Defective CoCs may cause disqualification

I had the opportunity to examine the certificates of candidacy of the aspirants for top provincial positions in Negros Oriental.
This is courtesy of a newly-launched election website www.negor2010.com that had the initiative of publishing on pdf the certificates of candidacy of candidates vying for top positions like governor, vice governor and member of congress, in Negros Oriental.
This is good public service for the electorate.

Certificates taken seriously

I was amused examining the candidates’ certificates of candidacy, having myself prepared the certificates of candidacy of those seeking national positions.
Preparing and filing of certificates of candidacy is a very serious matter, because any haphazard, careless preparation and filing can lead to a candidate’s disqualification.
I noticed many legal defects in the certificates of candidacy of candidates for top provincial positions.
These defects created legal grounds for their disqualification.
One of the important things candidates must take note is that their certificates of candidacies must be “legally clean” and in order, so it cannot be taken advantage of by rivals.

Not duly sworn

One of the major defects I noted is that many of the certificates of candidacy were not sworn in accordance with law.
As a legal requirement, a certificate of candidacy must be sworn in accordance with the law.
Otherwise, this can be a ground for disqualification for having filed a certificate of candidacy that is not sworn in accordance with law.
I noted many certificates of candidacy were defectively sworn before notaries public because they used cedula which is not competent evidence of identity.
The Supreme Court has long ruled against the legality of using cedulas as evidence of identity.
In fact, there have been petitions dismissed by the Supreme Court outright, solely for failing to use competent evidence of identity in the verifications.
Other certificates of candidacy are worse because no competent evidence of identity was presented before the notary public.
Other certificates of candidacy I noted were false entries in the certificates themselves.
The following candidates for top positions which used (defective) community tax certificates are:
Emilio C. Macias II (for governor), Raul S. Aninon (for congress), Henry Pryde Teves (for congressman).
Those who used evidence of identity which looked ostensibly like cedulas are Agustin Ramon M. Perdices (for vice-gov), Marcelo G. Adanza (for congress), Telesforo Diao Jr. (for congress).
Those who did not present any evidence of identity before the notary public are: Samuel B. Torres (for vice gov), Mariant-Escano Villegas (for vice-gov), German P. Sarana (for vice gov).
Those who used competent evidence of identity are Petit A. Baldado (for governor) used his government I.D. card, George Arnaiz (for congress) who used his driver’s license, Jocelyn S. Limkaichong (for congress) who used her passport, Jacinto V. Paras (for congress) who used his passport, Hector C. Villanueva (for congress) who used his driver’s license.

Factually impossible entries

There are also candidates who wrote factually impossible entries in their certificates.
They can be considered false entries.
For example George P. Arnaiz candidate for congressman, listed his birthday as 2-21-1955 meaning February 21, 1955. He listed his age as 54 (at the time he filed his certificate).
For the entry requiring the “period of residence in the Philippines before May 10, 2010”, Arnaiz listed 55 years and 9 months.
This appears factually impossible since on May 9, 2010 (a day before the election) Arnaiz’ period of residence in the Philippines, and on this Earth for that matter, would yet be 55 years, 2 months and 18 days (to be exact)
The entry for period of residence placed by Arnaiz in his certificate means he was already a resident in the Philippines even before he was born.
This needs an explanation because I don’t quite get it, specially with my deficiency in mathematics.
His rival for second district congressman, Hector C. Villanueva is no better, technically speaking.
Villanueva listed his birthday as April 15, 1945.
For the entry “period of residence in the Philippines before May 10, 2010”, Villanueva listed “65 years and 1 month”.
This is also not accurate because on May 9, 2010 ( a day before the election) Villanueva would have been residing in the Philippines only for 65 years and 24 days only.
In the civil code, one month means 30 days.
Like Arnaiz, Villanueva also claims he has been a resident in the Philippines even before he was born.
The third rival, Mr. Aninon is worst.
He did not write any entry for the period of residence in the Philippines.
There is no way of knowing whether he complied with the constitutional requirement for residency, for congressional aspirants.

Other data

From the certificates of candidacy among aspirants for top provincial posts, we gather that the oldest candidate is Emilio C. Macias at 76.
Perdices is second oldest at 75 years old.
There is no age limit to be a candidate.
As long as one is still breathing, he can run for office.
We can also gather that all the candidates (for top posts) except one, are fifty years old and above.
No candidate for top provincial posts, is in his forties.
The youngest is Henry Pryde Teves who is thirty seven.
If you want to access the certificates of candidacy for Negros Oriental aspirants, go to www.negor2010.com

Brownouts: An election issue

I fear that brownouts will mar next years automated elections.
Accurate, computerized elections will depend on the stability of electricity supply.
In Negros Oriental for instance, brownouts are a regular, common, scheduled occurrence.
Elections are held on the second Monday of May.
In Negros Oriental, brownouts are scheduled usually on Sunday.
So it is not unexpected that Sunday before the elections, there will be brownouts.
I can’t imagine a scenario of brownouts during elections.
But it is a reality.
In previous elections here in Dumaguete and Negros Oriental, brownouts are a part of the elections.
I recall, in the 2007 elections, a brownout was reported in city hall.
I was in Dumaguete at that time, and there was no brownout except at city hall.
Brownouts traditionally have been old electoral fraud tactics.
Power outages are resorted to by political camps to suppress the will of the people.
When there are power failures, it will be too hot to count the ballots.
Election canvassers will have to resort to candle-light ballot counting.
This will be susceptible to error, or worse, to fraud.
When there is brownout, there is darkness.
Out votes, our ballots, and our country’s future, will be hostaged by deliberate darkness.
I have yet to hear our local officials, who have been sitting in power for many many years, explain how these power outages will be resolved.
They have been in power for so long.
But they have never solved the brownout problems.
Power supply is a very basic service.
Once in Hongkong, I asked whether there are brownouts in Hongkong.
I was laughed at.
“Mister, if Hongkong has brownouts, Hongkong will collapse,” I was told bluntly.
But in Dumaguete and Negros Oriental, brownouts is like its part of our lives.
Brownouts are experiences that we have to endure.
We just have to grin and bear it.
Local officials seemingly don’t like to have it resolved.
Brownouts benefit politicians, specially during elections.
Besides, they have their own generators.
They don’t feel the urgency of eliminating brownouts.
But to me, brownouts should be a local election issue.
The officials who again seek our votes should be made to explain how they are going to resolve the perennial power outages.
What are they going to do with Noreco, which conveniently releases prepared reasons everytime there is a brownout.
Reasons range from falling branches of trees, to “regular maintenance” procedures.
I was still in short pants, and “regular maintenance” procedures already has been the predictable reason.
There should be some variety in giving out reasons for brownouts.
When will these brownouts end?
When will we be free from the bondage of power failures?
The coming elections should be our chance.
As the electorate, we should make these brownouts an election issue.
Electricity is a very important utility, next perhaps to water supply.
If we continue to vote for these officials who have not ensured the delivery of very basic services, then we deserve the kind of officials we elect.

