Atty. Howard Calleja says at least 2 more groups set to file next week petitions vs. Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos, Jr. either to intervene in the petition to cancel his certificate of candidacy or to disqualify him. 
Calleja will serve as counsel. Says this is separate from his duties as convenor of 1Sambayan and insists this is not driven by political motivation.
One group will be composed of Martial law victims while another group will be led by Dr. Rommel Bautista.
One group will be composed of Martial law victims while another group will be led by Dr. Rommel Bautista.
Aside from the issues already raised in the first Comelec petition, one of the arguments petitioners will raise is that the CA ruling which reduced penalty for non-filing of income tax returns to mere fine is void ab initio. They will raise it before Comelec, eventually to SC.
If CA decision will be declared void ab initio, Calleja says this means the RTC ruling imposing prison sentence and fines on Marcos, Jr. will stand.
QC RTC in 1995 imposed a total of at least 9 years imprisonment on Marcos, Jr.
QC RTC in 1995 imposed a total of at least 9 years imprisonment on Marcos, Jr.
CA decision became final in 2001 when Marcos, Jr. withdrew his appeal to the Supreme Court.
Calleja points out doctrine of immutability of judgment which prevents a court from modifying a final judgment does not apply if the sentence is void ab initio.
Calleja points out doctrine of immutability of judgment which prevents a court from modifying a final judgment does not apply if the sentence is void ab initio.
One point which has been raised is Marcos, Jr. was never sentenced to a jail term. Section 12 of the Omnibus Election Code uses the term "sentenced by final judgment" and says disqualification is removed 5 yrs after serving of sentence. Calleja says "sentence" includes fines.
Ex-Justice usec and election law professor Atty. Albert Agra pointed out Wednesday night Marcos, Jr. was not "sentenced to imprisonment" because only fines were imposed. He also argued there is a Supreme Court case which declares non-filing of ITR not a crime of moral turpitude.
Agra said fraud is required to qualify a crime as one of moral turpitude.
Calleja disagrees with Agra saying the crime of moral turpitude does not require finding of fraud.
Ret SC Sr Assoc Justice Antonio Carpio said last night tax evasion is a case involving moral turpitude.
Calleja disagrees with Agra saying the crime of moral turpitude does not require finding of fraud.
Ret SC Sr Assoc Justice Antonio Carpio said last night tax evasion is a case involving moral turpitude.
Calleja stresses Marcos, Jr.'s repeated non-filing of tax returns and not clear if he has paid the fines.
He also brings up case of a politician whose COC was cancelled because he declared he was eligible to run despite libel conviction. Tax evasion, he says, is worse than libel.
He also brings up case of a politician whose COC was cancelled because he declared he was eligible to run despite libel conviction. Tax evasion, he says, is worse than libel.
Calleja adds that even assuming Marcos, Jr. can claim his is not a case involving moral turpitude, he could not get away from Tax Code which states that a public officer/employee who violates its provisions will be "perpetually disqualified from holding any public office."
Calleja distinguishes cancellation of COC from disqualification. Cancellation of COC is based on material misrepresentation in COC while qualification is being questioned in DQ case. While DQ'd candidate can be substituted, no candidate to be substituted if COC cancelled.
Meanwhile, Calleja reminds Comelec spox Dir. James Jimenez not to talk about or mention the merits of the case. He also cautions side of Marcos against quoting Jimenez. “Technically they’re just misquoting themselves at the end of the day.”
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
