Petitioners should wait after proclamation before moving vs. Marcos, lawyer says

The legal counsel of presumptive president Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. said Friday petitioners who want to move against a Marcos presidency would have to wait after the proclamation.

In a television interview, Atty. Estelito Mendoza was asked if any questions on candidates and even on the conduct of polls could not be elevated before the Supreme Court.

He was also asked if petitioners could seek a temporary restraining order on the canvassing of votes and the proclamation of winner for the May 9 elections.

"That will have to be done through an election protest... not at this time, but at this time, the Constitution provides step by step, what shall be done with the votes that are cast in the election," Mendoza told CNN Philippines.

"The canvassing of votes by the Board of Canvassers of each province and each municipality, their transmittal to the president of the Senate and the president of the Senate has also time within which they shall have them open before the Senate and the House of Representatives in joint public session," he added.

To recall, Mendoza submitted a manifestation to the High Court stating that it has no jurisdiction to prevent Congress from canvassing the votes and proclaiming the winner of the May 9 presidential election.

He argued that the duly elected president and vice president must begin their term at noon on June 30 and end their term at the same time six years later, as stated under the 1987 Constitution.

A group led by Father Christian Buenafe has asked the SC to prevent Congress from canvassing the votes cast for Marcos and proclaiming him as the next president pending the resolution of their petition seeking the cancellation of the former senator's certificate of candidacy.

Martial law survivors, religious and youth rights advocates, and the Campaign Against the Return of the Marcoses and Martial Law (Carmma) also filed a petition before the SC seeking the same.

In an interview on ANC, Mendoza mentioned that if the petitioners would still push through, they could also file a quo warranto before the SC.

"The petitioners will then have to decide whether to abide and stick by the petition as filed by the SC or whether the scenario has changed and then therefore, what they should be filing is an election protest before the Supreme Court, either a quo warranto or an ordinary election protest," he said.

According to the 2010 Rules of Presidential Election Tribunal, the quo warranto is a verified petition for quo contesting the election of the president or vice president  on  the ground of ineligibility or disloyalty to the Republic of the Philippines.

This may  be  filed  by  any registered  voter  who  has  voted  in  the  election concerned  within  ten  days after  the  proclamation  of  the  winner.

In election  protest, the  registered  candidate  for president  or  vice president of  the  Philippines  who  received  the second  or  third  highest  number of votes  may  contest  the  election  of the  president  or  vice president,  as  the case  may  be,  by  filing  a verified  election  protest  with  the  Clerk  of the Presidential Electoral Tribunal  within  30  days  after  the  proclamation  of the winner.—AOL, GMA News