Edgar Teves: I feel emancipated

September 9 2009

Mr. Ely Dejaresco
Atty. Elmar Jay Dejaresco
The Negros Chronicle
Dumaguete City

Dear Ely and Jay,

I would like to convey to you my thanks for publishing last Sunday, September 6, 2009, the Supreme Court’s decision regarding my case.

It had been a burden really for the past few years as it hampered some of my ventures. I felt that your segment had in some way provided me a sense of emancipation. There is nothing next than to have cleared my name at last.
Once again, thank you.

Sincerely,

Edgar Y. Teves.

SC: Edgar Teves can run

The enduring former mayor of Valencia Edgar Teves can now wear his running shoes after he was recently permitted to re-engage in politics by no less than the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court last April 28, 2009 declared Edgar Teves can run for public office in the 2010 elections….if it happens.
Edgar was convicted of violating Section 3(h), Republic Act (R.A.) No. 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, for possessing pecuniary or financial interest in a cockpit when he was mayor of Valencia, which is prohibited under the local government code.
Edgar Teves was sentenced to pay a fine of P10,000.00.
Former Rep. Herminio G. Teves, Edgar’s uncle, but political adversary, filed a petition to disqualify Edgar Teves in the 2007 elections.
The argument was that since Edgar Teves was convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, he should be disqualified.
The Comelec disqualified Edgar Teves, and cancelled his certificate of candidacy for congressman.
Edgar appealed to the Supreme Court.
The issue raised in the Supreme Court is whether or not the conviction of Edgar Teves was of a crime involving moral turpitude.
Moral turpitude, according to the court, implies something immoral in itself, regardless as to whether or not it is punishable by law.
The act, to be one involving moral turpitude, must be immoral in itself.
The Supreme Court found that Edgar’s conviction did not involve moral turpitude.
The Supreme Court found that Edgar Teves , then Mayor of Valencia, did not use his influence, authority or power to gain such pecuniary or financial interest in the cockpit.
Neither did he intentionally hide his interest in the subject cockpit by transferring the management thereof to his wife, the court added.
The Supreme Court ruled that while possession of business and pecuniary interest in a licensed cockpit is prohibited, however, its illegality does not mean that violation thereof necessarily involves moral turpitude.
Neither does it makes such possession of interest inherently immoral, the court said.
Since the crime for which Edgar Teves was convicted did not involve any moral turpitude, the implication is that Edgar Teves is not disqualified to run for public office.
Let me simplify the rules.
If one is convicted of a crime, it does not mean automatic disqualification to run for public office.
It must first be determined whether the crime for which one was convicted, involved moral turpitude.
If not, then the convict cannot be disqualified.
If the crime involved moral torpitude, then the five year ban (to run for public office) applies.
Welcome back to politics, Edgar!

Re-election bar

The only elective official in the Philippines who is barred from seeking even a single re-election (for the same position) is the President.
The 1987 constitution states that "The President shall not be eligible for any re-election".
Those who are frightened at the prospect of an Erap-comeback will file this petition before the Supreme Court (just like what they did to Fernando Poe Jr.).
They will expectedly invoke the deliberations of the 1986 constitutional commission, that discussed this anti-Marcos paranoia of a provision.
Inherently, I don't like these and other "paranoid provisions" of the constitution because it restricts my God-given right---or gift--- of choice.
Perhaps, the members of the 1986 constitutional commission (concom) were of the thinking that in order to prevent the repeat of another overstaying President like Marcos, it should be best to put a provision barring re-election.
At first the 1986 constitutional comissioners decided a bar to "immediate" re-election.
In other words, initially they barred re-election of the President, but only in the very next presidential election immediately after his six-year term.
This meant that while the President will be barred from seeking re-election in the next Presidential election, he can still run in future Presidential elections.
But later on, this was put to an amendment by commissioner Padilla who proposed that the bar (on re-election) should be perpetual.
Then the concom placed the word "any" (before "re-election") courtesy of commssioner Davide, to emphasize that what the President is being barred is from running again for the same position.
The obvious reason for the bar, as can be seen in the concom deliberations, is that the President will only use the Presidency to somehow perpetuate himself in power.
So better to bar him from seeking re-election.
The seemingly paranoid commissioners said there should be a bar, forever.
The reasoning by commissioner Padilla (for a forever ban) is the Mexican experience.
In Mexico, he explained, the President there once belonged to a highly dominant, strong political party.
In the next Presidential election, while the Mexican President was barred from seeking "immediate" re-election, the President let his "tuta" (lapdog) run for President.
After the term of the lapdog president was over, the original President came back to power.
So, to avoid this, commissioner Padilla proposed that the ban against re-election should be lifetime.
Commissioner Rodrigo however, did not find commissioner Padilla's apprehensions tenable, arguing that the Philippine constitution, unlike Mexico, adopted a multi-party system.
This being so, the likelihood of a dominant political party having a stranglehold in presidential politics is remote.
When put to a vote, commissioner Padilla's proposal won.
But of course, when the matter of Presidential re-election ban was deliberated by the constitutional commission, they did not forsee the Erap experience.
Remember, Erap was unceremoniously removed from the Presidency only after two years in office.
So the reasoning of the constitutional commission for the lifetime re-election ban, i.e. that the President would only use his first term to prepare for the next election, or consolidate his resources, or to perpetuate himself in power, did not apply to Erap.
For how could Erap possibly prepare for the next election when he was already ousted at the early years of his Presidency, and he had no longer any control of the government resources?
As a matter of fact, he was imprisoned.
It can be argued therefore, and it is my humble submission, that the ban against Presidential re-election only applies to Presidents who were able to serve their FULL TERM of six years, or at least those who have served much of the six year term.
That is the only time that the President can adequately and influentially prepare for the next Preisdential election.
What are my bases for such proposition?
The deliberations of the concom iteself, and also an analysis of the commentaries of some authorities.
Erap can argue that in his case, the reason for the ban (on re-election) does not apply to his experience.
So, is Erap barred from taking a crack at the Presidency again?
I say not necessarily.
Don't you think so?

Erap for President (again)?

So-called presidentiables have begun surfacing this early obviously training their guns at the 2010 presidential derby.
The early birds who have waged a virtual launching of their presidential bids are Mar Roxas, who has been elected as President of one of the oldest political parties, the Liberal Party.
The other who staged a “soft launching” was Manuel Villar, Senator President and head of the Nacionalista Party.
Villar waged a media blitz by posting 30-second spots on radio, the message of which I could not even understand.

