Robredo camp asks PET to investigate 'possible collusion' between Marcos, Calida

Vice President Leni Robredo's lawyers have asked the Supreme Court (SC) to investigate the "possible collusion" between former senator Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos, Jr. and Solicitor General Jose Calida in the Marcos-Robredo election protest.

In an urgent motion, Robredo's legal team questioned Calida's participation in support of Marcos in what they said is supposed to be a private suit between a losing candidate and an elected public official.

Marcos and Calida had sought, in separate motions filed hours apart, the inhibition of Associate Justice Marvic Leonen from proceedings in the protest that has been pending before the SC, sitting as the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET), for the last four years. 

"The timing and synchronicity of the actions of OSG and protestant Marcos are too perfect to be accidental," the Vice President's lawyers said.

The PET dismissed both motions on Tuesday, marking the second time Marcos' allegations of bias failed to convince the court to re-raffle the case. His motion for the inhibition of then-ponente Justice Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa was denied in 2018.

This time, the tribunal also ordered Calida and journalist Jomar Canlas, whose reports Marcos and the solicitor general had cited in their pleadings, to explain why they should not be held in contempt of court for their actions.

In their 31-page motion, Robredo's lawyers said Calida's Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) raised "eerily similar" arguments as Marcos in seeking Leonen's inhibition.

They asked the PET to conduct an "immediate investigation" on the "possible collusion among Calida, his 19 assistant solicitors general, and Canlas in "besmirching the reputation of the member-in-charge."

The two motions accused Leonen of being biased against the Marcos family, both citing his dissenting opinion in the Ferdinand Marcos burial case, as well as the supposed delay in the case under Leonen's watch as member-in-charge.

Marcos has claimed he and Calida have not communicated regarding the election protest.

Robredo's lawyers also pointed out that Calida campaigned for Marcos in the 2016 elections, saying this connection makes the solicitor general's participation in the protest suspect.

They said only Marcos, the protestant, could raise allegations of bias against Leonen. "The State, through OSG, has no obligation to assuage the insecurities, impatience or hurt feelings of protestant Marcos," they said.

"The personal feelings of protestant Marcos are not the concern of the Republic or of the people," they added

The OSG's function is to serve as the government's lawyer in legal proceedings. But in submitting motions related to the election protest, Calida has invoked his role as the "People's Tribune."

He has used this justification for both his motion for Leonen's inhibition and his call, notwithstanding the position of its client, the Commission on Elections, for the PET to implement the 50-percent threshold in the recount of votes earlier on in the protest.

"If the Office of the Solicitor General is to be the People's Tribune, it cannot be someone's gladiator," Robredo's lawyers said.

"Indeed, how does siding with one man serve the welfare of the people; and why would he take up the position of the defeated candidate whose interest is to call into question and effectively disenfranchise the vote of the people of the Philippines?" they added.

Robredo's camp asserts Marcos' protest, which alleges fraud took place in the 2016 polls, should have been dismissed last year when a recount of ballots from Camarines Sur, Iloilo, and Negros Oriental showed the vice president's lead over her challenger increased by some 15,000 votes.

Instead, the PET, citing due process, ordered the parties, the OSG, and the Comelec to weigh in on issues on Marcos' call for the annulment of election results in Lanao del Sur, Basilan, and Maguindanao due to alleged terrorism and fraud.

Robredo's term ends in 2022.—AOL, GMA News