The Palladium May 2016 Broadsheet

NEWS

LEGAL

THE COMPLICATED SITUATION OF PREMATURE CAMPAIGNING

PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHER AS MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF ELECTION INSPECTORS

VOLUMENo. No.XX XVIII VOLUME

CAFETERIA CONCESSIONAIRE TO END ITS OPERATIONS?

By Solomon Michael P. Vardeleon

ANCHOR Cuisine Inc. (Anchor) has been the cafeteria concessionaire of the Ateneo Professional School (APS) since 1999, the same year that the Ateneo Law School (ALS) was transferred from the H.V. Dela Costa campus to its present location in Rockwell.

In the early part of August this year, however, Anchor received a Memorandum from the Office of the Vice President of the APS formalizing their agreement that Anchor will hold its concession only until the commencement of the renovation of the APS building in Rockwell. In the said Memorandum, it was stated that the APS is grateful to Anchor for its continued operations despite the expiration of its contract in March 2016; however, after the renovation for the new canteen is completed, a bidding for the grant of the new concession will be conducted.

ATENEO TRIUMPHS AT THE ‘DEBATE SA SENADO’

ISSUENo. No.22 ISSUE

JANUARY MAY 20162015

ATENEO LAW SHINES WITH 81%; ARCEO, ANDERSON, AND TIU MAKE IT TO TOP 10

By Marianne Jezelle Jem T. Macarilay

THE Ateneo Law School accomplished an 81.01% over-all passing rate in the 2015 Bar examinations.

The passing rate for first-time takers from the Ateneo this year is at 83%, whereas the passing rate for Ateneans who have taken the Bar The renovation of the examinations before is at 78%. cafeteria, according to Ms. Marife Reginald Arceo led the new Villanueva, Assistant to the Vice President of the APS, is part of batch of Atenean lawyers with a the total renovation planned for score of 86.70%, good for 4th place the APS building. Although the overall. Mandy Therese Anderson renovation is still in the process of (5th place) and Jericho Tiu (8th discussion, the general proposal place) join Arceo in the Top Ten, for the renovation has been on with scores of 86.15% and 85.85% the table since 2015, and part of overall respectively. the discussion is the proposed Topping the Bar examinations addition of the culinary school Le Cordon Bleu to the campus this year is Rachel Angeli Miranda which, if approved, will form part from the University of the Philippines with a score of 87.40%, folof the APS community.

Although the general proposal lowed by Athena Plaza from Unihas been in discussion since last versity of San Carlos with 87.25% year, its finalization is still a matter , and Jayson Aguilar, another UP graduate, with a score of 86.75%. that is yet be concluded. P

of San Beda College - Manila with 85.90% at 6th and 7th place respectively. Joining Jericho Tiu in 8th place are Jecca Jacildo from the University of San Carlos and Soraya Laut from Xavier University. Jedd Brian Hernandez from UP ranked 9th with 85.80%, and Ronel Buenaventura from Bulacan State University and Lara Carmela Fernando of San Beda College – Manila all scored 85.75%, good for 10th place.

Ateneo Law improved its performance in the 2015 Bar examinations, bouncing back from a 53.78% overall passing rate in 2014. The national passing rate also improved to 26.21% with 1,731 of the 6,665 examinees hurdling the Bar this year, from last year’s 18.82%.

Criminal Law, Political Law, and Civil Law proved to be the most challenging exams in 2014, Other topnotchers include Gi- with only 17%, 23% and 24% of selle Hernandez from UP with the total examinees passing these 86.10% and Darniel Bustamante subjects respectively.

VOLUME No. XVIII XIX

ISSUE No. 32

BAR OPS TEAM GEARS UP FOR BAR 2016

www.thepalladium.ph

Examiners According to the Office of the Bar Confidant’s memo dated May 2, 2016, the 2015 Bar examiners were the following: Presiding Justice Amparo M. Cabotaje Tang - Political Law and Public International Law; Asst. Court Administrator and Chief Public Information Officer Theodore O. Te - Labor Law and Social Legislation; Atty. Rita Linda V. Jimeno - Civil Law; Justice Amelia R. Cotangco-Manalastas - Taxation; Atty. Rafael A. Morales - Mercantile Law; Justice Efren N. De la Cruz - Criminal Law; Justice Alexander G. Gesmundo - Remedial Law; and Justice Maria Theresa Mendoza-Arcega - Legal Ethics and Practical Exercises Associate Justice Teresita Leonardo-de Castro, who chaired the Supreme Court Bar Examination committee for the 2015 exams, earlier said the oath taking of passers is set on June 16, 2016 at the Philippine International Convention Center in Pasay City. P

facebook.com/palladiumALS

@palladiumALS

NEWS

2

ALS BAGS FOUR CHAMPIONSHIPS IN 2016 CONFLICTS OF LAW

By Luis Alfonso S. Seña

ATENEO Law School (ALS) once again proved that it is a force to be reckoned with not only in the field of academics but also in the field of athletics when it was able to obtain four championships in the recently concluded 26th Conflicts of Law Sports Tournament held last February. ALS struck gold in Men’s Basketball, Football, Futsal, and Swimming events. The Women’s Basketball Team of the ALS

The ALS also participated in was also the First Runner-Up in the Men’s and Women’s Volleythe annual tournament. ball, DOTA, Badminton, and TaThe Men’s Basketball Team ble Tennis, and Debate events. beat the University of Sto. Tomas Chelle Ventura (4D) and Amber in the championship game held in Gagajena (3B) were the representSan Beda-Mendiola, with a score atives of ALS in the Mr. and Ms. of 75-62. Meanwhile, the Foot- Conflicts of Law Pageant. ball and Futsal teams prevailed Conflicts of Law is an annual over San Beda College-Mendiola in their respective championship sports tournament participated by various law schools in the Philmatches.

ippines. This year’s tournament was held on all Sundays of February. Arellano University (Taft and Legarda campuses), Philippine Christian University, Adamson University, and San Beda CollegeMendiola all opened their doors to serve as the venues for the 2016 Conflicts of Law Tournament. P

ATENEO TRIUMPHS AT THE ‘DEBATE SA SENADO’

By Marianne Jezelle Jem T. Macarilay

ATENEO Law School emerged as the champion against the University of Santo Tomas (UST) in the National Finals of the Inter-Law School Debate Competition held at the Senate of the Philippines on 20 January 2016. The teams debated on the following motion: “Let it be resolved that Congress should override the President’s veto of House Bill No. 5842, An Act Mandating A Two Thousand Peso (2,000) Across-The-Board Increase In The Monthly Pension With Corresponding Adjustment Of The Minimum Monthly Pension Under The Social Security System.”

Team Ateneo, consisting of Natasha Daphne Marcelo (3C), Rami Hourani (3A) and Jet Garcia (3C), argued on the affirmative side while Mark Vixen Dorado, Diane Lucero, and Jonalyn Roxas of Team UST argued for the negative side. The first speaker of UST, Dorado, was awarded Best Speaker for the championship round. The heated disputes on the necessity, beneficiality, and practicability of the increase in the SSS pension during the finals were adjudicated by experienced debaters Atty. Michael Vincent Dela Rosa, Atty. Roland Glen Tuazon, and Dean Abraham Espejo of the New Era University

College of Law. Dean Espejo also served as the Chief Adjudicator for the finals. Likewise awarded was Christopher Reyes of De La Salle University as Best Speaker for the Elimination Rounds held at the Ateneo Law School on 16 January 2016 among 10 teams from 6 different law schools.

The arguments of the opposing teams revolved on the feasibility of the pension hike and its effect to the Social Security System and its members. The trio from Ateneo presented measures and ways to sustain the SSS pension hike while the trio from UST discussed the impossibility and the

risk of compromising the stability of the SSS in the near future.

The event, also known as the “Debate sa Senado,” was organized by Ateneo Law’s St. Thomas More Debate and Advocacy Society (STM) in partnership with the Senate Committee on Public Information and Mass Media.

The occasion was also graced with the presence and messages of Senator Grace Poe, Chairperson of the Senate Committee on Public Information and Mass Media, and Chairman Eugenio “Toto” Villareal, MTRCB Chairperson and Ateneo STM adviser.

P

NEWS

3

ATENEO LAW UNITES FOR THE NATIONAL ELECTIONS TASK FORCE

By Thea Elyssa Vega

IN preparation for the 2016 National Elections, various organizations in the Ateneo Law School, including the administration, have joined forces to implement what is arguably the largest electionrelated project the school has ever undertaken. The National Elections Task Force 2016 was initiated through the efforts of Ateneo Human Rights Center (AHRC), the Legal Network for Truthful Elections (LENTE), Samahang Lingkod Bayan (SLB), and Ateneo Law Student Council (Student Council) as preparation for the upcoming May elections.

sions include “kuwentuhang bayan” and a discussion on basic election offenses. Students from the Ateneo Law School (ALS) were actually sent to various communities to implement the project.

tion program since the students were trained on how to conduct it with the different marginalized sectors.” The Student Council was in charge of the mobilization of the law students.

before, students should use it as an opportunity because it is your future.” In the long run, Dean Candelaria is hoping to see the academicpractical aspect of the course to be in fruition.