I think I heard him extolling the Nacionalista party in his radio ads.
There is a saying that the early catches the early worm.
These presidential wannabes have apparently taken this adage to heart.
However, I believe that there is a wild card in the race for the 2010 presidency
I am referring to former president Joseph Ejercito Estrada, who just might decide to make a comeback and take a crack at the presidency again.
If he does this, I believe, Erap will give both Roxas, and Villar and the rest of the ambitious politicos a run for their money.
Erap remains a credible threat to anyone aiming for the presidency.
Erap’s charisma is as strong as ever.
And Erap’s has this burning passion to prove to all and sundry that even if he was convicted by the courts, the Filipino people have absolved him.
And there is no better way to validate this than votes cast during the presidential elections.
Remember, Erap posted the highest number of votes cast ever for a presidential candidate during the 1998 elections.
And to think he was not an administration party candidate, but an opposition standard bearer, against Jose De Venecia.
For me there is no question, if Erap decides to take a crack at the presidency, he would be the man to beat.
But this is speculative at this point.
There are stumbling blocks ahead in Erap’s the quest for the presidency the second time around.
First, Erap is the beneficiary of a presidential act of grace called pardon.
This pardon can be revoked by the president.
While the president has restored Erap’s civil and political rights, the President can take this back.
Second, of course is the constitutional question as to whether or not Erap, who had been elected, and succeeded to the presidency once, and served briefly as such, is qualified for election as President in 2010.
I think there are sufficient reasons to say that constitutionally, Erap is still qualified for election as President in 2010.
This should raise a good and interesting discussion.

DILG rules ABC membership in council is elective, not appointive

The Department of Interior and Local Government has issued two opinions adverse to the charge that the ex officio membership of the president of the liga ng mga barangays in the sangguniang panlunsod (city council) is appointive in nature.
The DILG says the position is elective.
I challenged that when the Dumaguete City liga president filed his certificate of candidacy for regular membership of the sangguniang panlunsod for the May 14, 2007 elections, he was deemed ipso facto resigned by virtue of Section 66 of the omnibus election code.
Section 66 of the omnibus election code mandates that those in appointive office or position are ipso facto resigned from their positions upon the filing of their certificates of candidacies.
The objective of the law is to prevent abuse by the appointive officer of his position while he is a candidate for election.
As an example, Secretary Mike Defensor resigned from being presidential chief of staff (an appointive position) when he filed his certificate of candidacy for senator.
The DILG has ruled that the ABC ex officio membership in the city council is an elective, and not an appointive position.
Therefore, the liga ng mga barangay president Harrison Gonzales was not deemed resigned from his ex officio membership, even when he filed his certificate of candidacy for regular membership of the Dumaguete city council.
The following were the reasons advanced by the local government operations officer Leopoldo Y. Gravador for their conclusion that the ex officio membership of the liga president in the sangunian is elective in nature:
1. Section 469-490 of the local government code enumerates the appointive officials for cities. Since the ex officio memebrship of the liga president is not among those enumerated, then such office or position is not appointive and therefore elective.
2. Section 41 (b) provides along with the manner of election of the regular members of the sanggunian the ex officio memership of the liga president in the sanggunian. (The provision states: The presidents of the liga ng mga barangay elected by their respective chapters shall serve as ex officio members of the sanggunian).
Aside from this Mr. Gravador claims that the liga president continues to sit in the sanggunian until the next barangay elections on a holdover capacity pursuant to R.A. 9340 Section 5.
Meanwhile, the regional director of the Department of Interior and Local Government Pedro A. Noval Jr. explained that a punong barangay who filed his certificate of candidacy is not considered resigned.
He said that under R.A. 9006 any elective official whether national or local, running for any office shall not be considered resigned.
This was contained in a 2nd Indorsement dated May 22, 2007.
He also explained that under the constitution and by laws of the liga ng mga barangay, the term of all officers and members of the liga at all levels shall be concurrent with their term and tenure of office of the sangguniang barangay.
Conseuqently, the regional director said, a punong barangay who is at the same time an officer of the liga ng mga barangay shall continue to be an officer thereeven if he has filed a certificagte of candidacy in view of the fact that he is not considered resigned as a punong barangay.
My comments on these opinions on my next blog....

Gonzales liable for usurpation?

The president of the liga ng mga barangay in Dumaguete City can be held liable for criminal, civil and administrative charges for continuing to function as member of the city council, despite a vacancy in such office or position owing to his ipso facto resignation when he filed his certificate of candidacy.
Harrison Gonzales, punong barangay of Tinago Dumaguete City and president of the city's liga ng mga barangay became the ex officio member of the city council having been appointed as such pursuant to the local government code.
But the office or position of ex officio city councilor was vacated by Gonzales when he filed his certificate of candidacy for city councilor for the May 14, 2007 elections
Gonzales’ appointment as ex officio member of the city council being the president of the liga ng mga barangay, is pursuant to law, i.e. Section 494 of the local government code (R.A. 7160).
The local government code states that “the duly elected presidents of the liga…shall serve as ex-officio members of the sanguniang panlunsod. They shall serve as such only during their term of office as presidents of the liga chapters which in no case shall be beyond the term of office of the sanggunian concerned.”
Thus, while being punong barangay and being president of the liga is an elective position, the ex officio membership in the city council is an appointive position, Gonzales not being elected as a regular member of the city council.
According to Section 457 © of the local government code, the regular members of the city council are those who are elected by the people as such.
Gonzales was never elected as a member of the city council. His (ex officio) membership in the city council is appointive in nature, pursuant to law, Section 494 of the local government code.
Section 66 of the omnibus election code mandates that, “any person holding a public appointive office or position…shall be considered ipso facto resigned from his office upon the filing of his certificate of candidacy.
When Harrison Gonzales filed his certificate of candidacy for city councilor in March 2007, he was considered ipso facto resigned from the office as ex officio member of the city council, and the position became vacant at that time.
There is a valid, logical and laudable reason for the ipso facto resignation: to prevent such officer from taking advantage of the position to advance his political interests.
Section 45 (d) of the local government code provides that in case of vacancy in the representation of the barangay in the sanggunian, said vacancy shall be filled automatically by the official next in rank of the organization concerned.
Yet, even after having filed his certificate of candidacy, Gonzales illegally continued to hold office and function as an ex officio member of the city council, records and minutes of the council show.
Such illegal acts can constitute usurpation, a criminal offense under the revised penal code.
Article 177 of the penal code punishes any person who shall perform any act pertaining to any person in authority or public officer of the government or any agency thereof, without being lawfully entitled to do so.
If convicted, the accused can face over four years imprisonment.


Gonzales continued to function as city councilor.
What was he doing?

