Lawyer: Comelec independence ‘tainted’ when it joined DOJ in poll fraud probe

A lawyer for one of the accused in the alleged rigging of the 2007 elections on Tuesday said the independence of the Commission on Elections (Comelec) was tainted when it jointly conducted the investigation on the alleged poll fraud with the Department of Justice (DOJ).   Brigido Dulay, lawyer of former Comelec chairman Benjamin Abalos, told Supreme Court justices during the oral arguments on the joint panel’s legality that the DOJ-Comelec merger was in violation of the principle of the separation of powers between the executive and judiciary branches of government.   Dulay said it was evident early on that the government, through the panel, was railroading the filing of charges against former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, who allegedly ordered the rigging of the 2007 elections  to favor her administration’s senatorial bets.   He also said Justice Secretary Leila de Lima and Comelec chairman Sixto Brillantes seemed to be "targeting" certain individuals from the Arroyo administration.   "It was always in the headline up to the present. I think everyone is very much intrigued and interested in what happened to former President Arroyo," Dulay said.   Dulay claimed that the Comelec, when it issued a resolution recommending electoral sabotage charges against Mrs. Arroyo and several others, seemed to be "acting as a rubber stamp of the joint panel."   Justice Antonio Carpio requested Dulay to furnish the high court copies of the news articles proving that De Lima and Brillantes made pronouncements against Mrs. Arroyo.   Dulay took note of the supposed imbalance in the powers exercised by the Comelec and the DOJ, saying apart from DOJ members outnumbering Comelec members, the poll body also seemed to be submitting only to the DOJ component of the panel.   “They are not on equal footing,” he said. “Instead of saying they were approving the DOJ-Comelec recommendation... the [Comelec resolution] now say they are relying on the recommendation of the joint committee."   But Associate Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno, an appointee of President Benigno Aquino III, contested the Arroyo camp's allegation that the independence of the Comelec might have been compromised when it merged with the DOJ for the joint panel.   Sereno pointed out to Dulay a specific portion on the Comelec resolution recommending charges against Mrs. Arroyo that said the poll body was adopting the panel's recommendation with modifications.   "The Comelec was exercising its own independent thinking. In fact, it did not fully adopt it. It modified the recommendations," Sereno said.   No basis   Lawyer Benjamin Santos, one of the legal counsels for Mrs. Arroyo, echoed Dulay's arguments, and added that the creation of the panel was not anchored to any law or provision in the 1987 Philippine Constitution.   "We do not find any justification within jurisprudence which would allow the Comelec to engage in an enterprise or a process of preliminary investigation on a joint basis. At best, we would concede that the Comelec-DOJ may have concurrent position with the DOJ," Santos said.   Meanwhile, Justice Lucas Bersamin asked Dulay why the Arroyo camp kept using the word "railroading" to describe how the government seemed to have rushed the filing of cases against Mrs. Arroyo.   The justice said the term "railroading" is an "infrastructured" term used only when talking about infrastructure projects.   "When you say railroad, it means fastracking a project. It's a 24-hour affair. Is that the same idea you are conveying to me?" asked Bersamin.   "I suppose they [DOJ-Comelec panel members] had to spend sleepless nights to be able to finish their reports," Dulay responded.   Justice Martin Villarama suggested if Dulay could instead use "prioritizing" instead of "railroading," but Dulay replied: "I don't think that would best describe [the situation]."   Dulay insisted that the DOJ-Comelec panel committed grave abuse of discretion when it subjected Mrs. Arroyo and several others under preliminary investigation for supposed poll fraud in the 2007 elections.   Dulay emphasized the three points of their objection to the creation of the joint panel: 1) The panel was in violation of Mrs. Arroyo's equal protection under the law; 2) The holding of the preliminary investigation violated due process of law; and 3) The panel violated the principle of the separation of powers.   Meanwhile, a group of protesters from militant group Akbayan staged a noise barrage just outside the Supreme Court building on Padre Faura while the oral arguments were ongoing.   The rallyists displayed anti-Arroyo and anti-Chief Justice Renato Corona banners, containing the words: "Arroyo litisin, huwag patakasin" and "No to CoronArroyo!"  — KBK, GMA News