Activists Seek Supreme Court Intervention to Head Off Marcos

Thursday, May 19, 2022
author picture Gerald Girard
trends
Video/image source : youtube, cdnhoteld
Original content created by news.limited staff

Activists Seek Supreme Court Intervention to Head Off Marcos' Disqualification

The legal entanglement surrounding Ferdinand Marcos' family has prompted activists to request the Supreme Court's intervention to disqualify the former president from running for president in the upcoming elections. Earlier rulings have found him ineligible for the presidency‚ but Petitioners are now asking the Court to overrule Comelec's earlier rulings. Activists want the court to determine whether Marcos is indeed unfit for the presidency‚ and what impact a disqualification would have on the upcoming election.

Activists seek Supreme Court intervention to block Ferdinand Marcos from running in the election

A petition filed by human rights activists to block Ferdinand Marcos from running for president in the upcoming elections has been denied by the Comelec Second Division. The petitioner claims that Marcos violated the Constitution by misrepresenting his tax conviction‚ a crime that carries an accessory penalty of perpetual disqualification. Earlier‚ the petitioners sought the Comelec to nullify the COC if Marcos had declared himself ineligible to run for president. They also cited Marcos's declaration that he had an intention to run for the presidency‚ a fact that was never made public. The petitioners argue that the removal of Marcos from the presidency would lead to a constitutional crisis and mass political unrest. While Marcos is a former senator‚ his candidacy was based on his rejection of the liberal elite and mainstream press. If the Supreme Court was to invalidate his candidacy‚ it would be the beginning of a political era that is rife with tensions between Marcos supporters and the ruling party. The petitioners include former political opponents‚ victims of the Marcos regime‚ and his wife‚ Louise. The petitioners also include former Marcos Jr. and his son-in-law‚ Estelito Mendoza. Mendoza‚ whose firm defended the Marcoses during the martial law era‚ claims that the ruling is a violation of the constitution. Leni Robredo‚ the vice presidential candidate‚ has positioned her campaign on fighting graft and protecting democracy. She has used the issue of human rights to garner support from small parties. Her poll numbers have climbed to 24 percent‚ but she remains behind Marcos Jr. Activists are calling for the Supreme Court to intervene in the election to prevent Marcos from running. The agrarian unrest has not abated. In fact‚ the agrarian unrest exploded in the Philippines‚ and the CPP has become the spearhead of the opposition movement. The opposition leader‚ Leni Robredo‚ has promised to take a hard line towards China and has refused to talk with Beijing on the South China Sea until a tribunal ruled in Manila's favor. Beijing is unlikely to concede if the Hague ruling‚ which ruled in favor of Manila‚ is upheld.

Petitioners want Comelec to overrule earlier rulings on Marcos' eligibility

A second petition seeking to disqualify Ferdinand Marcos Jr. from running for president has been filed with the Commission on Elections. The petitioners are leading by the Akbayan Citizens Action Party and are asking the court to nullify Marcos' bid for president based on a 1995 tax evasion conviction. That conviction makes Marcos ineligible to hold public office. Regardless of what the Comelec decides‚ the main Petition is expected to stand. The petitioners cite a 1995 conviction for failing to file income tax returns. The conviction is permanent‚ and Marcos has been disqualified from holding public office for four years. A petition led by tax professionals cited the same conviction and prayed for the revocation of Marcos' COC. The petitioners also cited a 1995 case involving a PFP official who said Marcos was ineligible to run for office. The petitioner has failed to prove that the Marcos couple had Swiss funds. The petitioner's lawyer has admitted that he cannot produce any evidence showing that the Marcos couple owned the funds during their incumbency. He also has failed to prove that the Marcos couple had other sources of legitimate income and proper earnings. This argues against a ruling that the petitioner has failed to establish the third and fourth essential elements of R.A. 1379. The Sandiganbayan Resolution of January 21‚ 2002 was a landmark enterprise. It was initiated out of considerations of simple justice and sheer necessity. The national coffers were almost empty. The court was forced to intervene on behalf of the Marcoses in the interest of the people. The petitioners believe that the Marcoses have deposited ill-gotten wealth in Swiss Banks. If that is the case‚ then the case could go to trial.

Legal issues hounding Marcos' family

The Marcos family is in the midst of a political comeback‚ but a legal battle is hounding them. After a failed presidential bid in 1986‚ the Marcos family fled to Hawaii. The late dictator died in exile three years later. The family returned to the Philippines in 1991 and became powerful politicians. Their son‚ Ferdinand Marcos Jr.‚ served as governor of his home province‚ Ilocos Norte. Marcos Jr. ran for vice president in 2016 but lost. The Marcos family is battling to regain their stolen property. Their daughter Imelda has been convicted in a graft case involving the transfer of $300 million in ill-gotten wealth to overseas bank accounts. The Marcos family is appealing the ruling that they are not the rightful owners of the artwork. She is a long-time pro-democracy activist‚ but she is wary of her son's ambition to undo his father's crimes. In 1992 and 1993‚ the Marcos family entered into two deals with the Philippine government‚ under which the Marcos family would keep 25 percent of $356 million in Swiss bank deposits. The deals were never authorized by the Philippine presidents at the time‚ and the courts declared them null and void. The Marcos family continues to claim that they earned their wealth legitimately. But there are many questions about the legitimacy of those deals and their motives. The Marcos family has not had the luck of winning the elections. It has faced numerous legal issues and is fighting for the presidency of the Philippines. Ferdinand Marcos Jr. is a leading vice presidential candidate in the May 2016 elections. With his likely victory in the elections‚ the Marcos family will regain their political influence. However‚ the comeback will not happen overnight. A legal battle over the Marcos family's legacy will continue to haunt them. After years of public relations efforts‚ Ferdinand Marcos Jr. is now presumed to be the next president of the Philippines. He has allied with the Duterte-Carpio party‚ which has also helped him achieve frontrunner status. According to the latest polling from Pulse Asia‚ the Marcos family is gaining support in big cities‚ particularly Cebu. The Marcos family's grip on power in the Philippines is particularly reprehensible since the country's Constitution prohibits political dynasty.

Impact of disqualification on election

The American system of disqualification is a sprawling‚ creaky‚ fragmented mess of costs and processes. In many ways‚ it is far too slow to confront the growing threat of anti-democratic behavior. Comparative experience‚ however‚ can highlight areas for improvement. First‚ we need to understand the impact of disqualification in our system. How can we better protect ourselves and our democracy? Here are some examples. It is important to note that disqualification in the framing of charges must apply retroactively. It is also important that disqualification be limited to offences with maximum penalties of five years. It is important to recognize that a conviction for filing a false affidavit should qualify as a corrupt practice and be treated as such. This process‚ then‚ is crucial to safeguard our democracy. But before we can consider the impact of disqualification on election‚ let us look at some common sense guidelines. First‚ there is a procedure for challenging disqualification. A candidate can go to court to challenge their disqualification‚ but it is much faster and less expensive to simply review his qualifications. If that fails‚ an elector can also go to court to challenge his or her disqualification. The MRSC‚ a nonprofit organization that serves local governments in Washington State‚ offers an Ask MRSC service. There are two types of disqualification process: a simple and fast way and a lengthy process. If a candidate is disqualified‚ what is the impact on the election? Several candidates - including the first vice-president of Rouhani's government - have vowed to boycott the election if disqualified. The disqualification of these candidates is beneficial for the reformists‚ and it helps make the political system appear more democratic. Those candidates are not the only ones who have faced disqualification.