The Omnibus election code considers people in appointive office ipso facto resigned upon the filing of their certificates of candidacy.
The laudable objection is to prevent the abuse of the position during the campaign period.
Even after the barangay ex officio membership in the city council became vacant by the ipso facto resignation of Harrison Gonzales when he filed his certificate of candidacy, he still continued to function as city councilor.
In the April 2007 sessions of the city council, Harrison Gonzales, the candidate, wasted no time in using his illegally occupied position, by sponsoring politically charged and motivated actions in the council.
For instance, records of the city council would show that during the April 12, 2007 session of the city council Gonzales, a candidate for councilor, initiated moves for the disbursement of taxpayers’ money for all sorts of purposes and for the proliferation of gambling activities.
The following were pushed by Gonzales during the April 12, 2007 session of the city council:
Authorizing the issuance of a special permit, subject to the mayor’s approval to hold a 5-cock 3-day derby on April 19, 20, 21, 2007 at the Dumaguete cockpit. Proceeds of the activity were to be used to support the activities of the women with disabilities of Dumaguete (together with Catan). As to how disabled women can be related to cockfighting, is unknown.
Another measure pushed by Gonzales was authorizing the city treasurer to disburse P145,000 to be used for the partial expenses of the so-called Kabulakan Festival funds to be taken from the tourism council trust fund (with Kag. Catan).
Another Gonzales-pushed measure was appropriating P1,282,000 for the concreting of unamed barangay road to Bajumpandan Habitat 4, with funds to be taken from the unappropriated surplus code 501 (with Kag Esmena and Catan).
These and other disbursement of peoples’ funds were made at the height of the election campaign where Gonzales was a candidate.
The question now is how could Harrison Gonzales illegally continue to function as city councilor, pushing for disbursement of peoples’ money, while at the same time courting the constituency for their votes?
Does this not strike at the very heart of the noble objectives of Section 66 of the omnibus election code?
How could he illegally use public office as a means ostensibly to advance his political interests, considering that these authorities to disburse came during the election campaign period?

Rejected by the people

After the May 14 2007 elections, Gonzales bid for regular membership in the city council was resoundingly rejected by the people of Dumaguete.
There arises now an monumental anomaly where a directly rejected candidate, still continues to function as ex officio city councilor by virtue of his being president of the liga ng mga barangay.
After having been severely beaten in the elections (he placed 19th out of 20 candidates) , Harrison Gonzales continues to claim membership in the council, attending its session, even as his appointment as ex officio member has been terminated by his ipso facto resignation in March.
Gonzales bases his title as city council member through ex officio membership.
But the people don’t want him in the city council in the first place.
For Harrison Gonzales to continue functioning as ex officio city councilor even if he is deemed resigned from such appointment, and worse even after having been rejected by the sovereign electorate, is the height of absurdity.
This is a case of Gonzales having his cake and eating it too.

Latest first and third district poll results

Negros Oriental First District election results

As of 3 p.m. May 16 2007 Dumaguete time, the following are the partial unofficial results of the elections in the first district for the positions of first district congressman, and board members:
In the congressional race, the leading candidate is the mayor of La Libertad Joscelyn Sy Limkaichong (daughter of Julio Sy) with 17,331 votes; she is trailed by Olive Paras, wife of the incumbent and last termer Jing Paras with 7,605 votes; at third place is former congressman Jerom Paras with 5,033 votes; at fourth place is Danilo Roble with 3 votes.
For board members coming from the first district, the leading candidates are Rodolfo Martinez with 7,418 votes; second place is Lea Ga Bromo with 7,315 votes; third place is Jessica Jane Koppin with 6,696; fourth place is Napoleon Villegas Jr., with 6,461; fifth place is Jerome Jose Paras with 4,725 votes; sixth placer is Eric R. Jabel with 4,699 votes.
The first district is the northern part of Negros Oriental starting from the town of Manjuyod, Bindoy, Ayungon, Tayasan, Jimalalud, La Libertad, to Guihulngan.


Negros Oriental Third District election results

As of 3 p.m. May 16 2007 Dumaguete time, the following are the partial unofficial results of the elections in the third district for the positions of third district congressman, and board members:
In the congressional race, the leading candidate is present board member Henry Pryde Teves with 5,825 votes; second place is former vice governor Edgar G. Teves with 3,521 votes; third place is Edgar L. Jordan with 114 votes; while fourth place is Henry Cubalan with 50 votes.
For third district board members, the leading candidates are: Ernesto T. Tijing with 2,118 votes; second place is Marcelo G. Adanza with 4,940; third place is Roel R. Degamo with 3,700 votes; fourth place Teofisto F. Yap Jr with 2,118 votes.

Dumaguete unofficial election results

As of 3 p.m. May 16, 2007 Dumaguete time, the following are the partial unofficial results of the elections in Dumaguete for the positions of governor, vice governor, 2nd district congressman, mayor, vice-mayor and city councilors tabulated by the citizens quick count NAMFREL:
For governor, leading candidate is Rep. Emilio C. Macias with 31,646 votes. He is trailed by a mile by Samuel B. Torres with 1,264 votes.
For the vice governorship, the position is uncontested. The incumbent vice governor and former mayor of Manjuyod Jose Petit Baldado with 30,199 votes.
For second district congressman to be vacated by Rep. Macias, the leading candidate is the governor, George P. Arnaiz with 29,899 votes. He is followed by retired Gen. Ramon Montano with 4,014 votes. Third placer is Raul S. Aninon with 382 votes.
For Mayor, leading candidate is the incumbent mayor Agustin Perdices with 20,802 votes. He is trailed by lawyer and provincial board member Arturo Umbac with 15,992 votes. At third place is Ardelio Guarin with 343 votes.
For the vice mayor, leading is the opposition candidate Woodrow Maquiling with 18,379 votes. He is trailed by the incumbent vice mayor William Ablong with 15,696 votes. At third place is lawyer Arturo Erames with 2,554 votes.
Meanwhile in the race for city councilors, the top twelve candidates are the following:
Incumbent city councilor Chiquiting Sagarbarria with 20,949 votes; second placer is another incumbent Rotelio Lumjod 20,576 votes; third place is lawyer Rommel Erames who is making a comeback to the council with 17,492 votes; fourth place is Noel de Jesus a doctor with 16,990 votes ; in fifth is lawyer Franklin Esmena 15,777 votes; sixth is Esperidion Catan an incumbent with 16,680 votes ; seventh is new lawyer and West Point (USMA) graduate Allan Cordova 15,779 votes; eighth placer is Nilo Sayson also making a comeback to the council with 15,205 votes; ninth place is Antonio Remollo (TonyRems) with 12,739 votes; tenth place is Amy Dicen at 12,056 ; at eleventh place is Danilo Leon with 11,916 votes. At twelfth place is George Villamor with 11,716 votes.
The unofficial results are partial with 303 precincts tabulated, out of about 330 precincts for the entire Dumaguete City.
There are only ten seats up for grabs in the city council.

