Commission on Elections (COMELEC) commissioner Rowena Guanzon should have know better. Leaking her decision on the disqualification petition against administration candidate Bongbong Marcos to the media was wrong because it violates the “sub judice” rule for cases that are still in review. No less than COMELEC spokesperson James Jimenez himself explained in his piece “Sub judice” published in the Business Mirror on April 2018 this rule that Guanzon now violates with impunity…
It is a rule that, in essence, restricts comments and disclosures pertaining to pending judicial proceedings, as a well settled limitation on the freedom of speech. It encompasses not only the participants in the pending case, including the members of the bar and bench, the litigants and witnesses, but also to the public in general—necessarily covering statements made by public officials.
Jimenez goes on to write about what he thinks motivates people to break this rule and why he disagrees with their reasons for doing so…
I understand why people choose to ignore the rule, and why some quarters would rather hear—or read about— battling soundbites. It’s certainly more exciting that way and, on a more practical note, probably provides a comforting buffer against an uncertain (or predictable, depending on how you look at things) outcome. I understand, sure, but I disagree. Despite the adrenalin rush of being in a wild-wild-west environment created by ignoring the sub judice rule, the fact remains that it ultimately does not advance the cause of determining the truth about the issues at hand. Quite the opposite.
Even more interesting is that Guanzon herself is a stickler for this rule and seems to apply it selectively on parties that are, shall we say, associated with political camps that are opposed to those she is evidently loyal to. In 2019, Guanzon invoked the sub judice rule while overseeing the review of petitions filed against former National Youth Commission (NYC) chairman Ronald Cardema whose application for substitution as the first nominee of the Duterte Youth party-list was being protested at the time by the College Editors’ Guild of the Philippines, the National Union of Students of the Philippines, and Youth Act Against Tyranny. Guanzon reportedly warned participants in the review…
| SUPPORT INDEPENDENT SOCIAL COMMENTARY! Subscribe to our Substack community GRP Insider to receive by email our in-depth free weekly newsletter. Opt into a paid subscription and you'll get premium insider briefs and insights from us. Subscribe to our Substack newsletter, GRP Insider! Learn more |
“Refrain from giving interviews since he [Cardema] is already sub judice,” Comelec Commissioner Rowena Guanzon said during the first hearing of the case.
The same Inquirer report notes; “A violation of this rule is punishable under Rule 71 of the Rules of Court”, suggesting that Guanzon could be in contempt as it applies to quasi-judicial bodies such as the COMELEC. Nonetheless media organisations allied with the Opposition are only too happy to indulge Guanzon’s impunity with Rapplerette Paterno Esmaquel II getting up close and personal with the “embattled” COMELEC commisioner.
NOW: Rappler’s news editor @paterno_II sits down with feisty Commissioner @rowena_guanzon to dig deeper into the infighting among Comelec officials and what led her to cast a vote against the candidacy of the ousted dictator’s son.#RapplerTalk: https://t.co/Pib497VMqf
— Rappler (@rapplerdotcom) January 28, 2022
It is clear that rules, as far as Yellowtards see them, magically turn into mere recommendations whenever it suits their dishonest agendas. In this particular case, it is quite evident that Guanzon is acting in desperation — desperation to fulfill her role as the Yellowtard COMELEC commissioner the Opposition are counting on to commandeer her office to the noble mission of preventing another Marcos presidency. And these crooks wonder why Filipinos are so on to them and their dishonest campaign.
benign0 is the Webmaster of GetRealPhilippines.com.
Yep..these extremists shouldn’t be in Comelec but here we are..
And funny thing, Guanzon-led COMELEC is now coordinating with the U.S. Embassy for foreign-observers to ensure legitimate voting in the PHL.
https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/topstories/nation/819793/us-embassy-coordinating-with-comelec-on-sending-of-poll-observers/story/
… AFTER funding anti-government organizations (Rappler, VERA Files, etc.) with $4.6MIL for years via National Endowment for Democracy (N.E.D.),
https://www.ned.org/region/asia/philippines-2020/
https://www.ned.org/wp-content/themes/ned/search/grant-search.php?organizationName=rappler®ion=&projectCountry=&amount=&fromDate=&toDate=&projectFocus%5B%5D=&search=&maxCount=25&orderBy=Year&start=1&sbmt=1
… a creation of U.S. Congress
https://www.congress.gov/bill/98th-congress/house-bill/2915
… and their tax-dollar recipient!
https://www.ned.org/about/faqs/
A trick to make sure we Filipinos choose the “right” answer? While I can’t not pay taxes here in the States to fund these, I’ve written to officials in Manila to hopefully counter this. May the observers either leave or observe together with fellow-observers from other, more trust-worthy democracies as well.