According to Atty. Anmau Manigbas, the AHRC Internship Director, “the AHRC contributed through training of the students on popular education and through contacting the different communities -- indigenous peoples, urban poor, farmers. These are already the partner communities of the AHRC.” She adds that “these laws/ messages are taught differently in law school and have to be relayed and understood by the marginalized communities.” Atty. Manigbas, together with the AHRC President for the Council of Interns Pau Vasquez, states that the data garnered from the communities will be used to make a “10 point human rights agenda per sector.” They aim to use this data as possible questions in the next Presidential or Vice- Presidential debates. Core team members from AHRC are also present for each deployment.

Carlo Africa, Head of the National Secretariat of LENTE, states that LENTE’s participation involved the training of student volunteers regarding the common election offenses. LENTE also provided the student body a copy of the module used for the deployment. Due to the scarce number of volunteers thanks to the heavy workload of students, the training sessions were done “guerilla-style” where anyone who was free would conduct the training sessions. Aside from this, however, LENTE also has other work outside ALS since LENTE is also an accredited NGO. There are currently thirty-one chapters of LENTE and it has also maintained partnerships with other schools.

Some volunteers, however, who wish to be unnamed in the article, stated that there was difficulty in recruiting more volunteers. There were instances when they had to conduct the activity but claim that “they were not fully prepared especially because the questions of the community are very specific” or that certain members had to facilitate for all aspects of the module even if it was not their area of expertise.

The group was given a financial grant by the Canadian Fund for Local Initiative to provide basic legal education to underrepresented sectors. Out of the five grant holders, this project was the only one based in Luzon. The goal of the task force is to empower those whose voices are unheard during the elections – the underrepresented and marginalized, those who have no knowledge on how to protect their rights against election offenses. The aim of the project is to analyze the individual and community needs For Student Council President regarding the elections and how Cyndy Dela Cruz, she states that these needs can be met. “the elections initiative initially Each organization had their own thought of was an infographic to area of expertise and complement- ignite interest among law students. ed the different aspects of the pro- However, through Canadian Fund ject’s module. The project is com- for local initiative, we realized there posed of two aspects – training and was a bigger opportunity possible, actual deployment. The module sayang naman.” She claims that this being taught during training ses- was “not an ordinary legal educa-

Dean Sedfrey Candelaria of ALS mentions that he initially envisioned an academic and practical aspect for the newly separated Election and Local Government Course. Since the elections will take place during the semester, he wanted the course to have corresponding practical activities nearing the elections. However, there was difficulty due to the “planning and personal involvement of some professors to the candidates.” He mentions that “information is already out in the open, as compared

Generally, however, the volunteers and organizers still see the value in their work. Africa mentions that “if we don’t do something at all, then nothing will happen. We have the opportunity for change. If not us, then sino pa? You can change the country by changing the elections.” Vasquez states that “the kuwentuhang bayan struck me, since it said that there should be no monopoly of power, and this should be reminded to people. A lot of rights can depend through elections. Through the government.” Dela Cruz also added, “Thank you to the volunteers who gave their time despite the busy schedule in school.” P

BAR OPS TEAM GEARS UP FOR BAR 2016

By Michael Francis D. Castro

IN preparation for the 2016 National Elections, various organizations in the Ateneo Law School, including the administration, have joined forces to implement what is arguably the largest election-related project the school has ever undertaken. The National Elections Task Force 2016 was initiated through the efforts of Ateneo Human Rights Center (AHRC), the Legal Network for Truthful Elections (LENTE), Samahang Lingkod Bayan (SLB), and Ateneo Law Student Council (Student Council) as preparation for the upcoming May elections.

knowledge on how to protect their rights against election offenses. The aim of the project is to analyze the individual and community needs regarding the elections and how these needs can be met.

Each organization had their own area of expertise and complemented the different aspects of the project’s module. The project is composed of two aspects – training and actual deployment. The module being taught during training sessions include “kuwentuhang bayan” and a discussion on basic election offenses. Students from The group was given a financial grant the Ateneo Law School (ALS) were by the Canadian Fund for Local Initia- actually sent to various communities tive to provide basic legal education to implement the project. to underrepresented sectors. Out of According to Atty. Anmau Manthe five grant holders, this project was the only one based in Luzon. The goal igbas, the AHRC Internship Direcof the task force is to empower those tor, “the AHRC contributed through whose voices are unheard during the training of the students on popular elections – the underrepresented education and through contacting the and marginalized, those who have no different communities -- indigenous

peoples, urban poor, farmers. These are already the partner communities of the AHRC.” She adds that “these laws/messages are taught differently in law school and have to be relayed and understood by the marginalized communities.” Atty. Manigbas, together with the AHRC President for the Council of Interns Pau Vasquez, states that the data garnered from the communities will be used to make a “10 point human rights agenda per sector.”

They aim to use this data as possible questions in the next Presidential or Vice- Presidential debates. Core team members from AHRC are also present for each deployment.

For Student Council President Cyndy Dela Cruz, she states that “the elections initiative initially thought of was an infographic to ignite interest among law students. However, through Canadian Fund for local initiative, we realized there was a bigger opportunity possible, sayang naman.” She claims

that this was “not an ordinary legal education program since the students were trained on how to conduct it with the different marginalized sectors.”

The Student Council was in charge of the mobilization of the law students.

Carlo Africa, Head of the National Secretariat of LENTE, states that LENTE’s participation involved the training of student volunteers regarding the common election offenses.

LENTE also provided the student body a copy of the module used for the deployment. Due to the scarce number of volunteers thanks to the heavy workload of students, the training sessions were done “guerilla-style” where anyone who was free would conduct the training sessions. Aside from this, however, LENTE also has other work outside ALS since LENTE is also an accredited NGO. There are currently thirty-one chapters of LENTE and it has also maintained partnerships with continued on p. 8

NEWS

4

ATENEO HOSTS FIRST-EVER TRADE POLICY FORUM

By Richard Gabriel G. Filasol

national Economic Relations of the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA).

The Forum saw guests from the government, the private sector and the academe, a few of which interposed questions to Sec. Cristobal and to the discussants. Also in attendance were Ateneo Law School (ALS) Dean Sedfrey Candelaria, Vice President of the Ateneo Professional Schools (APS) Dr. Antonette Palma-Angeles, TCRL Executive Director Amb. Manuel Teehankee and ACIEL Executive Director Anthony Abad, among others. P From left to right: ALS Dean Candelaria, Dr. Cielito Habito, VP Antonette Angeles-Palma, DTI Sec. Adrian Cristobal, Jr., Usec. Laura del Rosario and TCRL Executive Director Amb. Manuel Teehankee.

LAST 9 March 2016, the Teehankee Center for the Rule of Law (TCRL) and the Ateneo Center for International Economic Law (ACIEL) organized the first Ateneo Trade Policy Forum with the theme ‘Industrial Development for Inclusive Growth’. Patterned after the annual World Economic Forum, the first Ateneo Trade Policy Forum aimed to bring together intellectuals and key government and private sector leaders to raise awareness and lend insight into a few of the most pressing is-

sues facing the country today. As the theme suggests, this year’s forum delved into how the Philippine economy can balance industrial development and inclusive growth, while being cognizant of the changing trends in the global economy.

Delivering the keynote speech before the audience at the Justitia Hall was Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) Secretary Adrian Cristobal, Jr. A distinguished alumnus of the Ateneo

Law School, Sec. Cristobal discussed the country’s trade policy amidst new trends in international trade such as the ASEAN integration, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and e-commerce. He also shared his thoughts on how the Philippines can stay competent in the global market while maintaining inclusive growth for all sectors in the economy. Forum discussants also include Dr. Cielito Habito of the Ateneo Economics Department and Amb. Laura del Rosario, Undersecretary for Inter-

DTI Secretary Adrian Cristobal, Jr. delivering his speech

ELSA PROMOTES SUSTAINABILITY IN 5TH ‘AMAZING RACE’

By Solomon Michael P. Vardeleon

THE Environmental Law Society of Ateneo (ELSA) once again hosted its premier event ‘The Amazing Race 2016’ last 6 March 2016. The Amazing Race, now on its fifth year, was attended by a total of six teams, representing various organizations within the Law School.