Tired canvassing board adjourns

I am in Dumaguete and following closely the local elections.
It is a day after the May 14 elections, and in the city level,the board of canvassers has already been convenedto canvass the votes based on the election returns from the different polling precincts.
I was surprised that at around 7p.m. the city board of canvassers went home allegedly because there were already tired.
They said the board re-convenes tomorrow morning.
This is a very irregular procedure because Section 231 of the Omnibus election code mandates that the board of canvassers must continuously count the votes from day to day.
The only time they can adjourn is when they await the arrival of the election returns from the precincts.
I have not seen any provision that allows the board to just dismiss themselves, while the certificates of canvass have not been fully counted.
As a matter of fact, the city board of canvassers are mandated to finish their counting within forty eight hours.
How can they finish it now when they went home and agreed to return after twelve hours.
Failure to comply with Section 231 of the omnibus election code constitutes an election offense.

Why the Comelec disqualified Edgar Teves

We read in the Negros Chronicle May 13, 2007 issue that the first division of the Commission on Elections rendered last May 11, 2007 a midnight resolution (SPA No. 07-242) disqualifying Edgar G.Teves as candidate of the third congressional district of Negros Oriental.
This is of course not final since Edgar G.Teves can still file an appeal with the Comelec en banc, and the case can eventually go all the way up to the Supreme Court.
So on election day, Edgar G.Teves is still a candidate for congressman agasint the grandson of Rep. Herminio G.Teves, Henry Pryde.
The reason why the Comelec first division disqualified Edgar was because of Section 12 of the Omnibus election code which disqualifies any person who has been sentenced by final judgment for a crime "involving moral torpitude."
The main issue in this Comelec resolution is the phrase "involving moral torpitude."
Let us remember and emphasize that mere conviction is not sufficient to disqualify a candidate. The conviction of the crime must involve moral torpitude.
"Moral torpitude" is defined as an act of baseness,vileness,or depravity in the private duties which a man owes hisfellowmen, or to society in general,contrary to the accepted and customery rule of right and duty between man and woman or conduct contrary to justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals.
There is no dispute that EdgarTeves was convicted and sentenced by final judgment by the Supreme Court on December 14, 2004 (G.R.158182).
This conviction stemmed from Edgar Teves' continued ownership of cockpit while being mayor of the town of Valencia, Negros Oriental.
The Supreme court found Edgar guilty of violating Section 3(h) of the anti graft law (R.A. 3019). Ownership of a cockpit by a government official is expressly prohibited by the local government code under Section 89(2).
But the issue is whether that conviction is one involving moral torpitude.
There is nothing in the Supreme Court that suggests that such conviction was one that involved moral torpitude.
As a matter of fact, the sentence of Edgar was reduced from imprisonment of up to ten years, to a mere fine of only P10,000.
If the Supreme Court reduces the penalty upon an accused (from imprisonment to a mere fine), how can the crime committed involve moral depravity, baseness,vileness, or malicious intent?
We take note of the very wordings of the Supreme Court in its decision on December 17, 2004, in applying a highly reduced sentence upon Edgar Teves:

In the imposition on petitioner Edgar Teves of the penalty provided in the LGC of 1991, we take judicial notice of the fact that under the old LGC, mere possession of pecuniary interest in a cockpit was not among the prohibitions enumerated in Section 41 thereof. Such possession became unlawful or prohibited only upon the advent of the LGC of 1991, which took effect on 1 January 1992. Petitioner Edgar Teves stands charged with an offense in connection with his prohibited interest committed on or about 4 February 1992, shortly after the maiden appearance of the prohibition. Presumably, he was not yet very much aware of the prohibition. Although ignorance thereof would not excuse him from criminal liability, such would justify the imposition of the lighter penalty of a fine of P10,000 under Section 514 of the LGC of 1991

The Supreme court here even advanced an assumption of ignorance (of the law) on the part of EdgarTeves.
Is ignorance tantamount to moral torpitude, so as to justify Edgar's disqualification?

How to verify purchased votes

During elections, candidates who engage in vote buying to buy their way into office, have to implement double-checking measures to make sure that the voters they "buy" really voted in accordance with the candidates' dictates.
In other words, if a candidate buys the votes of Juan, the candidate should make sure that Juan really voted for the candidate and his pasrtymates.
How does the candidate make this verification?
There have been many ways to do this, but there is a new tactic.
The new tactic is to use the "coding" method.
Its like the color-coding scheme of vehicles in Metro Manila.
Candidiate X will approach a family in the barrio.
Candidate X and / or his agents will bring the cash and show guns, just to intimidate.
Candidate X will tell one family in the barrio, say a family of six, to place a "code" in the ballot.
This code cannot be detected by the board of election inspectors.
And this is the ingenuity.
Candidate X will instruct the family of voters to fill the last slot for, say councilors, board members or senators with a pre-assigned code.
The code can be the name of a person like "Pedro."
So for that entire family of six, they must place the codename "Pedro" at the last slot.
So when the votes are tabulated during th canvassing, the watchers of Candidate X will identify those six ballots which have the code "Pedro"
If there are less than six who entered this code, then the family should beware for candidate x will get back at them.
Each group of voters or each family have their owned pre-assigned code to be placed in the ballot to identify their ballots.
This kind of vote-buying verification is effective and will not be detected by the election inspectors because the the codenames will just be considered invalid votes, but actually, it was the signal for the corrupt candidate that indeed, the deal was "successful."

Abalos scored for doing a Pontius Pilate

Abalos hit for washing hands on Binay suspension

Genuine Opposition senatorial candidate Koko Pimentel today criticized Commission on Elections (Comelec) Chairman Benjamin Abalos for doing a Pontius Pilate over the unjustified suspension of the Makati City Mayor Jejomar Binay, who is running for re-election.
This was the reaction of Koko Pimentel over the pronouncements of Comelec chairman Benjamin Abalos to media that the Comelec won’t intervene and is taking a hands off policy over the suspension of Binay.
Last Friday evening, the Department of Interior and Local Government attempted to serve an Ombudsman suspension order against Mayor Binay in relation to an administrative case against him.
“The Commission on Elections is constitutionally mandated to be the chief administrator of all elections laws to ensure that elections are held fair and square,” Koko Pimentel reminded the Comelec Chair.
“The constitution is very explicit when it declares in Section 10 Article IX-C that bonafide candidates for public office shall be free from any form of harassment and discrimination,” Koko Pimentel stressed.
“What is happening to Binay is unprecedented and is the mother of all political harassments where he is being suspended with barely one week before elections,” Koko Pimentel deplored.
“It is the constitutional and legal duty of the Commission on Elections to intervene since it is the constitutional body which should ensure the conduct of fair elections,” Koko Pimentel said.
There is no legal basis for the Comelec to lays its hands off the Binay suspension over the flimsy ground that it purportedly involves graft and corruption, Koko Pimentel said.
“There is nothing in the omnibus election code that prevents the Comelec from using its power and authority to fulfill the constitutional mandate that candidates for elective posts shall be protected against, and insulated from all forms of harassments,” Koko Pimentel emphasized.
“What the omnibus election code merely says is that suspensions of officials in graft related cases would not constitute in an election offense,” Koko Pimentel explained.
“But this does not mean that the Comelec should already shirk in its constitutional duty to ensure that the elections are held fairly,” Koko Pimentel added.
“At the very least, the Comelec as a constitutional body, has the authority to intervene and issue a cease and desist order to prevent the enforcement of the suspension order, since its enforcement is nothing but a form of political harassment which the constitution expressly prohibits,” Koko Pimentel said.

