The Supreme Court (SC), sitting as Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET), has junked the petition of former Senator Ferdinand “Bonbong” Marcos Jr. to investigate the outing issue which took place at a Pansol resort in Calamba, Laguna.
In a notice, PET Clerk of Court Edgar Aricheta announced that the Tribunal has decided to “deny the motion to investigate as the Tribunal has already commenced and concluded its investigation relative to the subject ‘Pansol outing.’”
Marcos had informed the PET that Vice President Leni Robredo’s party revisor, Osmundo Abulayan, went on an outing last June 24 in Pansol along with at least 24 PET officers including head revisors, alternate head revisor, appraiser, ballot box custodians and chief tabulator.
Since a PET manual recount is ongoing over his election protest, Marcos sought the investigation of the outing since it appears that Robredo of trying to influence the PET officers.
“Protestant Marcos cannot help but wonder if the ongoing judicial recounts and revision proceeding is compromised given that the ‘pansol outing’ was attended by a number of PET personnel who appear to be in cahoots with the protestee’s (Robredo) camp,” read his motion.
The former senator suspects that the camp of Robredo has “already infiltrated and curried favor with these PET personnel in order to manipulate, influence and/or control the revision proceedings and maneuver the revision results in her favor.”
“Fraternizing with the party revisor for the protestee is obviously prohibited by this Honorable Tribunal since this act is prosecribed not only by the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel by also by the Canon of Judicial Ethics,” he reminded.
Marcos cited that under the Code of Conduct “Court personnel serve as sentinels of justice and any act of impropriety on their part immeasurably affects the honor and dignity of the Judiciary and the people’s confidence in it.”
“Their position allows them to control the conduct of the judicial recount and revision of ballots in Marcos’ election protest,” he reminded.
“In fact, these Head Revisors and the Alternate Head Revisors are in charge of initially determining whether the ballots found inside the ballots are valid, rejected or stray. They are likewise mandated to determine if the protested ballots comply with the 50% shading threshold as originally decided by the PET,” he added.