The funny thing is that U.S. democracy is a mess right now, and Washington still wants to pretend it’s the sole authority on it‽ The 2016 Presidential Election of Republican Pres. Trump was mired by the now-ruling Democratic Party’s accusations of foreign interference (specifically. Russian), and the complaint continued into the Trump-administered 2018 Mid-Term Election. Suddenly, Democratic Pres. Biden won in 2020 and it’s fine & legitimate (with any doubts being squarely due to idiocy, ignorance, hyper-partisanship, and paranoia), but now Pres. Biden is warning that the 2022 Mid-Term (where the Republicans are expected to win overwhelmingly) is potentially-illegitimate.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60063594
THIS is the standard for democracy around the world‽ THIS democracy wants to judge PH democracy‽ I wish I could be proud of both my citizenships at the same time, but it’s clear where 1 of my nations is has been going as of late.
Watching the video, based on what Comm. Guanzon is saying and explaining about her legal opinion, I think Marcos Jr. is in very precarious situation.
I don’t know about her legal opinion, but why it’s always BBM? It’s seems too suspicious. It’s like everytime he breathes, these people will try to slap him like there’s no tomorrow. What about the other candidates? Is it because their surname isn’t Marcos? I don’t know anymore.
Guanzon is laughable.
That is a straight up donkey face right there.
Guanzon is a hippo and will cry soon
Guazon is crying now.
In two days, the power and perks that come with being a high ranking government official, will be gone.
Its over, for this ugly ass donkey bitch..talking fake tough about gunfights and knife fights.this ugly loser never been in a real fight all her life.
Guazon the fascist pig now dictating on her fellow commissioners.
Oust this dictator.
I don’t think there’s hypocrisy in the decision by Comelec Comm. Guanzon to leak her decision on BBM’s disqualification. If ever, it is one of the real and sincere act I’ve seen in recent years. For me, legal or not, right or wrong, I see it as a final decision on her part to take sides in the coming elections.
That’s her way of saying, I’m against BBM. People should not vote for him.
Now, my question is, what will the BBM diehards say about that?
No name calling please. Just cite the facts or the law or logic why she was wrong in what she did. : )
“Just cite the facts or the law or logic why she was wrong in what she did.”
Well, perhaps ANC’s Karen Davila can be of help to put some sense in Juan Luna’s “see no evil, hear no evil” regard over Commissioner Guanzon’s hypocrisy with her reading of former Justice Diosdado Peralta’s 2009 decision concerning moral turpitude.
Here’s a brief exchange between Karen and Chiz wherein the Host answers own question:
Karen: I wanna ask you (Chiz Escudero) because this is discussed now… Would you consider failure to file an ITR for a public official a crime that actually is covered by moral turpitude?
Chiz: I’m not aware of any Supreme Court decision Karen that actually includes failure to file income tax return as moral turpitude.
Karen: Although there was… there was, Governor… (In) 2009 actually penned by then Justice Diosdado Peralta declared that failure to file an Income Taaxxx Reeturrnnn… ahh, Oh yeah iss nnot a crime, is not a crime for moral turpitude.
Karen asks a question… Karen answers the question… Boom!
“Well, perhaps ANC’s Karen Davila can be of help to put some sense in Juan Luna’s “see no evil, hear no evil”…
——–
Wait, I don’t remember Karen Davila’s opinion being the barometer of the legality of issues in question. All along I thought it’s the Comelec or the Supreme Court that settles legal issues.
If Guanzon, a Comelec commissioner, states that “Committing a crime of moral turpitude is a ground for disqualification under the Omnibus Election Code”, while it may not be an outright decision with finality, at least it has a semblance of legality because it came from the Commission in charge of the case.
The defense now has to show that such finding is incorrect according to legal sources and other precedents bearing on the law and facts at hand.
For sure, none of it will originate from Ms. Davila’s opinion.
“All along I thought it’s the Comelec or the Supreme Court that settles legal issues.”
Hmmm… I’m suddenly blinded, I thought I read it somewhere in the above post, will some kind soul please help me out.
Yes, for being blinded, you read a different post. Next time you get it right try to share your thinking on the subject matter and join the discussion.
