted Barzaga.

They said all election-related protests against proclaimed congressmen must be under the jurisdiction of the HRET, including Reyes’ case.

Leachon and Umali also said that it is clear that the SC decision was suspicious and doubtful since it was issued only 18 days after the case was filed.

They even cited the opinion of SC Associate Justice Arturo Brion who said that it looked like the decision was hastened to favor the son of a colleague.

For her part, Sato urged her colleagues to support and stand for the mandate of Congress to defend its dignity.

The SC has ordered the House of Representatives to answer Velasco’s bid to assume the post as representative of the lone district of Marinduque.

In their session the other day, the SC justices approved the issuance of an order directing the House to submit a comment on the petition filed by Velasco last month seeking the issuance of a writ of mandamus ordering Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. to recognize him as duly elected winner in last year’s congressional race and administer his oath of office.

The SC gave the House 10 days from receipt of notice to comply with its order.

To read the full story please click HERE.

LP stalwart threatens to impeach justices anew

Posted in Manila Bulletin
By: Ben Rosario

Manila, Philippines — A close Malacañang ally in Congress raised anew the sword of Damocles over the heads of Supreme Court  (SC) justices as he revived his threat to impeach magistrates whom he accused of abusing the power of judicial review and violating the principle of separation of powers.

In a privilege speech, Mindoro Oriental Rep. Reynaldo Umali appealed to witnesses of alleged judicial abuses and irregularities in the judiciary to come out in the open to help the executive and legislative branches of government cleanse the courts of bad eggs.

Delivering his second SC bashing in three months, Umali assailed several High Court decisions which he claimed to have flip-flopped on past rulings, saying that these were reached by magistrates in the guise of “judicial elasticity.”

In his first anti-SC privilege speech, the administration lawmaker vowed to push for the impeachment of two Supreme Court members, telling journalists later that the complaint will be filed in January 2014.

In his latest blast against the SC, Umali did not state reasons for failing to pursue the impeachment cases, but he reiterated his accusations that certain members of the judiciary were guilty of betrayal of public trust which is an impeachable offense.

“As the highest tribunal in the land, the Supreme Court should be the stronghold of integrity and impartiality.  Yet how can we trust a Supreme Court that changes its mind whenever such change appears to be convenient?” asked Umali, who takes pride of having authored impeachment resolutions that led to the resignation of former Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez and the ouster of former SC Chief Justice Renato Corona.

He detailed a number of cases which he said have been shrouded with judicial controversies due to reversals of previous decisions.

But his main criticism appeared to be aimed at the case of Marinduque Rep. Regina Reyes whose proclamation as congressional race winner over former Rep. Lord Allan Velasco has been ordered nullified by the Court.

Failing to get Speaker Feliciano Belmonte to acknowledge the ruling, Velasco, son of SC Associate Justice Presbitero Velasco, filed  a Petition for Mandamus seeking to compel Belmonte to administer his oath of office and direct Secretary General Emilia Barua-Yap to remove Reyes’ name from the roll of members  of the House.

Citing a House resolution signed by majority of congressmen and jurisprudence, Umali, himself a lawyer, stressed that the Supreme Court no longer has jurisdiction over the electoral controversy because the decision is already under the jurisdiction of the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal which Justice Velasco chairs.

“Surely, a full blown constitutional crisis will ensue at a huge cost to our political system on account of a flip-flopping , albeit, unwarranted decision of the High Court to favor a  son of a sitting magistrate, which I submit constitute betrayal of public trust, a clear ground for impeachment,” Umali said.

Reyes case was “motu propio” decided in record time of 18 days, without even requiring the sitting solon to comment, he said.

“It is very unusual how the Supreme Court was able to decide the Reyes case so swiftly when some, if not most, cases remain for years in the court dockets despite its mandate under the 1987 Constitution to resolve cases within 24 months from the date of submission,” Umali said.

Read the full article: click here