The theme of this year’s edition of the race was pursuant to ELSA’s advocacy of “sustainability” as each obstacle was specially-tailored to cater to different issues relating to renewable energy, disaster-resilient housing, sustainability in food production and consumption, and the 5Rs of sustainable living.

The race started from the Ateneo Law School and ended in the Ateneo’s Loyola campus. The race was had a total of five pit-stops,

with each pit-stop being hosted by an organization which likewise advocates the cause of sustainable development.

Manila Development Authority (MMDA), with a view of advancing an equitable and sustainable transport-sharing system for the Philippines, required participants to test all the modes of transportation within and around a designated area in Quezon City. The last pit-stop was co-hosted by the DENR, the Pollution Control Association of the Philippines, and Klean Kanteen. In the last stop, the participants were required to gather at least five kilograms of trash from the estero and list which pieces of trash should be reduced, reused, recycled, refused, and rot. Finally, after all the tasks had been completed, the teams raced to Bellarmine Field in Ateneo’s Loyola campus, where the finish line was located.

The first stop was hosted by Myshelter Foundation, author of the Litter of Light Project. During this stop, participants were tasked to light their own solar-powered lamps. The second pit-stop, hosted by Taguyod Bayan Foundation, Inc., required participants to build mini-houses using everyday materials, and to test how disaster-resilient they were, water was poured over the prototype to simulate a real-life disaster. The third stop, hosted by Mara’s Organic Market, required participants to interact and get-to-know the farmers and their organic products. The fourth stop, hosted by the DepartThe team representing the Atment of Environment and Natural eneo Human Rights Center Resources (DENR) and Metro

(AHRC) struck gold in the event.

Team AHRC was comprised of Regine Abuel (4D), Ponce Lopez (4A), and Matel Lazano. Team CBR came in second, which was comprised of Ulysses Trinidad, Rex Fernandez, and Jhun Mariano. The team representing the Ateneo Law in Business Association (ALBA) came in third place, comprised of Max Diego (4B), Erika Casas (4A), and Aylene Sarmiento (4B).

The other participants of the event were Denise Sales (4A), Paolo Fondevilla (4A) and Diego Santiago (4B) of ‘Team Go Panis’; Anton Mercado (2B), Dyrol Agbayani (2B), and Hazel Dizon (2B) of ‘Team Kapatities’; and Penelope Capistrano, Kat Mangongsong, and Alex Delos Santos (4D) of ‘Team Hingal’. P

5

5

OPINION

facebook.com/palladiumALS

The Palladium ALS

@palladiumALS

www.thepalladium.ph

@ThePalladiumALS

palladiumALS@gmail.com

www.palladiumonline.com

E D I T O R I A L

THE SINS OF THE FATHER AND THE SINS OF THE SON SOME eleven thousand miles away from this archipelago lies a country on the western coast of South America. There, from the edge of the Pacific Ocean to the foothills of the Andes mountains, ballots have been cast to determine the country’s next leader. Despite thousands of protesters marching on the streets of Lima, many Peruvians have still chosen the daughter of an imprisoned ex-president, infamous for his iron-fisted rule and later convicted of corruption and human rights abuses, to become their next president.

Does this sound familiar? Offspring of notorious and disgraced former leaders running for the highest (or second highest) position in the land and topping the polls, all because of ignorance and forgetfulness of a part of history only decades past.

There are some differences, however. While Keiko Fujimori has apologized for the crimes and errors of her father’s government, promising to “never again” let such atrocities befall Peru, Senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos, Jr. has done the complete opposite. When asked in the recently held Vice Presidential Debates about the alleged human rights violations during his father’s regime, he simply had this to say: “I will apologize for any wrongdoing that I have done ... But, I can only apologize for myself, not for anyone.”

The lack of remorse is astounding, and it continues to both baffle and anger many that the Marcos family continues to deny that billions of pesos have been siphoned away from our national coffers during Marcos, Sr.’s time, and that they refuse to return what is rightfully ours, feigning innocence despite findings by the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) and rulings of U.S. courts.

But not all Filipinos denounce the Marcoses’ impunity. Senator Marcos continues to lead the vice presidential race in in surveys, with Senator Francis “Chiz” Escudero falling to second place, now statistically tied with Liberal Party bet Maria Leonor “Leni” Robredo. Marcos apologists and historical revisionists hound writers and commenters in news and social media websites, yearning for the so-called golden years of the Marcos regime. Notwithstanding statements denouncing historical revisionism from various institutions around the country, including one from members of the Ateneo community, many Filipinos – particularly those from the younger generations who have no firsthand experience of Martial Law – still believe that those years were not as bad as we have allegedly been made to believe, attributing this to the politicization of history by the supposed “victors” of the People Power Revolution. Even within the halls of such institutions, students believe that the sins of the father should not be blamed on the son. But how is that even applicable, when it has been shown that Marcos, Jr. was complicit, that he had committed his own sins?

Perhaps the worst part of this state of affairs is that it is indicative of a lack of compassion among Filipinos. That many can continue to support Marcos, Jr. for whatever accomplishments he may have, and continue to ignore the atrocities committed during Martial Law and his lack of remorse for the same, shows selfishness: as long as it did not happen to them, then it does not matter to them, either. They continue to be oblivious to the plight of the victims of the regime, and sadly, it does not look like things will change any time soon. P

The Palladium has its editorial office at the Palladium Room, 3/F Ateneo Professional Schools Building, 20 Rockwell Drive, Rockwell Center, Makati City 1200. For comments and suggestions, please drop a line at thepalladiumals@gmail.com. © Copyright The Palladium 2016.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any manner whatsoever without the prior express written permission of the Editorial Board, except in cases of brief quotations for academic research purposes.

Editorial Board A n a I s a b e l F. C a s t e l o Editor-in-Chief Kim L. Rances Associate Editor K at h l y n Nad ia D. Ba l d o nad o Managing Editor K e v i n L u k e V. M i z o n Junior Associate Editor R aymond Aljon A . Cusipag Office and Circulations Manager Luis Alfonso S. Sena News Editor Er i c a May O. Gana Legal Editor Alyssa Hannah R . Nuqui Features Editor R ac h el l e A n n e D. Gu t i er re z Arts and Culture Editor Roslyn Bianca R . Mangaser Multimedia Editor Roberto G. Reyes Layout & Graphics Editor D e n i s e A n n e V. S a l e s Photo Editor

Staff NEWS

Marianne Jezelle Jem Macarilay Solomon Michael Vardeleon Joben Mariz Odulio Michael Francis Castro

Richard Gabriel Filasol Louise Celerio Joren Lex Tan Thea Elyssa Vega

LEGAL

Earvin James Atienza Aileen Cruz Lorenz Fernand Dantes Raphael Dantes Mohammad Muktadir Estrella

Stephen Joshua Gana Jesus Lapuz, Jr. Chynah Marie Monzon Perpetua Calliope Ngo Stephanie Ann Pagdanganan

FEATURES

Maria Pilar Lusia Elago Manolo Buenviaje III Jose Maria Santos Joren Lex Tan Vanesa Joyce Banta Kirsten Erika Casas Thea Elyssa Vega

Diego Santiago Clara Murallos Julie Jolo Fe Trampe Anjan Rosario Aira Marie Andal Mariel Cristina Sadang

OFFICE & CIRCULATION Donatello Justiniani

MULTIMEDIA Kenzo Rodis

Jeah Dominguez

ARTS & CULTURE

Raymond Joseph Mercado David Robert Jacinto Rosario III Perpetua Calliope Ngo Erika Gabrielle Valdez Leslie Ann Po Maria Theresa Cervero Steffi Sales

LAYOUT & GRAPHICS

Mitch Espiritu Frankie Alba

Dar Cristobal Jillian Paris

PHOTOS Lina Maria Domingo Chelsea Ysabel Go Jansen Santos Chloe Chrysilla Laxa Philip Evardone Liz Angela Intia Jhansel Cura

OPINION

6

INTER ALIA

By Ana Isabel F. Castelo NUMEROUS editorials and articles have been published and posted since the recent Supreme Court decision on Senator Grace Poe’s disqualification case. Many lawyers and other members of the legal community have expressed similar sentiments on the matter, criticizing parts of the decision despite acknowledging that it should nevertheless be respected.

It is evident that not everyone agrees with the decision, not simply because of prior political biases against Senator Poe, but because of valid reasons based on law. Moreover, the majority who voted in favor of Poe turned out to be not such a clear majority after all, thus adding fuel to the criticism aimed at the ruling.

It was not too long ago when, during one of our Constitutional Law II

sessions, Dean Sedfrey Candelaria told us that there the Court does not always make decisions in a vacuum.

Many other factors, including the political climate of the time, can affect the outcome of certain cases. Today, there is speculation that such factors – perhaps political in nature – had some effect on the decision. Then again, these remain to be speculations. But can such conjectures be helped if, upon reading the decision and the reasoning of the Court, one feels a sense of unease at how the law was interpreted?

