Marcos yet to pay fines in 1995 tax case conviction —petitioners

Presidential aspirant Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. has yet to pay the fines imposed by the court for his failure to file his income tax returns in the 1980s, petitioners said.

Lawyer Theodore Te, the counsel of the group of Martial Law victims who were seeking the cancellation of Marcos’ certificate of candidacy for president, requested the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City Branch 105 documents relevant to the 1995 tax cases.

According to Te, the documents included a certification issued by the acting presiding judge, indicating that Marcos “has not satisfied the judgment of the court” in the tax cases decided July 27, 1995 “as modified” by the Court of Appeals in its decision on October 31, 1997.

“Based on this information, petitioners will bring this matter to the urgent attention of the [Commission on Elections] in SPA-21-156 (DC) and also the Office of the City Prosecutor of Quezon City which is the government agency mandated to enforce the judgment of the RTC,” Te said.

Asked to comment on the certification, Marcos spokesman Atty. Vic Rodriguez said, "I would love to answer you, because I know fully well what the correct answer is, but they, the petitioner should have done a complete due diligence before they have done with the filing of their cases."

"We are not here to supply, and I will not supply them all missing fact or facts that are needed in their petition," Rodriguez said.

"It’s their job to complete the allegation, the attachment and the evidence, documentary or otherwise and we will not supply all the missing pieces of evidence that they would want us now to provide them," he added.

The group of Martial Law victims said in their petition that Marcos was convicted for failure to file his income tax returns in the 1980s. The Court of Appeals affirmed Marcos Jr.'s conviction in 1997.

On November 19, Marcos Jr.'s camp answered the petition’s allegation of material misrepresentation since he declared that he had not been convicted of an offense carrying a penalty of perpetual disqualification from public office.

The presidential aspirant’s camp argued that there was no material misrepresentation if the basis was information stated in the COC of a candidate under the Section 74 of the Omnibus Election Code.—AOL/NB, GMA News