CITY OF SAN FERNANDO – Noting that "courts are not infallible and reversal of rulings already rendered is not uncommon", Gov. Eddie Panlilio filed Friday before the Supreme Court a motion for reconsideration (MR) on the Court’s verdict allowing a recount of all gubernatorial votes cast in the 2007 polls in this province.
"This Supreme Court decision, if not set aside, will set a very bad precedent. We can expect the Commission on Elections (Comelec) to be swamped with sham protests after the 2010 elections," warned Ernesto Francisco, one of Panlilio’s volunteer lawyers.
The recount was initially ordered in July, 2007 by the second division of the Comelec in favoring the petition of Lilia Pineda who lost by 1,147 votes in the last gubernatorial race. As provided by law, Pineda "deposited" some P4.4 million with the second division for recount expenses.
Last July 17, the Supreme Court dismissed Panlilio’s petition and lifted its order against the transfer of ballot boxes from 4,836 precincts in this province to the Comelec central office for a recount.
Provincial Comelec chief Temmie Lambino said he would transfer the ballot boxes as soon as he gets the go signal from the Comelec central office. As of yesterday, however, he had not yet received any copy of the Supreme Court resolution.
In filing the MR, Francisco also warned that unless the High Court reverses its decision, "all that moneyed but losing candidates have to do is to file sham, pro forma or copied petitions asking for recount and spend money on the recount to make sure that the outcome of the election will be reversed."
Panlilio, a former parish priest, ran for governor without any political party and relied on financial support from civil society groups. On the other hand, Pineda had been mayor of Lubao and provincial board member for three successive terms. She is the wife of Rodolfo "Bong" Pineda who was once tagged in the Senate as a "big time gambling lord". In her protest, she claimed irregularities and misreading of ballots during the last elections in the province.
In its resolution last July 17, the Supreme Court said Panlilio’s petition deserved "scant consideration" and upheld the Comelec second division’s initial verdict which was signed by only Commissioner Florentino Tuason. The Court thus lifted its temporary restraining order against the transfer of ballot boxes for a recount at the Comelec central office.
Panlilio’s MR, which also indicated Romulo Macalintal and Gregorio Brillantes as legal counsels, said that in dismissing the governor’s petition, the Supreme Court "in effect sweepingly tilted the scales of justice in favor of the private interest of every losing candidate."
Panlilio argued that "proclamation of the winning candidate is imbued with the presumption of regularity" and that this should "subsist, except only when rebutted by sufficient countervailing proof."
The Court’s dismissal of his petition, he noted, "leads to a very absurd situation because rather than a recognition of the presumption of regularity, what would govern would be a presumption of irregularity."
The MR also insisted that Pineda’s electoral protest was a "sham" and had "failed to state with detailed specificity the frauds and irregularities" in the 2007 elections.
Panlilio also said that Pineda’s protest was a "fishing expedition" which "failed to state with specificity how many ballots were affected, how the alleged frauds and irregularities were committed." This, he noted, is "tantamount to an overly broad and too liberal interpretation or construction of elections laws." Panlilio’s MR also noted that Pineda’s electoral protest was an "exact replica" of a similar protest filed in Taal, Batangas on May 24, 2007 or a day before Pineda’s petition was filed.
The filing of such sham electoral protests, Panlilio said, "will only clog the dockets of the tribunals and accordingly, constitute an unwarranted imposition on their time and intelligence."
The petition also said that the Supreme Court virtually ignored the function of the Board of Election Inspectors (BEI) in favoring Pineda’s petition as it noted that Pineda never filed any protest at the BEI level.
Panlilio said this would again set another "very bad precedent as it would "render inutile the authority thus given to the BEI inspectors and would remove a very important safeguard to the institution of frivolous suits."