For instance, how do we reconcile how the Court has seemingly applied the principle of jus soli in determining the citizenship of foundlings, when in accordance with the Constitution, we use jus sanguinis as the primary basis of citizenship by birth? What about

pro hac vice By: Kathlyn Nadia D. Baldonado Just recently, the first microsatellite of the Philippines was launched into outer space.

Called the Diwata-1, the microsatellite is programmed to collect weather patterns and other information for disaster risk management and agricultural productivity.

This project, headed by the Department of Science and Technology (DOST), is seen as a milestone when it comes to space innovation in our country as it is a first ever in our country’s history that we launched something into orbit. The agency is now eyeing the launch of the second microsatellite in December 2017.

And yet, as early as the first week of its launch, the project already has its share of controversies.

Two engineers involved in the said project cried foul over the treatment given to them by the Philippine government. Paolo Espiritu and Julian Oliveros air out their concerns that they were

under compensated, and that their contracts with the DOST made them appear to be students under a scholarship without any particular indication of their contribution as engineers. The two engineers claim that their team was subjected to long hours of labor and laboratory work, and yet, they were not given the recognition that they deserve. Despite the unfavorable conditions, the two engineers stood ground and completed the project as they see this as a glimmer of hope for the country.

The Diwata-I incident brings into light the developments and long-standing issues when in comes to the sciences. On one hand, it reopens the discussion and debates when it comes to support of the said industry.

In a country where majority choose to be nurses and call center agents while the rest are geared towards being doctors and lawyers, not much premium has been given in choosing

Pieces

By Kim L. Rances A professor has called the Bar exams the second most difficult one in the Philippines, the first being the foreign service exams (where examinees have to hurdle five tests: qualifying test, preliminary interview, written test, psychological test, and an oral test. I couldn’t find a reliable source of statistics for passing rates, but it’s reported to be consistently at just 1%, with most applicants failing at the qualifying test).

But no other national exam is taken, and the results released, with as much fanfare as the Bar exams. It really is quite the spectacle – examinees from bigger law schools check in at five-star hotels during Bar weekends and get shuttled off to UST (there is a discus-

sion to be had here regarding privilege and status and how it helps one’s chances at the Bar exams). The entire Bar month is covered by the media.

And when the results are released, it is front page news – pictures of passers weeping in front of the Supreme Court are published, and we are inundated by interviews of the Top 10 placers for about a week. One news outlet would have enough time in the day to go through the list of 1,000+ passers and pick out interesting or funny names (remember Habeas Corpuz?).

I might be wrong, but as far as I am aware, we are possibly the only country that has this obsession with the Bar exams. No country releases the Top 10 placers of their exams. A quick Google

More questions than answers her residency, and what about the COMELEC’s authority to disqualify?

It seems that with the decision, more questions have arisen from the answers the Court has given.

The citizenship issue was once again raised in the recent Presidential debate hosted by TV5 and the Philippine Star, and was instantly pointed out

by Vice President Jejomar Binay in his exchange with Senator Poe. “Lagi mong sinasabi na ikaw ay tunay na Pilipino, paano ka magiging tunay na Pilipino kung sumumpa ka na na maging Amerikano at mag-aabroad ka. Ikinahihiya mo ang pinaggalingan mo,” he accused. With a Supreme Court decision to support Poe, however, the accusation seemed to be inconsequential. And to Filipinos who do not understand the nuances of the

law and the implications such a ruling may have, the issues of citizenship and residence are beside the point. To many, her capability and competence are much more important issues.

But what these people do not seem to realize is that this is the Presidency at stake. Since the Supreme Court has interpreted the law to be as such, then we must follow such interpretation. But our understanding of the Constitution and other relevant laws have now been changed because of this ruling, and this interpretation is to be applied in determining who may or may not run for the highest position in the land. Is it just a sense of nationalism behind disagreement to the decision, or is it fear of the implications on how the fundamental law may be construed? P

Musings over Diwata-I the sciences as a viable career option. And it is understandably so, when the priority concern for the ordinary Filipino would be putting food on the table. As could be seen from the ires of the Diwata-I engineers, there isn’t much incentive in working for the sciences as they receive a lesser pay cut compared to other professions and not enough recognition. Even from a news standpoint, developments in sciences do not receive equal treatment as compared to developments in politics. It isn’t surprising that those who do pursue a career in the sciences would choose to go to other countries, where support is more generously given.

On the other hand, and in a more positive tune, the launching of the Diwata-I shows that we have achieved great strides in the development of sciences.

Even with the limited resources as compared to our Western counterparts, we were able to

build our very own satellite that is very relevant to our agriculturally-disposed country.

DOST now also enjoys more budget allocation compared to the previous administrations.

Developing the sciences may not have the advantage of reaping concrete benefits in the short term but it definitely has an impact on our future growth as a nation, may it be in the aspect of farming, in the aspect of economic development, or in the aspect of intellectual property.

As future lawyers and nation builders, the field of sciences provides for further opportunities that could be tapped into in order to achieve our nation’s goals. In the coming years, as Diwata-I completes its orbit in outer space, may we also complete our full recognition of the value that the sciences bring.

P

The Bar (Over)Hype search showed that other countries put a premium on the passing rate of law schools, and not the grades of individual examinees. Other countries also aren’t singularly focused on grades as qualification for legal work.

US Supreme Court Justices don’t seem to use placing at their Bar exams as a claim to their positions; their grades, while I’m sure are high, don’t even seem to be public record. Amal Clooney’s Doughty Street Chamber’s profile doesn’t describe her as having graduated with academic honors or placing high at her Bar exams, but she is able to practice at the reputable London firm and work at an international level, having governments and presidents as clients.

This is not to hate on those who place at the Bar exams (especially since I have little chance of placing!).

It is important to criticize this Top 10 obsession because it takes away from what is truly important with the practice of law, which is the results of such practice. Passing the Bar exams is, literally, the minimum requirement for law practice. It doesn’t make one a great lawyer (although it’s a pretty good indicator). Of course, the coverage is not the legal profession’s fault, but the media’s. But let’s not deceive our countrymen into thinking that the Bar exams is anything more than what it is – a qualifying test, not a measure of greatness. P

OPINION

TINTED GLASSES

By Rachelle Anne D. Gutierrez

The Power of Words “There is one whose rash words are like sword thrusts, but the tongue of the wise brings healing.” ~ Proverbs 12:18

One of the first things I learned as law student is the power of words. In the small world of law school, we learn very quickly that all it takes is one word from your professor to make you feel elated the entire day or to send you running to the bathroom so you can cry away from prying eyes. As we progress into our senior year, we learn that we must be very careful with the words we choose to employ whenever we stand for recitation or answer our exams because it can mean one point more or one point less on our final grade.

than the sword, so words – carelessly thrown around – can wound more deeply than a sharp blade.

Through the years, people have become more and more careless with their usage of words. Today, it is not surprising to hear people talk recklessly or hurl invectives at one another publicly. Nor is it surprising to read posts on social networking sites containing hurtful and judgmental statements, some of which could even fall just a little short of libel and slander.

In most situations, people would claim that their statements are merely harmless “expressions” or “rants” for they have no intent to cause emotional or mental harm with their words. Human experience, however, would reveal otherwise. For just as the pen is mightier

Everyday, we encounter people who struggle – with law school, with relationships, with life. Everyday, we encounter people whose spirit is broken and damaged, one way or another. Everyday, we have an opportunity to make an impact on their lives. The only question is what kind of impact are we going to make? For while most people would say that we should not be easily affected by what others say about or to us, the truth of the matter is – it will always have an impact on us. P

On the other hand, sincere statements that overflow from a heart of genuine love and concern bring healing to a broken and shattered spirit. Several times, I have witnessed the silent pain suffered by those needlessly hurt by careless words. At the same time, I bear witness to the healing power that even the most basic compliment may have to one who has been secretly broken.

La Vida Lawca

By Alyssa Hannah R. Nuqui

“There is one whose rash words are more or one point less on our final like sword thrusts, but the tongue of grade. the wise brings healing.” ~ Proverbs 12:18 Through the years, people have become more and more careless One of the first things I learned with their usage of words. Today, as law student is the power of it is not surprising to hear people words. In the small world of law talk recklessly or hurl invectives school, we learn very quickly that at one another publicly. Nor is it all it takes is one word from your surprising to read posts on social professor to make you feel elated networking sites containing hurtful the entire day or to send you and judgmental statements, some running to the bathroom so you of which could even fall just a little can cry away from prying eyes. As short of libel and slander. In most we progress into our senior year, situations, people would claim we learn that we must be very that their statements are merely careful with the words we choose harmless “expressions” or “rants” to employ whenever we stand for for they have no intent to cause recitation or answer our exams emotional or mental harm with because it can mean one point their words. Human experience,

7

Gana Do It All

By Erica May O. Gana

Move Corrupt, difficult, and resistant to change-- these are words typically used to describe politics in the Philippines. It’s a motherhood statement that continues to find relevance despite the growing movement that seeks to reform the Philippine system of governance.