-30-

Double chalk

There are, of course, wholesale electoral fraud.
But let us start with the cheating in the precint level.
When we say precint it is like the police precinct---small quarters where the voters will actually go to physically cast their votes.
Precincts are usually in the public school buildings, different rooms, different precincts.
If you are a voter, you look for your name in the different precincts so you will know what precinct you will cast your vote.
Be wary of the "double chalk".
This type of cheating is simple.
Counters use chalk to list the votes in the blackboard.
One election inspector reads the ballot aloud. Another inspector correspondingly writes, or more appropriately, tallies the votes read.
But sometimes, the chalk is sliced thinly in the middle, so that unknown to the watchers, each stroke of the chalk on the blackboard will write or list down not one, but two votes at the same time.
The votes in the blackboard are group into "boxes" of five votes. In Visayan the counter shouts "kahon" (box) everytime the votes for a candidate reaches five.
At the end, the counter will just count the number of boxes multiplied by five.
It would be quick to form "boxes" of five votes by the double chalk scheme.

Ways to cheat during elections

I would say it is unfortunate that the Filipino ingenuity is displayed in the bad light during election time.
Filipinos have developed so many dirty tactics during the elections.
Much has been said about "dagdag bawas", a method of election cheating where one candidate is given additional votes at the expense of another whose votes are shaved.
This was first uncovered by Senator Nene Pimentel when he ran during the 1995 elections.
He became a victim of this dagdag bawas method of election cheating.
I will discuss the other deceitful methods which are contrived during elections.
There is a method called "First Count, Last Count"
This scheme is employed when ther are multiple positions up for election, like, senatorial positions, city council, and to a lesser extent, provincial board positions.
In the "First Count Last Count" method, the persons involved here are those election inspectors in precinct level, specifically the one who reads the ballots.
Lets take as an example the senatorial counting in the precint level.
The ballot reader will first read out loud candidate "A".
Then he or che proceeds to read the rest.
There are only twelve names to be read.
But, if the watchers are not meticulous, the ballot reader will read thirteen, instead of only twelve names.
He will say out loud again, candidate "A's" name even if it is not actually written in the ballot.
So in one ballot, the name of candidate "A" is read twice, the first count, and the last (13th) count.
This can also be applied in the list of city or municipal councilors where there are ten names to be read.
The unscrupulous reader will read a total of eleven names per ballot instead of only ten.
That is the "First Count Last Count" scheme.
To prevent this, election watchers should be vigilant and told to make sure only the correct number of names should be read out per ballot.

Political dynasty and democracy

I read in the Negros Chronicle recently that political dynasty is anathema to a democracy.
I disagree with this proposition.
One Rachel Martinez also wrote to the effect that by tolerating political dynasties, the country is slipping back the medieval period were family dynasties ruled kingdoms.
I also disagree with this position.
That relatives are running for various elective positions is not anti-democratic.
I am a person who has faith in the body politic.
I am a person who does not think that I make judgments better than the sovereign.
What is anti democratic is when a system begins to prevent citizens from participating in the electoral processes.
What is anti-democratic is when the electorate is deprived the broadest freedom to choose who they feel should occupy positions in government.
Free choice is the essence of a democratic environment.
By having close relatives running for various elective positions, this shouldn't be equated with the dynasties of the past.
The distinction is that in today's set-up, the citizenry, the people themselves have the last say on whether to allow a relative of an incumbent to occupy public positions.
The dynasties of the past did not allow electoral invetervention.
Just look at the United States, with its over two hundred years of democratic exprerience, relatives ran and occupied various public positions.
John Adams was the 2nd President of the U.S. His son, John Quincy Adams later also became the sixth President.
Jack Kennedy became President, while brother Ted Kennedy became senator. Later Bobby joined brother Ted in the U.S. Senate.
Todays younger Kennedy's occupy other elective posts in the U.S., the most prominent of whom is a Kennedy by affinity, Arnold Scwharzenegger (spelling correct?) who is governor of California. Arnold is husband of Maria Kennedy Schriver (spelling correct?).
In the present, George W. is President while brother Jeb is Governor of Florida.
Father George Herbert Walker is ex-President.
Looking into the future, there might just be the first ever conjugal dynasty if Hillary Clinton makes it to the White House.
Her husband Bill was President of the U.S.
In all these political scenarios, was there ever a single issue raised on political dynasty in the U.S.?
None?
Do you know why?
Because Americans put greater faith in the wisdom of the their electorate that they would choose properly the right people to lead them.
Americans don't give a damn if relatives run for public office, as long as the people retain their supreme sovereign authority to approve or reject these relatives running for public office.
That is the true essence of democracy.

Bribing media during elections

Here in the Philippines, it is election season.
This is a financially promising time for some (or many?) journalists.
This is the sad reality of life.
As I pondered upon this election season, I recall a few years back when I was very active as a journalist back home.
It was election time also and as a news reporter, I covered a political gathering of local candidates.
After a while I was about to leave the affair, the top local candidate (I won't even mention what local elective position he was running for) went to me and handed to me a cheap, lousy, political T-shirt and something else ---yes, cash, of course (to add to the T-shirt).
Those shirts are good for one or two wears, after which the paint gradually rips itself off.
It wasn't really a tough situation for me because I was not acceding to the offer.
But what made the situation tough was on HOW to reject the offer.
You see, it also requires tact to reject a bribe.
You do not appear popish, visibly self-righteous, and embarass the "honorable" briber in front of other people.
The better way I think is to discreetly, but decently reject a discreetly indecent proposal.
By the way, I noticed that the other candidates were secretly keeping an eye on me, and trying to see whether I was a bribe receiver. (If they saw me receiving bribe, I think the other candidates would have folowed suit and bribed me also).
The candidate tried to insist the cash to my hand, to no avail.
In the end I was able to successfully ward off the cash, but I 'appeased' him by just getting the T-shirt.
The obvious reason why candidates, during election time, bribe media people is because they want favorable coverage in news reports.
That is bad on media's part because a bribed reporter will not be able to report the news objectively and dispassionately.
Later, let me blog about how media management deals with this bribery affair with their reporters.

