|
Wednesday, June 09, 2004
SC nixes suit questioning canvass rules
MANILA -- The Supreme Court rejected Tuesday an opposition suit questioning the legality of the rules adopted by Congress in the canvassing of votes cast for president and vice president last May 10.
There was no abuse of discretion on the part of Congress when it adopted the rules for canvassing, said the High Court, noting that the move was of the legislature as a whole.
The SC's 14 justices in a unanimous decision said it found no merit on the petition filed by opposition legislator Ruy Elias Lopez, who asked the court to stop the vote count claiming the rules covering the canvassing violated the Constitution.
President Arroyo's administration welcomed the SC's move, saying it would help hasten the canvassing proceedings.
Lopez's suit questioned in particular the creation of a 22-member joint congressional committee to do the tabulation of the votes as specified in the rules of canvass.
The Davao City congressman has 15 days to appeal the adverse ruling, after which it becomes final and executory.
The ruling did not come as a surprise after the SC last week rejected Lopez's appeal for a restraining order on the canvassing proceedings.
No further delay
President Arroyo hopes that the ruling will now "lead to a more expeditious canvassing process in Congress," her office said in a statement.
"Nothing can stop the counting now," House of Representatives speaker Jose de Venecia told reporters after receiving word of the court's decision.
De Venecia said Congress would allow Poe allies to "exhaust all arguments imaginable."
"But at a certain point in time, maybe tomorrow (Wednesday) or the day after tomorrow (Thursday), the ruling of both chairs will now be decisive in not permitting further delay," he said, referring to the majority leaders of the Senate and the House of Representatives who were co-chairing the tabulation.
Lopez filed a 29-page petition Wednesday last week urging the High Court to issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) to stop Congress from implementing rules of canvass that set forth the creation of a joint committee to conduct the tabulation.
Lopez was represented by former Immigration chief Rufus B. Rodriguez and opposition election lawyer Sixto F. Brillantes.
Named as nominal respondents in the suit were Senate President Franklin M. Drilon, House Speaker Jose De Venecia and the chief financial and budget officers of the two houses of congress.
Mass walkout
Opposition members on Tuesday again managed to delay the vote count by grilling a Commission on Elections official who had admitted to making an error in figures contained in one certificate of canvass.
An exasperated crowd that has been watching on from the galleries later staged a mass walkout to protest what they called were dilatory tactics by the legislators.
"We only want them to speed up the count, is that wrong?" said one woman who led the group as they shuffled into the corridor while debates were continuing in the floor.
"Stop talking, begin the counting," said another.
De Venecia said he believes the final tally would be finished in two weeks.
"The final report of the joint committee will then be presented to the plenary session of Congress and this will take another one or two days and then the new president and vice president would be proclaimed," he said.
"This would be way before the constitutional deadline of June 30."
Constitutional, legitimate
Earlier, Solicitor General Alfredo Benipayo, Drilon and de Venecia defended the rules of canvass adopted by Congress saying the rules are constitutional.
Benipayo said Congress, in adopting its rules, "may consider a number of factors such as preserving the credibility of votes and the canvassing and avoiding undue delay" in the canvassing to ensure the proclamation of the winning candidates before June 30.
Benipayo said to require the whole of Congress to canvass the certificates would unduly delay the canvassing of votes. "This delay may prove detrimental to the national interest. The national interest would be best served by deferring to this policy decision made by the Congress," he added.
De Venecia, for his part, cited in a 12-page reply to Lopez's petition a commentary by noted Constitutionalist Joaquin Bernas on the bicameral conference committees where he said that while the bicameral conference committee "has no textual foundation in the Constitution, its use has been considered legitimate for a long time on the basis of practicality and wisdom."
"A preliminary canvassing committee would serve a similar purpose and would similarly be based on practicality and wisdom. For this reason, it has been used in previous presidential elections," de Venecia in quoted Bernas as saying.
De Venecia said the issue is not one of Constitutionality but of wisdom and practicality.
Final say
Nevertheless, De Venecia said Congress as a whole has a final say on the matter since Congress as a whole "may approve, disapprove, amend or revise not only the canvassing process but also the interim and final report of the joint committee."
Drilon, meanwhile, said in a 41-page comment that a SC ruling in favor of the petitioners would result in a situation where "it (SC) may run into a collision course with a co-equal branch of government asked to canvass the votes for president and vice president and proclaim the winners."
He added that Congress does not have the power to inquire or decide questions of alleged irregularities in the conduct of the elections.
"These are matters appropriate for an election contest with the Presidential Electoral Tribunal."
Drilon added that Lopez's motive in filing the petition is illegal and improper.
Malacaņang hailed the SC's ruling upholding the authority of the 22-member canvassing committee to count the votes for president and vice president.
"We hope the resolution of this case will lead to a more expeditious canvassing process in Congress so that our people's wish for the affirmation of their choice for stable leadership in the future shall at least be fulfilled," Deputy Presidential spokesman Ricardo Saludo said. (JMR/With AFP)
(June 9, 2004 issue)
Write letter to the editor.Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board.Click here. |
|
|
|
[return to top]
[home]
|
|