The problem, however, is so deeply rooted in our culture and social practices that there is always the sentiment that the situation will never change and that we will continue to live in a country run by plundering legislators and bribeseeking public officials.

This sense of helplessness has become so widespread and contagious that slowly, I’ve come to see friends expressing on social media their lack of interest for the upcoming elections. Some would rather wash their hands of the whole thing all together; they refuse to participate, vote, or even care for the whole the process.

The problem, however, lies in exactly that. Sometimes, we refuse to be involved in matters where we feel our voices will be unheard and our actions rendered useless.

But even apathy is a choice and, just like any choice, we must brace ourselves for its consequences.

Even though we may try to find comfort in believing that we did not aggravate the situation, when we refuse to act, we allow evils to prevail without putting up resistance. Worse, by the time one

realizes that we should act, the damage which could have been prevented is done. As the saying goes: “Regret is insight that comes a day too late.”

Likewise, when we refuse to act even when it is within our power to do so, we only strengthen the mistaken belief that there is nothing we can do. Even just one person can move mountains. It may come in small, incremental movements – whether it’s learning a bit more about current events, taking a stand with regard to important issues, or just finding time to register to be a voter (and even convincing the rest of your household to do the same).

Doing good or creating change does not immediately become great or momentous. Just like how reading a few pages a day will lead to finishing a thousand-page book, our acts – though small when taken together – will slowly but surely lead to fruition.

We can even act in concert with other like-minded individuals (no one ever said we needed to act alone). Whether it’s participating in school sponsored campaigns or off-campus programs, we can gain more ground with the help of others.

So this coming election season, I ask you to not be discouraged but to act. And remember: it isn’t just his, her, or their future on the line – it is ours. As the LENTE hashtag goes, ATIN ang eleksyon. P

How do you solve a problem like Philippine traffic? however, would reveal otherwise.

For just as the pen is mightier than the sword, so words – carelessly thrown around – can wound more deeply than a sharp blade.

On the other hand, sincere statements that overflow from a heart of genuine love and concern bring healing to a broken and shattered spirit. Several times, I have witnessed the silent pain suffered by those needlessly hurt by careless words. At the same time, I bear witness to the healing power that even the most basic compliment may have to one who has been secretly broken.

Everyday, we encounter people

who struggle – with law school, with relationships, with life.

Everyday, we encounter people whose spirit is broken and damaged, one way or another.

Everyday, we have an opportunity to make an impact on their lives.

The only question is what kind of impact are we going to make? For while most people would say that we should not be easily affected by what others say about or to us, the truth of the matter is – it will always have an impact on us. P

OPINION

8

LOOK WHO’S TALKING

By Luis Alfonso S. Seña

Ever since the latter part of the 19th century, it seems that every generation of Filipinos before ours has had to experience and live through, for a lack of a better term, some form of “landmark adversity” that leaves an indelible mark in the pages of world history. Our greatgrandparents lived through the Philippine Revolution against Spain; our grandparents lived through World War II and the occupation of Japanese forces in the archipelago; our parents lived through Martial Law brought about by a dictator.

The war of our generation

the Marcos years), is lucky. We are lucky to be living in a time when no dictator is audaciously depriving us of our fundamental human rights, and when no foreign nation is declaring war or forcing colonization against us; however, our generation is not without our own challenges and adversity.

rights of Filipinos. Today, we have a solid legal framework founded on our Constitution which guarantees all these. Our ancestors worked to establish better relations with other nations to achieve peace. Today, the Philippines is a member of the United Nations and a party to various international agreements.

We live in the future that our ancestors always envisioned. We live in a time when we are free from the clutches of a colonizing nation and a dictator. During their time, our ancestors literally fought and died Our generation (those born after for the recognition and exercise of

The challenge that our generation will continue to face will deal with how we can continue to preserve and build on the good that has been left to us by those who came before us.

The adversity we continue to face is internal in nature. How our generation

ALS CELEBRATES INTERNATIONAL WOMEN’S WEEK

By Joben Mariz J. Odulio

LAST February, right after the Valentine’s Day celebrations in Ateneo Law School, red hearts were replaced by purple ribbons as the community commemorated International Women’s Week.

Through the initiative of the Urduja Desk of the Ateneo Human Rights Center (AHRC), students, professors, and staff members alike were reminded of the significant economic, social, cultural, and political successes women have contributed to society over the years.

The celebration of International Women’s Week also called on the community to help reduce gender inequality, an ever-present, pressing issue that permeates cultures across the world.

By showcasing the #PledgeforParity exhibit last 7-11 March 2016, the Urduja Desk Heads, Hacel dela Cruz (4C) and Mikee Retirado (3C), and AHRC-Urduja Desk member Bea Gutierrez (3A), explained that it is important to celebrate International Women’s Week, as the United Nations reported that gender equality situations in various aspects in society have been improving.

However, while success came in droves in matters such as maternal death rate, gender gap in education, and participation in decision-making in both the public and private settings, there continues to exist global issues of disproportionate

susceptibility to HIV of women and children, child marriages, and violence against women. Thus, the exhibit sought to acknowledge that while women’s contributions in various fields have been widely applauded, gender inequality is still a cause for concern. Likewise, the exhibit aimed at helping its audience learn and be inspired from the exhibit, as it showcased women who are accomplished in different fields, and how such achievements benefit not only women, but society as a whole as well.

Examples of these achievements translating into the betterment of society were made apparent during the talk held on 10 March 2016 entitled Women in Uniform, as organized by the Gender and the Law elective class. The speakers included the following: PCI Kimberly Molitas of the Philippine National Police; JSUPT Analize Pama-Bides of the Bureao of Jail Management and Penology; and SUPT Belinda Ochave of the Bureau of Fire Protection. They shared that although there are experiences and challenges working in a male-dominated profession, they are more than glad to be serving their posts. The women shared that while they faced some challenges, they are able to overcome them and were able to deliver their work with more substance and performance, which, at the end of the day, benefits everyone.

It is said that women hold up half

will collectively make decisions which will affect governance, the Philippine legal framework, our natural environment, relations with other countries, among others, will be the legacy which we will leave behind to the next generation. How we can actually prevent another war or dictatorship from happening will also be part of our legacy.

With respect to governance, how our generation will deal with and overcome the unresponsiveness and corruption of public officials will likewise serve as our legacy. P

BAR OPS TEAM GEARS UP FOR BAR 2016 continued from p. 3

the sky. As much as women everywhere are excelling in their own rights, it remains that women cannot do it alone. Urduja Desk Head de La Cruz posited that if everyone were to uphold the essence of gender parity in our everyday lives, all of us – both men and women – will be liberated from the rigid gender roles that have long afflicted us.

Through the International Women’s Week celebration, especially through the #PledgeforParity exhibit, all law students are urged to be more sensitive to gender parity in their own ways. It can be as simple as taking the conscious effort to use gender-neutral language in our everyday communication with our professors, fellow students, and friends. We can also explore other platforms by which they can help bring attention to gender disparities. By pledging for parity through these little efforts, sustained over time, surely, we will be able to be more conscious of and sensitive in our efforts to achieve equality for all. P

other schools.

Dean Sedfrey Candelaria of ALS mentions that he initially envisioned an academic and practical aspect for the newly separated Election and Local Government Course. Since the elections will take place during the semester, he wanted the course to have corresponding practical activities nearing the elections. However, there was difficulty due to the “planning and personal involvement of some professors to the candidates.” He mentions that “information is already out in the open, as compared before, students should use it as an opportunity because it is your future.” In the long run, Dean Candelaria is hoping to see the academic-practical aspect of the course to be in fruition.

Some volunteers, however, who wish to be unnamed in the article, stated that there was difficulty in recruiting more volunteers. There were instances when they had to conduct the activity but claim that “they were not fully prepared especially because the questions of the community are very specific” or that certain members had to facilitate for all aspects of the module even if it was not their area of expertise.