Repblicanism and political dynasty: Balance of interests

The Will of the Sovereign

Republicanism, democracy
and political dynasties:
Balancing the interests

In our democracy, the sovereign decide and define what a political dynasty is.
Much has been said about the constitutional provision that seeks to prohibit political dynasties, “as may be defined by law.”
It is found in the Section 26, Article II, the declaration of principles.
“The state shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service, and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.”
While the sovereign has adopted the principle to prohibit political dynasties. It is the same sovereign who have decided, and will continue to decide what should be, and should not be deemed political dynasties.
The constitutional principle which seeks to prohibit political dynasties is not the only interest that must be protected. While constitution adopts a policy that would prohibit political dynasties in order to guarantee equal opportunities for public service, there are paramount interests that must never curtailed in pursuit of these interests.
The other compelling interest: Republicanism and democracy
There is a paramount principle that Filipinos have adopted in the 1987 constitution. This is our adoption of the principle of republicanism. Section 1, Article II of the constitution, the same article where the prohibition against political dynasties, provides:

"The Philippines is a republican a democratic state. Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them."

The Philippines as a republican state, is anchored on the principle that supreme power rests in the body of the people. Republicanism more simply means a state that establishes a government of the people, by the people and for the people.
The constitution likewise characterizes our country not only as a republican state, but also a democratic state.
Many believe there is not much difference. If there is, the difference lies in emphasis. This was what the 1986 constitutional commission highlighted during its deliberations on this important principle. In inserting the word “democratic” apart from the word “republican”, commissioner Nollledo came up with a description of the insertion as a “pardonable redundancy”
But Commissioner Adolf Azcuna (now justice of the Supreme Court) hit the nail on the head by stressing that the word “democratic” is significant because it emphasizes that our country is one that is participatory in nature. We do not only elect representatives upon whom sovereign power is delegated. The people themselves reserve their right to directly participate in the affairs of state and governance such as voting in elections, plebiscite, initiative, referendum, setting up people organizations. All these have been enshrined in our constitution. The word “democratic” in our constitution is to institutionalize and to capture the spirit of “people power.”

Elections and Direct Democratic participation

Chief Justice Renato Puno said in his dissent in Arturo M Tolentino versus Comelec (January 21, 2004):
“An outstanding feature of the 1987 Constitution is the expansion of the democratic space giving the people greater power to exercise their sovereignty.
“Thus, under the 1987 Constitution, the people can directly exercise their sovereign authority through the following modes, namely: (1) elections; (2) plebiscite; (3) initiative; (4) recall; and (5) referendum. Through elections, the people choose the representatives to whom they will entrust the exercise of powers of government.
“The electoral process is one of the linchpins of a democratic and republican framework because it is through the act of voting that government by consent is secured. Through the ballot, people express their will on the defining issues of the day and they are able to choose their leaders in accordance with the fundamental principle of representative democracy that the people should elect whom they please to govern them.
“Voting has an important instrumental value in preserving the viability of constitutional democracy. It has traditionally been taken as a prime indicator of democratic participation.
“The existence of the right of suffrage is a threshold for the preservation and enjoyment of all other rights that it ought to be considered as one of the most sacred parts of the constitution.
In Geronimo v. Ramos, et al., we held that the right is among the most important and sacred of the freedoms inherent in a democratic society and one which must be most vigilantly guarded if a people desires to maintain through self-government for themselves and their posterity a genuinely functioning democracy in which the individual may, in accordance with law, have a voice in the form of his government and in the choice of the people who will run that government for him

Republican, representative

Our republican state is representative in nature. The people elect their representatives in government who exercise delegated power.
We may define a republic to be a government which derives all its power directly or indirectly from the great body of the people; and is administered by persons holding offices during pleasure, for a limited period, or during good behavior.
That is why the power to make laws, or to legislate, originally is a power vested in the people themselves. Yet under our constitution these powers are delegated and granted to representatives in the House and in the Senate.
Senators, congressmen, therefore as lawmakers, exercise derivative legislative powers. As representatives of the sovereign---the Filipino people---they cannot legislate against what the sovereign themselves have adopted as a policy.

Political dynasties: A policy in the constitution

When the Filipino people ratified the constitution in 1987, they adopted a principle to prohibit political dynasties.
But at the same time, the Filipino people themselves, in the exercise of their sovereign capacities, and as part of the democratic scheme, through the exercise of their right of suffrage, have decided what should be, and what should not be a political dynasty.
No agent, or delegate, should have the unwarranted arrogance to pronounce a dynasty when the sovereign has declared otherwise. To borrow a basic principal in law, the spring cannot rise above its source. If it does, it is the height of misplaced arrogance, the arrogance of claiming that he or she has better judgment than the rest of the Filipino people.

Filipinos' definition: political dynasty

Let us now re-visit how the Filipino people have defined what should be or should not be a political dynasty, through their exercise of the right of suffrage, which is a component of direct participatory democracy, a principle adopted in Section 1 Article II of the Constitution.
As far as the senate is concerned, the sovereign Filipino people have elected the following, aware of, and in the midst of the principle seeking to prohibit political dynasties:

A. Mother and son, as both incumbents: Senator Loi Estrada and Jinggoy Estrada
B. Father-in-law and son-in-law as incumbents: Senators Ramon Revilla and Sonny Jaworski
C. First cousins as incumbents: Senators John Osmena and Sergio Osmena
D. Father and son, successively: Senator Ramon Revilla and Bong Revilla
E. Father and daughter successively: Senator Renato Cayetano and Pia Cayetano

Amidst, or inspite of the principle seeking to prohibit political dynasties, the Filipino people, the ultimate repository of sovereign power in a republican and democratic state, , have decided on who or what should not be deemed a political dynasty.
We are talking only of the Senate. There is a need to further look into how the sovereign have decided on what should not be a political dynasties in other elective public offices like the House of Representatives and local elective positions.
Thus, for those well-meaning intellects who intend to file bills giving flesh to the constitutional provision seeking to prohibit political dynasties, they must be guided fully and at all times on the parameters that have been laid down by the sovereign, through their exercise of direct participatory democracy.
No individual mortal must define, for his or her own preference or convenience, what a political dynasty is. He is merely particle of the democratic space who must respect the voice of the sovereign. No one can go against the will and mandate of the sovereign.
Everyone must all work hand in hand to create a law prohibiting political dynasties, based on the policies laid down by the people themselves in the past elections.

In the case of Koko Pimentel, his participation in the Senatorial race does not contravene the constitutional principle against political dynasty.
The sovereign people have already decided that for a parent and child to be both incumbents in the Senate, does not constitute a political dynasty. Experience tells it. History validates it.
When the people elected Senator Loi Estrada and Jinggoy Estrada, it was the people themselves who declared this is allowed, and this does not constitute a political dynasty.
There is no substantial difference between the Loi-Jinggoy experience and the Nene-Koko experiment. To say that there is, will create an invalid classification, which violates of the equal protection clause.
No one should say it is immoral. The sovereign Filipino people don’t consider it immoral.
They declared it when they exercised their power of direct participatory democracy---in the elections--- in pursuit of Section 1, Article II of the constitution which states that “the Philippines is republican and democratic state. Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them.


