Why PET has yet to vote on Marcos poll protest vs. Robredo

The Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET)  said on Friday it “deemed essential to meet due process requirement,”  which explains the deferral of the decision on the electoral protest filed against Vice President Leni Robredo by former Senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr.

“This Tribunal, however, will comply with its constitutionally mandated duty allowing the parties the opportunity to examine the results of the revision and appreciation of the pilot provinces as well as comment so that they are fully and fairly heard on all the related legal issues,” the PET, composed of Supreme Court justices, said in a resolution.

The resolution showed that Robredo's lead Marcos increased by some 15,000 votes after the manual recount in the three pilot provinces Marcos chose in his protest before the Presidential Electoral Tribunal.

The PET said that before it proceeds to make a ruling on the effects of the results of the revisions on the three pilot provinces, the parties will be required to submit their position stating their factual and legal basis.

“Likewise, the Tribunal deems it essential to meet due process requirement to require protestant and protestee to now provide their position in relation to the Third Cause of Action also articulated in the Preliminary Conference Order,” it said.

Marcos' supposed third cause of action is the annulment of 2016 election results for vice president in Lanao del Sur, Basilan, and Maguindanao due to alleged terrorism, violence, force, threats, intimidation, pre-shading of ballots, and vote substitution.

The Justices said the delay in the decision has “spawned very serious but unfounded and careless speculations on the part of many partisan observers who, on the basis of incomplete information, would rather latch on to their favorite
conspiratorial theories rather than critically examine the facts and the law
involved in this case.”

However, PET said it would comply with its mandate to give the concerned parties to fully examine the results and comment before it makes a decision.

“Based on the submissions of the parties, the Tribunal can therefore confidently and judiciously deliberate on the proper course of action as clarified by the actual position of the parties on the common issues we have identified,” it said. —Nicole-Ann Lagrimas/LDF, GMA News