Generally, however, the volunteers and organizers still see the value in their work. Africa mentions that “if we don’t do something at all, then nothing will happen. We have the opportunity for change. If not us, then sino pa? You can change the country by changing the elections.” Vasquez states that “the kuwentuhang bayan struck me, since it said that there should be no monopoly of power, and this should be reminded to people. A lot of rights can depend through elections. Through the government.” Dela Cruz also added, “Thank you to the volunteers who gave their time despite the busy schedule in school.” P

9

LEGAL

facebook.com/palladiumALS

The Palladium ALS

@palladiumALS

www.thepalladium.ph

@ThePalladiumALS

palladiumALS@gmail.com

www.palladiumonline.com

IS GRACE POE A RESIDENT? A Critique of the Supreme Court’s Ruling in Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC

By Lorenz Fernand D. Dantes and Stephen Joshua O. Gana

DUE TO the upcoming 2016 elections this May, it comes as no surprise that many controversial issues are coming to light, most notable of which is the disqualification case filed against Senator Mary Grace Natividad PoeLlamanzares (Senator Poe) questioning her compliance with the citizenship and residency requirements. This case is a significant one because of its novelty and significant impact as a precedent.

This article will focus on the issue of her residency.

Among other things, presidential candidates are required to be a resident of the Philippines for at least ten (10) years preceding the election. In Senator Poe’s case, the issues are straightforward: Whether or not she established her permanent residence in the Philippines in time for the ten-year requirement to be fulfilled, and whether or not her subsequent actions had substantially undermined this manifestation. In order to analyze her situation more effectively, we need to clarify the details on her residence.

Factual Antecedents Senator Poe had lived in the Philippines up until 29 July 1991 when she chose to follow her husband, Daniel Llamanzares, who was both a Philippine and American citizen, to the United States of America (U.S.) to start a family. She was eventually naturalized as a U.S. citizen on 18 October 2001. While she would return to the Philippines several times, it was in 2005, after the death of her father the year prior, that she and her family decided to return and live in the Philippines.

Thus, Senator Poe had quit her job in the U.S. and returned the Philippines on 24 May 2005, initially residing with her mother, and eventually purchasing a unit at One Wilson Place in San Juan City in November 2005. Upon her return, she secured a Tax Identification Number (TIN) in order to settle her father’s estate.

Senator Poe also enrolled her children in Philippine schools in June 2005.

On 27 April 2006, her husband was able to sell their house in the U.S. He then resigned from his job there and returned to the Philippines on 4 May 2006. He has been working in the Philippines since July 2006.

On 10 July 2006, Senator Poe filed a sworn petition to reacquire her naturalborn Philippine citizenship and she likewise filed petitions for derivative citizenship on behalf of her children.

These petitions were granted by the Bureau of Immigration Commissioner on 18 July 2006. She also registered as a voter at San Juan City on 31 August 2006.

On 6 October 2010, due to her pending appointment as Chairperson of the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board (MTRCB), Senator Poe complied with the requirement of taking an Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines, as well as the requirement of renouncing her American citizenship.

At no time after this did she use her U.S. passport. The Vice Consul of the U.S. issued a Certificate of Loss of Nationality of the United States which attests that she lost her U.S. citizenship on 21 October 2010.

Establishing Senator Poe’s Residency Status This brings us to our main contention: did Senator Poe meet the residency requirements as set forth in Article VII, Section 2?

According to jurisprudence, the term “residence” as used in the 1987 Philippine Constitution means more than bodily presence; rather, it is equivalent to domicile. As explained in the landmark case of Koh v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. L-40428, 17 December 1975): “Residence is used to indicate a place of abode, whether permanent or temporary; domicile denotes a fixed permanent residence to which when absent, one has the intention of returning. A man may have a residence in one place and a domicile in another.

Residence is not domicile, but domicile is residence coupled with intention to remain for an unlimited time. A man can have but one domicile for one and the same purpose at any time, but he may have numerous places of residence. His place of residence generally is his place of domicile, but is not by any means, necessarily so since no length of residence without intention of remaining will constitute domicile.”

Senator Poe does not dispute the fact that when she left for the U.S. in 1991, she abandoned her domicile here in the Philippines. However, she claims that when she came back in 2005 after the death of her father Fernando Poe Jr., she had reestablished her domicile here in the Philippines.

The Supreme Court in Romualdez v.

Regional Trial Court (G.R. No. 104960, 14 September 1993) laid down the requirements to acquire domicile in the following manner: “In order, in turn, to acquire a new domicile by choice, there must concur (1) residence or bodily presence in the new locality, (2) an intention to remain there, and (3) an intention to abandon the old domicile. 21 In other words, there must basically be animus manendi coupled with animus non revertendi.”

In Senator Poe’s case, she submits as proof of her intention to abandon her domicile in the U.S. the fact that she enrolled her children in Philippine schools by June 2005 and that she got a Philippine TIN within the same year.

Thus, counting from 2005, she is able to meet the 10-year residency requirement for the 2016 elections.

A major argument, however, is the fact that even after selling her house in the U.S. and applying for reacquisition of natural-born citizenship in 2006, she still chose to retain her American citizenship until 2010. Thus, for four years, she was a dual citizen and was continuously using her American passport.

Senator Poe’s retention of her American

citizenship casts serious doubt upon her claim that she really intended to reside permanently in the Philippines when she came back in 2005. An important precedent is Coquilla v. COMELEC (G.R. No. 151914, 31 July 2002), which observed that permanent residency in the U.S. is a prerequisite for U.S. Citizenship. Thus, it is incumbent upon the candidate to prove abandonment of this permanent residency upon return to the Philippines. The same doctrine was subsequently reiterated by the Supreme Court in Caballero v. COMELEC (G.R. No. 209835, 22 September 2015). In Grace Poe’s case, this would be a difficult burden considering that even after going back to the Philippines in May 2005 to “permanently reside” here, she still went back several times to the United States for a few more trips.

It is also worth emphasizing that in Caballero, the Supreme Court sustained the COMELEC in starting the count of the residency period upon reacquisition of Filipino citizenship under R.A. No. 9225, or the or the Citizenship Retention and Reacquisition Act of 2003. If we apply this to Senator Poe’s case, this means that the period of counting, at the earliest, starts from July 2006 and not in May 2005 as she claims.

This, however, is upon the assumption that the Oath of Allegiance executed

by Senator Poe in July 2006 is valid, considering the fact the she used her American Passport several times after such date. This would then bring her within the ambit of the ruling in Maquiling v. COMELEC (G.R. No. 195649, 2 July 2013), which declares that subsequent use of American Passport effectively nullifies and recants an Oath of Allegiance made under R.A. No. 9225.

If we then consider the oath taking of Senator Poe in July 2006 as invalid based on Maquiling, we would have to start counting the 10 year residency period from October 2010, the date where she executed her “Affidavit of Renunciation of Allegiance to the United States”.

Following the precedent in Caballero, it is only here where we start counting because it only from this point where she truly reacquired her Filipino Citizenship.

In either case, Senator Poe falls short of the required 10 year residency period required for presidential candidates.

Another problem for Senator Poe is that fact the she made a judicial admission (as Former Senator Kit Tatad claims) in her certificate of candidacy (COC) for the 2013 Midterm Elections that she has been a resident of the country for only six (6) years and six (6) months. Based on Senator Poe’s admission, she would be short of the 10-year period for the 2016 elections.

However, the camp of Senator Poe answers by citing a precedent in the case of Marcos v. COMELEC (G.R. No. 119976, 18 September 1995), wherein the Supreme Court held that:

“Having been forced by private respondent to register in her place of actual residence in Leyte instead of petitioner’s claimed domicile, it appears that petitioner had jotted down her period of stay in her legal residence or domicile. The juxtaposition of entries in Item 7 and Item 8 — the first requiring actual residence and the second requiring domicile — coupled with the circumstances surrounding petitioner’s registration as a voter in Tolosa obviously led to her writing down an unintended entry for which she could be disqualified. This honest mistake should not, however, be allowed to negate the fact of residence in the First District if such fact were established by means more convincing than a mere entry on a piece of paper.” (emphasis supplied) The Court’s Ruling Despite the foregoing doctrines laid down in jurisprudence against the alleged reacquisition by Senator Poe of her Philippine domicile, in a decision penned

by Justice Jose Perez, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Senator Poe. The Court first made an observation that when Grace Poe immigrated to the United States in 1991, it was clear that she had abandoned her original domicile in the Philippines. However, upon her return to the Philippines on 24 May 2005, the Court held that she was able to reestablish her domicile in this country.

The Court said that the voluminous evidence presented by Senator Poe more than sufficed to establish her intent to abandon her U.S. domicile and relocate to the Philippines for good.

