From 15 to 12: Ex-CJ Panganiban says Carpio, Brion, De Castro should inhibit from SC voting on Grace Poe case
A VPN is an essential component of IT security, whether you’re just starting a business or are already up and running. Most business interactions and transactions happen online and VPN

From 15 to 12: Ex-CJ Panganiban says Carpio, Brion, De Castro should inhibit from SC voting on Grace Poe case

Share on facebook
Share on google
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin

Former Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban said that the magistrates who voted to disqualify Senator Grace Poe in the Senate Electoral Tribunal should not join their High Court peers when they decide on the same case.

“Having judged below, they can no longer judge above,” said former Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban in his Inquirer column. This means that only 12 of the 15 magistrates would decide on the fate of Poe, not counting the members who might volunteer to abstain from the vote.

Associate Justices Antonio Carpio, Arturo Brion, and Teresita Leonardo-De Castro along with Senator Nancy Binay voted to uphold the petition of Rizalito David to disqualify Poe as senator for failing to meet the citizenship and residency requirements when she ran for senator in 2013. They were voted, however, by five senators – Tito Sotto, Loren Legarda, Bam Aquino, Cynthia Villar, and Pia Cayetano.

Panganiban said that this case and the four other disqualification cases filed against Poe at the Commission on Elections would be be elevated to the high court for a final consolidated decision.

Panganiban said there was no reason Poe’s name should be excised from the ballot “as was done in Joseph Estrada’s case in the 2010 presidential election.” The SC didn’t act on petition to disqualify Estrada for running a second time as president after wining in 1998 (and forcibly booted out of office midway into his term).

For Panganiban, Poe’s case was how the magistrates would chose to interpret the law on Poe: literal or liberal, letter or the spirit, the naked provision or the ultimate purpose, legal syllogism or substantial justice, in isolation of or in the context of social conditions, harshly against or gently in favor of the voters’ choice.

Panganiban opined that these issues were better left to the people to decide on the ballot rather than a few men and women in robes.

For example, Panganiban cited Poe’s decision to migrate to the United States and swear allegiance to the stars and stripes was a political and not a legal question.

” Not every question can and should be decided by our tribunals. Let Poe explain to our people, and if the majority accepts her explanation and votes her to office, so be it. This is the essence of democracy. As the axiom goes, Vox populi voxDei,” Panganiban said.

Leave a Comment


Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on reddit
Share on whatsapp
Share on email

POLITIKO / Across the Nation

POLITIKO / Latest News

Trending News


    Weekly Sports News

      Sign up for our Newsletter

      We are a social news blog where politikos, their kin, friends and allies are the center of the universe. We write about their words and deeds, likes and dislikes, dreams and fears. We are here to entertain, provoke and hopefully inform you along the way.