@Juan Luna: “The defense now has to show that such finding is incorrect according to legal sources and other precedents bearing on the law and facts at hand.”
What is the difference with BBM’s 2022 DQ case vis-a-vis Leni Robredo’s 2013 DQ case?
Leni Robredo’s has a DQ case in the Comelec filed by a defeated congressional candidate Nelly Villafuerte in the third district of Camarines Sur in May 23, 2013 over a violation of the Omnibus Election Code’s prohibition on receiving campaign donations from foreign sources.
Commissioner Rowena Guanzon twitted in 2021 that “Foreigners cannot contribute to any candidate.”
·
So what is so special about Robredo’s DQ case that after nearly nine years the Comelec still has yet to come out with a decision.
“What is the difference with BBM’s 2022 DQ case vis-a-vis Leni Robredo’s 2013 DQ case?” – Sidney
——–
Good question. While the issue here is Guanzon over the disqualification of BBM, allow me to respond to that by quoting you.
BBM’s case was about his failure to file income tax return, and Robredo was about, what you said in your third paragraph, campaign donations. There’s no connection between the two, neither an issue was raised about them, legally or factually.
If you are insinuating that Guanzon was taking sides because of his inconsistency in judgment between the two cases, I suggest you go back to my first post where I opined the same conclusion.
No Marcos loyalist will ever see Guanzon’s decision against BBM as just and fair, and I get that. It was a good topic for discussion because the pros and cons side will be challenge to express their opinion and idea about it.
“Guanzon is laughable. That is a straight up donkey face…” – Megget
“Guanzon is a hippo…” – Megget
“Its over, for this ugly ass donkey bitch…” – Megget
“Guazon the fascist pig…” – Megget
“Guazon, who is ugly,…And she is ugly as a donkey.” – Megget
“This legal donkey guazon…” – Megget
———-
That’s not what I meant when I said opinions and ideas. ?
Mr. Lunat, I have no problem with your personal opinion of Ms. Hypocrite Guanzon’s decision as being “one of the real and sincere act I’ve seen in recent years.”
But, just think about it… there’re two disqualification cases: a nine year old disqualification cases involving a ‘kakampink’ and a weeks old disqualification case involving a Marcos, the kakampink’s perceived ‘bad guy’. Then, there’s the Comelec’s Omnibus Election Code that “prohibits receiving campaign donations from foreign sources” and there’s an existing 2009 Supreme Court ruling that says “failure to file an ITR is not a crime for moral turpitude.”
So make up your mind. Should a presiding judge to rule over a case be based on one’s personal opinion or should it ought to be based on merits of the case and the law?
Would you rather go blind or stick to your gun?
“All along I thought it’s the Comelec or the Supreme Court that settles legal issues.”
Sidney,
Hypocrisy or hypocrite is a state that involves fakery or a person pretending to be good or moral when in fact he/she is not. Nowhere in the issue involving Comm. Rowena Guanzon we can apply such state because nothing in what she did was fake or she’s just pretending. Her decision to disqualify BBM is real and sincere based on legal ground.
Do I agree with the decision, I don’t know. It’s more a topic for discussion to me than an issue worth fighting for. Also, contrary to your claim, there is only one disqualification case, the BBM case. The Robredo case in irrelevant to the case that even the BBM camp never raised it as part of their defense. It’s just a smokescreen that tends to confuse than clarify.
The case is simple, he did not file his tax return for a couple of years, it was clear he’s in violation. Other people who commit lesser crime were punished, so why exempt him? Does it warrant disqualification? Guanzon said yes and claimed it was a crime involving moral turpitude, one that gravely violates the sentiment or accepted standard of the community. She’s a legal luminary, hence, the presumption is, her findings makes sense, it’s the right decision. However, hers is only one vote out of three. And that means anything can happen when the decision finally comes out.
Like I said, if you are a Marcos loyalist the Guanzon decision is poison to you. Now that Guanzon is already retired a lot of BBM are hopeful that the case will die down and The obstacle to BBM presidency finally removed.
Unless there will be a surprise, I think BBM will not be disqualified.
Guazon, who is ugly, has single handedly put the comelec in a bad light.
Comelec commissioners have to be impartial, or at least put on the front of impartiality.
But she has declared her bias with that meltdown and hence her vote is tainted and should no longer be counted, whether she is retiring or not.
And she is ugly as a donkey.
This legal donkey guazon has done this before to grace poe.
Same playbook, over and over again.
Same losing results.