The evidence included: Grace Poe’s U.S. passport showing her arrival on 24 May 2005 and her return to the Philippines every time she travelled abroad; e-mail correspondences with a freight company to arrange for the shipment from the U.S. of their household items the Philippines; e-mail with the Philippine Bureau of Animal Industry inquiring how to ship their dog to the Philippines; school records of her children showing enrollment in Philippine schools starting June 2005 and for succeeding years; tax identification card for Senator Grace Poe issued on July 2005; titles for condominium and parking slot issued in 2006 with their corresponding tax declarations; 2005 receipts from the Salvation Army in the U.S. acknowledging donation of items from Senator Grace Poe’s family; a 2006 e-mail to the U.S. Postal Service confirming request for change of address; a final statement from a U.S. based insurance company showing sale of their U.S. home in 2006; a 2011 questionnaire submitted to the U.S. Embassy where Senator Grace Poe indicated that she had been a Philippine resident since May 2005; affidavit from Jesusa Sonora Poe (attesting to the return of Senator Grace Poe in 2005 and their stay in her home until Senator Grace Poe was able to buy condominium unit); and Affidavit from Senator Grace Poe’s husband (confirming that they decided to relocate to the Philippines in 2005 and that he stayed behind in the U.S. only to finish some work and to sell the family continued on p. 11

LEGAL

10

PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHER AS MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF ELECTION INSPECTORS: Should Mandatory Participation Continue?

Public school teachers’ participation under the Omnibus Election Code UNDER Section 164 of B.P. Blg. 881, or the Omnibus Election Code of the Philippines, public school teachers are required to participate as member of the board of election inspectors (BEI).

The minimum qualifications are also provided in Sec. 167 of the same Code, the only disqualification being “if he is related within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity to any member of the board of election inspectors or to any candidate to be voted for in the polling place or his spouse.”

Nowhere in the Code is it found that public school teachers are required also to have immense courage and bravery in the face of inevitable election-related violence while doing their duty as inspectors. They are faced with serious physical injuries, mental anguish and trauma, if not death.

Why teachers?

“It is a role they are bound by law and by their own integrity -to play. The teachers were required to serve poll duty mainly because of the lack of manpower.

But perhaps more important than that, teachers are held in high esteem in the Philippines and are considered the most honest and credible members of the civil service.”

– Antonio Tinio, Chairman of the Alliance of Concerned Teachers, in an article written by Carlos Conde in 2007 entitled Teachers bear the brunt of election violence in the Philippines.

Aside from the fact that manpower is a problem, it is no secret that teachers are hailed as one of the most honest and honorable professionals in the country.

With a meager salary and compensation in their regular work as well as in their duties as members of the BEI, still, teachers do their obligations as provided by law.

By Chynah Marie M. Monzon Saving grace While some teachers find joy and On 26 March 2014, Senator Bam satisfaction in their work as inspectors Aquino filed Senate Bill No. 2178 or despite the risks and hazards involved, the Election Service Reform Act of some expressed their distaste and swore 2014. In the explanatory note of the that they would never serve as inspectors aforementioned bill, it states that it ever again. sought to make election service noncompulsory for public school teachers, “I’ve had enough; I want to look for and to authorize appointment of other another job, even if it’s manual labor,” one qualified citizens, in the following of four teachers abducted in the southern manner: province of Maguindanao said at a news conference in Manila last week. They were The proposed amendment builds on kidnapped, the teachers said, so they could the recognition of its teachers as they not report to election duty, thus ensuring a play an important role in the conduct of failure of elections in their voting precincts.” the democratic processes of the Filipinos (Conde, C., 2007) and extends the space where citizens can actively participate in the reform of The price of a duty mandated by law institutions (emphasis supplied).

According to an article written for GMA News Online on 13 January 2010, Senator Aquino’s explanatory note Filomena Tatlonghari was, in 1995, stated that despite the importance shot during a ballot-snatching incident and bulk of their election-related in Mabini, Batangas. Ballot-snatching work, teachers receive insufficient and murder charges were filed against compensation aggravated further by the perpetrators but the one who shot delay in its release. Teachers have also Filomena was acquitted for murder and been harassed in the past by private only suffered one year jail time while the armies of some politicians. They have other one was still at large. also been prevented from exercising their right to suffrage because they were In 2010, Nellie Banaag and Leticia not registered in the precincts where Ramos were burned to death inside a they were assigned. building while hiding from the men who came to burn the ballot boxes they were Therefore, aside from providing protecting (Conde, C., 2007). non-compulsory service for teachers, the bill addresses key problems of Most publicized are the fates of BEI members such as the minimum Filomena, Nellie and Leticia but there honoraria, insurance, equitable package are still unsung stories of several of their commensurate of their service, and colleagues being abducted, harassed voting privileges. and intimidated before, during and even after the elections were concluded Is non-compulsory service the (Conde, C., 2007). This shows that solution to teachers’ woes? public school teachers’ roles in keeping The bill provides that the BEI shall the election as clean and as streamlined still be composed of a chairperson and as possible is fraught with threats. Thus, two members, all of whom shall be better protection should be afforded public school teachers who are willing them if they were to continue with their and available to render election service. laudable efforts.

Section 3 of the Bill also provides that:

…should there not be enough teachers willing, available or qualified to serve, the Commission may appoint any registered voter of the city or municipality who are of known probity and competence; Provided, that the Chairperson shall be a public school teacher. The appointment of other qualified citizens shall follow the order of preference herein provided: a. Private School Teachers; b. National Government Employees (DepEd Non-Teaching Personnel or other national government officials and employees holding regular or permanent positions, excluding the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police); c. Members of Commission-accredited citizen’s arms and other civil society organizations and non-governmental organizations duly accredited by the Commission; d. Any citizen of known probity and competence who is not involved with any candidate or political party.

In cases where they may not be enough qualified voters, the Commission may oblige qualified public school teachers to render election service. x x x (emphasis supplied) The foregoing provision used the words “willing and available” signifying the non-compulsory nature of the work.

It also provided a list of persons who can be tapped, in case public school teachers are unavailable. Note however, that the Chairperson of the BEI should still be a public school teacher. The last sentence of the provision also mentioned that if the COMELEC is not able to get qualified voters as members of the BEI, qualified school teachers may be obliged to render service.

It may be gleaned from this provision that the non-compulsory service is not really non-compulsory. If the teachers continued on p. 11

DUTERTE’S SCRATCH CARDS: Of Political Inclusiveness and of Potential Violation of Campaign Finance Law

By Mohammad Muktadir Ahmad Estrella

ELECTION cycles in the Philippines in recent years have been characterized by heavy campaign expenditures involving millions, sometimes even billions of pesos.

This is true especially for those running national campaigns. In fact, despite the prohibition against property requirement for those who wish to serve in elective offices, there have been instances where candidates have been disqualified for not having the means to run a national campaign upon the determination of the Commission on Elections (COMELEC).

This kind of political atmosphere creates room for what is referred to as “king makers” in Political Science parlance, who would pour millions to support candidates during elections. In return, these candidates, once elected, are expected to protect and promote the business and political interests of their campaign donors.

Going into the 2016 presidential race, supporters of Mayor Rodrigo “Digong” Duterte of Davao City have been vocal that one of their main concerns is the source of funds needed to sustain and win the polls in May considering that even before the start of official campaign, electionrelated advertisements have been airing on various platforms including television,

radio, and social media. Consistent with their promise that they are going to run a people’s campaign, Duterte’s camp has resorted to creative means of raising funds. Recently, the camp introduced scratch cards, which allow small amounts of contributions from supporters of the Mayor.

On one hand, this development should be welcomed positively given its potential to promote and encourage participation of more people in campaign finance. It spells inclusiveness as the common tao are given concrete means to support their candidates no matter how much they can give. Theoretically, a campaign that is hugely dependent on contributions of the common tao will not be held hostage by business interests and can thereby yield to a government that is for the people, of the people, and by the people. However, the use of scratch cards may also be a potential medium to circumvent the laws.

Section 95 of B.P. Blg. 881, or better known as the Omnibus Election Code of the Philippines, provides a list of those disqualified to give contributions “for purposes of partisan political activity” including: (a) Public or private financial institutions;

(b) Natural and juridical persons operating a public utility or in possession of or exploiting any natural resources of the nation; (c) Natural and juridical persons who hold contracts or sub-contracts to supply the government or any of its divisions, subdivisions or instrumentalities, with goods or services or to perform construction or other works; (d) Natural and juridical persons who have been granted franchises, incentives, exemptions, allocations or similar privileges or concessions by the government or any of its divisions, subdivisions or instrumentalities, including government-owned or controlled corporations; (e) Natural and juridical persons who, within one year prior to the date of the election, have been granted loans or other accommodations in excess of P100,000 by the government or any of its divisions, subdivisions or instrumentalities including government-owned or controlled corporations; (f) Educational institutions which have received grants of public funds amounting to no less than P100,000.00; (g) Officials or employees in the Civil Service, or members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines; and

(h) Foreigners and foreign corporations.

It bears stressing that the law prohibits contributions from these individuals or entities either directly or indirectly.

