PET junks Marcos' bid to annul votes in Lanao del Sur, Maguindanao, and Basilan

Former Senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. will not be able to overcome Vice President Leni Robredo’s lead even if his poll protest proceeds to the third cause of action, the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET) has ruled.

In its February 16 decision, the PET no longer gave due course to Marcos' third cause of action—the annulment of 2016 election results for vice president in Lanao del Sur, Basilan, and Maguindanao.

It said Marcos failed to make a substantial recovery of votes in the pilot provinces that he himself had designated. Robredo's victory will not be overturned even if the annulment was granted.

It also voted unanimously to junk Marcos' election protest.

The full copy of the decision was made available to the media only on Monday. 

“Failure to make out his case through his designated pilot provinces— Camarines Sur, Iloilo, and Negros Oriental—protestant (Marcos) cannot now insist on the annulment of the election results in Lanao del Sur, Maguindanao, and Basilan,” the PET said in its February 16 decision,” the PET said in its February 16 decision.

“The [PET] Rules explicitly direct the forthwith dismissal of his protest ‘without further consideration of the other provinces mentioned in the protest. A resort to [the] third cause of action can no longer be had.”

It added: “All told, the third cause of action fails, and is likewise dismissed.”

Still, the PET projected that Robredo would still maintain a lead of 15,130 votes “even if we proceed with the third cause of action.”

The tribunal arrived at this conclusion by combining the results of the manual recount in the three pilot provinces and the projected results for the third cause of action.

Marcos’ camp earlier insisted that his third cause of action could proceed independently from the manual recount and judicial revision, but the PET ruled that doing so would “risk frustrating the valid exercise of the nation’s democratic will and subject it to the endless whims of a defeated candidate.”

“Changing the rules this late in the game to grant protestant’s third cause of action would not be a good precedent as it would tailor the protest in favor of one party,” the PET said.

“Besides, there is also [the] protestee’s pending counter-protest that would be affected by a change in the rules. This tribunal must be prepared to hear it if we decide to proceed with the annulment of elections.”

The PET added that annulling the votes for vice president in the 2016 elections “casts serious doubts on the victory of other nationally elected officials like the president, senators, and party-list representatives.”

According to the tribunal, annulment of election results must be resorted only in “extreme cases of fraud and under circumstances which demonstrate to the fullest degree a fundamental and wanton disregard of the law.”

In this case, the tribunal said Marcos failed to show proof that the elections in Lanao del Sur, Maguindanao, and Basilan were marred by terrorism, intimidation and harassment of voters, as well as irregularities such as pre-shading of ballots and substitution of voters.

“Instead, he chose to make sweeping allegations of wrongdoing and submitted incomplete and incorrect data,” the ruling said.

For instance, the PET noted the lack of clustered precinct numbers, erroneous use of the established precinct number instead of the clustered precinct number as required by the tribunal, and precinct numbers that do not exist based on the Project of Precincts for the 2016 elections.

Lack of witnesses for several clustered precincts and repetition of the names of some witnesses were also observed, it added.

“His abject failure to support his claims leaves this tribunal with no other recourse but to dismiss his protest,” the PET said.

A party may file a motion for reconsideration within 10 days of receipt of the decision, a copy of which was released to the media by the SC on Monday.

Associate Justice Marvic Leonen penned the decision on behalf of the tribunal. Then Chief Justice Diosdado Peralta and Justices Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa, Mario Lopez, and Samuel Gaerlan issued separate opinions. —NB, GMA News