“A little more faith [in the people]”

Commissioner Christian Monsod, also former Comelec Commissioner put it correctly during the deliberations of the constitutional commission:

“Mr. Presiding Officer, as we said before, the assumption here seems to be that we are underestimating our people in their right to choose; we are trying to put a prescreening mechanism so that public office is not after all accessible to all because we are going to prohibit or exclude certain people from running for public office. And my point is, we should have a little more faith. Now that we have a new COMELEC, the process will be cleaned up, but we should give our people full choice. Let them run and let the people decide. That is the essence of suffrage.”
“...I do no think we should curtail the right of the people to a free choice on who their political leader should be.”

Adding disqualification is unconstitutional, illegal

Commissioner Monsod, who vigorously fought against this provision on political dynasties, and battled hard to delete it, further argued that to prevent people from running will add to the list of disqualifications which would be contrary to the constitution:
“We have in this constitution qualifications of those who seek elective office. We are adding in this section (meaning political dynasty section) a disqualification to those who may aspire after public office, in effect amending various provisions of the constitution which enumerate the qualifications and disqualifications of the law.”

Do we have the right to curtail?

The late Senator Blas Ople, also commissioner of the constitutional commission, said:
“What I feel is an inner demand for logic and rationality so that this provision can be actually attached to some principles of equity without doing violence to the freedom of choice of the voters because they are entitled to as broad a freedom of choice as the environment can provide and if they want somebody to run for office even if he closely related to someone in office, do we have the right to curtail the freedom of the voters?”
Commissioner Abubakar made his view more pointed:
“This Constitutional Commission, composed of intelligent people, people who believe in the dictum that the voice of the people is the voice of God, is very religious. How can we, on the assumption that we are only appointed, or even if we were elected, suppress the voice of the people if they want an elected representative to continue with one, two, three terms? So be it. We are not here to suppress that voice. We are here to give reality and to give substance to what the people want; not to suppress their desire to elect their own representatives for the terms they wanted them to have. So I would presume that this Commission will be able to come up with a constitution that the people can embrace, approve and conceive as a document that looks after their interest, first and foremost. We should not contradict this voice. If a dynasty or a family is wanted by the people to represent them for two terms and another would succeed, who are we to question their choice or their voice? We are here on a constitutional mandate, and let not our power be abused at the expense of the right of the people for I believe in the dictum that the ultimate power lies in the people and the voice of the people is the voice of God.”

Nolledo: limited anti-political dynasty
Tolentino: sparingly

Commissioner Nolledo, self-proclaimed author of the provision seeking to prohibit political dynasties in the constitution, categorcially stated: “I am limiting it only to a situation where the rule against further re-election might be circumvented. That is my suggestions to Congress although the Congress can also widen the meaning of political dynasty.”
It is instructive therefore to heed the call of the revered constitutionalist Senator Arturo Tolentino who wrote in the explanatory note of his bill enacting a law prohibiting political dynasty (S.B. 1919 October 1994). It is a reflection of the intent of the framers of the constitution that pushed for the provision against political dynasty. Tolentino explained:
“Since the idea of excluding political dynasties may be contrary to the democratic principle that the people should be free to select their officials, it should be limited and sparingly applied. Ultimately, the people themselves may break up the dynasties.”
Tolentino went on the correct track to begin this prohibition against presidential relatives. He is all too familiar with this scenario, having had political attachments to the former dictator, and once having been a vice-presidential candidate (vice Imelda?). Tolentino further said:
“A good beginning for the prohibition of political dynasty is in the area of presidential relatives. Unquestionably, the President is the most powerful official of the land and can use vast powers to help in the election of a relative. This, after all, is the basic reason for prohibiting political dynasties.”

Other Senate Bills
There are at least two other Senator bills that have been reflective and responsive of the intention of the framers of the constitution. That is to prohibit the political dynasties among the local elective positions.
We refer to the bills of Senators Miriam Defensor Santiago and Alfredo Lim. Both bills focus on suppressing the perpetual fiefdoms of mini executive officers in the local governments. This was the thrust of the author of the provision against political dynasty, commissioner Nolledo.
The people, the sovereign, decide on what constitutes a political dynasty. Lawmakers, as agents of the sovereign, must enact a law prohibiting political dynasties that is in consistent with, and within the parameters that have been laid down by the sovereign in their exercise of direct democracy..

Congressman Manny Pacquiao?

The biggest story in this mid-term Philippine elections could perhaps be the sudden entry of Manny Pacquiao, the world's most exciting boxer, into the political ring.
Manny Pacquiao has announced he will run for a seat in congress in the first district of South Cotabato.
He will run against the petite re-electionist Darlene Custodio, a staunch opposition figure in the House of Representatives.
Not a few are dismayed over the decision of Manny Pacquiao to prematurely enter politics.
And rightly so.
These disappointed Filipinos, are the same Filipinos who have backed, cheered, routed for Pacquiao in all his most difficult boxing bouts abroad, specially against the legendary Mexican puglists.
These Filipinos mean well for Manny.
In their opposition to Manny's decision to join politics, they do not intend to belittle his capabilities, although there is suffiicent reason to do so considering his educational background and lack of preparation to be a maker of laws.
On the other hand, Manny means well, too.
I myself can see genuiness in his desire to help his people who, like him not long ago, are wallowing in poverty.
There are those who prophesy that Manny's entry into Philippine politics will spell his doom in boxing.
But Manny is unfazed over this.
He has indicated that he is willing to hang his gloves in the name of public service to his poor countrymen.
I can understand why Manny wants to shift careers.
Boxing is a brutally dangerous and deadly profession.
Try to imagine yourself having your face exposed to the killer punches of the likes of Erik Morales.
Who can endure having a risky career which requires facing physicial pain and destruction, even death?
Manny feels he has earned enough.
I don't see greed in him, even as he is aware he is still in his prime as a boxer which could enable him to even double his present financial worth.
At the end of the day, Manny is a Filipino who has every right to be given that opportunity to enter politics.
My one and only problem with Manny, is timing.
If I have a message for our hero, it is this: There is a time for everything.
If I were to give him an unsolicited advice, I will tell him that he has every right to run for public office. But it should be at the right time.
Now, he is still at the prime of his boxing career.
There are still many battles to be won in the ring.
It is better that he seize these golden, yet fleeting opportunities.
For these opportunities will never pass his way again.
It is true that he can use his boxing achievements as his springboard for political prominence.
Many have done this.
BIll Bradley a former New York Knicks superstar in the 1970's became a U.S. Senator.
Even our own basketball "living legend" Sonny Jaworski also became a Philippine senator.
But there is a proper time for everything.
For Manny, I believe strongly that this is the time for him to continue his reign as the world's most exciting boxer.
This is his contribution not only to this country, but to the entire boxing world.
Then, when the dusk sets in, and his body tires, as every body does, Manny can move on to other things like running for public office.
I hope that before the day of the elections, he will come to his senses and realize that politics can wait.