According to Carlo Africa, the National Secretariat Head of the Legal Network for Truthful Elections (LENTE), the use of scratch cards to support candidates can be used by these entities as a medium to indirectly contribute financially; worse, according to Africa, our present laws do not have sufficient regulations in place to monitor potential violations thereof. This means that although it can potentially bring people to participate in the political process of choosing the next set of our country’s leaders, it can also be breed the status quo as regards the role of king makers in oligarchic politics.

At the end of the day, the introduction of new means to raise funds in support of a candidate and his or her cause, especially if it promotes inclusiveness, must be promoted; but this must be done in consonance and within the bounds of the law. After all, we do want a President who is accountable not to the interests of the ruling few but to the Filipino people. P

LEGAL

IS GRACE POE A RESIDENT? continued from p.9 home).

The Supreme Court said that these evidences were undisputed and even listed by the COMELEC in its resolutions.

The Court also said that during the oral arguments, COMELEC Commissioner Arthur Lim conceded that Senator Poe has shown and intention to remain in the Philippines (animus manendi), albeit denying that she intended to abandon her U.S. domicile (animus non-revertendi).

The Court distinguished the case at bar from the case of Coquilla by stating that unlike Senator Poe, Coquilla was not able to present adequate evidence to prove reestablishment of domicile in the Philippines.

The Court also distinguished the present case from the case of Caballero by saying that unlike Senator Poe, Caballero admitted that his place of work was still abroad and that he only visited the Philippines during his vacations.

The Court further observed that in those two cases (as well as other similar cases cited by the COMELEC), evidence presented on reestablishment of residence was sparse. Thus, the Supreme Court had no choice in those cases but to hold that residence could be counted only from acquisition of a permanent resident visa or from reacquisition of Philippine citizenship.

In contrast, the evidence of Senator Poe is “overwhelming” and “leads to no other conclusion that she decided to permanently abandon her U.S. residence”. Thus, “coupled with her eventual application to reacquire Philippine citizenship and her family’s actual continuous stay in the Philippines over the years,” it is clear that the Senator was able to prove reestablishment of Philippine domicile.

As for the statement in Senator Poe’s COC, the Court believed Senator Poe’s explanation that it was merely a matter of “misunderstanding” the date required in COC. The Court said that the query about residence for COC in the 2013 elections was vague; thus, Senator Poe cannot be blamed for misunderstanding the question. The Court noted that the COMELEC likewise recognized that it was vague when it changed the phrasing of the question for the 2016 elections.

Finally, the Court held that the COMELEC erred in treating the admission the 2013 COC as conclusive.

The Court agreed with Senator Poe that the case of Marcos served as an important precedent in showing that a mistake in the filling up of the COC can be overcome by contrary evidence.

Concurring Opinions Justices Sereno, Velasco, Leonen and Jardeleza have expressed similar grounds in granting Senator Poe’s petition.

First, as established in RomualdezMarcos v. COMELEC (G.R. No. 119976, 18 September 1995), the fact of qualification and not simply the statement in the Certificate of Candidacy (COC) is decisive in determining the length of residence. In addition, because of the fact that the statement in Senator Poe’s 2012 COC was deemed to have been an “honest mistake”, the burden of proof to establish material representation therefore lies with the respondents.

Second, it was held that while the determination of intent to establish a new national domicile cannot be plausibly established by one isolated formal act, Senator Poe had presented overwhelming evidence of her permanent relocation and that the same that commenced on

24 May 2005. Furthermore, the justices opined that the Court recognized that the establishment of a new domicile is undertaken not only through incremental moves but also through initial and preparatory moves. Thus, residence is deemed acquired or changed as soon as these moves are established. What is vital is the context in which such actions were accomplished.

Finally, the qualification of residence is independent of the qualification of citizenship. Senator Poe had manifested that permanent relocation of her residence had occurred even before she took her oath of allegiance in July 2006.

There is not constitutional anchor for the added requirement that within the entire 10-year period prior to the election when the candidate is a resident, he or she must have reacquired his or her natural born citizen status. To require natural-born citizenship status in order to legally consider the commencement of residency is to add and amend the minimum requisites of the Constitution.

Justice Caguioa likewise agreed with the stand of the majority opinion and stated that the COMELEC gravely abused its discretion when it placed the burden of proof upon Senator Poe to prove that she complied with the residency requirement of the presidential office. Justice Caguioa opined that COMELEC failed to prove on the part of Senator Poe intent to deceive, which is characterized as a “deliberate attempt to mislead, misinform, or hide a fact which would otherwise render a candidate ineligible.” The element of intent cannot be proved by the mere finding that a false representation of a material fact was made; according to Justice Caguioa, the candidate’s intent to deceive should have animated the making of the false representation. Instead of proving intent on the part of Senator Poe, Justice Caguioa opined that COMELEC deduced that there was intent to deceive the electorate on the part of Senator Poe by merely relying on her representations in the COC she filed in 2012 for the position of Senator.

Dissenting Opinions Justice Perlas-Bernabe refuted the main decision by stating that Senator Poe reentered the Philippines in 2005 through a visa-entry program known as the “Balikbayan program”. Under this program, it was stated that the person reentering the Philippines obtains entry for only one year. Although the main decision said that the program never intended to force a Balikbayan to leave after one year, Justice Perlas-Bernabe argues that the fact remains that entry under this program provides temporary residential status only, not a permanent one. Hence, Justice Perlas-Bernabe argues that the period from May 2005 until she reacquired her citizenship in 2006 should not be counted as part of the 10-year period. Justice Perlas- Bernabe also argues that despite resigning from her work in the U.S. as early as 2004 and enrolling her kids in the Philippines in 2005, the senator never bothered to apply for a permanent resident status until 2006. Thus, this puts grave doubts about her intention to reside in the Philippines when she came back in May 2005. Moreover Justice PerlasBernabe argues that the bulk of evidence presented by Senator Poe, such as the emails and the tax declarations, occurred when she was still a permanent resident of the U.S. and before she reacquired her Philippine citizenship. Hence, following jurisprudence, they should not be given much weight in ascertaining animus non revertendi.

Justice De Castro, meanwhile, argued in her dissent that following the ruling in Coquilla, the Court should have disregarded the period of physical

presence in the Philippines while Senator Poe was still a non-resident alien. Justice De Castro argues that the Senator was still a non-resident alien from May 2005 to July 2006 as she had not shown any proof that she waived her non-resident status when she came back here in May 2005 as a “Balikbayan visitor”.

As for Justice Del Castillo, he dissented from the main decision by highlighting the fact that tax declarations are not competent evidence to establish domicile in the Philippines given the fact that even non-residents are required to secure TIN for purposes of tax payment. He also said that acquiring a condominium here is also not a competent evidence given the fact that jurisprudence has already held that ownership of a house does not establish domicile. Justice Del Castillo points that Senator Poe maintains two residential property in the U.S. up to this day, one of them being bought in 2008, 3 years after her supposed reestablishment of domicile here in the Philippines. Justice Carpio concurred with Justice Del Castillo’s dissent on this point.

According to Justice Brion, even assuming that Senator Poe can be deemed a Philippine citizen, when she acquired permanent residency status in the U.S. in 1991, she was deemed to have “abandoned the Philippine domicile that she had from the time she was found.”

In addition to this, Justice Brion opined that her intent to stay in the U.S. were supported by the following subsequent incidents: her stay in the U.S. from the years 1991 to 2001; and her eventual status as a naturalized American citizen.

Although Senator Poe and her husband returned to the Philippine in 2005, Poe came back to the Philippines as a visitor under a Balikbayan visa. Although Senator Poe claims that her initial stay in the Philippines were preparatory acts to finally establish residence in the Philippines, Justice Brion opined that the same were inconclusive for the purpose of determining whether she abandoned her U.S. residence. Even Senator Poe’s oath of allegiance on 7 July 2006 did not immediately legally change her domicile; even her application with the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation (BID) for reacquisition of Philippine citizenship under R.A. No. 9225 did not affect her domicile since, according to Justice Brion, Poe admitted that she still had the option of establishing her residence both in the U.S. and in the Philippines. At most, opined Justice Brion, Senator Poe would have established her residency on 18 July 2006 when her application was approved by the BID. With regard to the claim that Senator Poe intended to mislead the electorate regarding her eligibility, Justice Brion argued in the affirmative. In her COC in 2012, Senator Poe admitted that she had been residing in the Philippines for only six (6) years and six (6) months and if the same position were adopted by her, Senator Poe would have been short of three months to comply with the residency requirement for President.

However, in her 2015 COC, Senator Poe claimed that she has been residing in the Philippines since 24 May 2005, and thus complying with the residency requirement. It is thus apparent, stated Justice Brion, that the change in Senator Poe’s residency period was made in order for her to comply with the requirement laid down for the constitution.

Further, while Senator Poe claims that the falsities in her 2012 COC were due to an “honest mistake,” the allegations contained therein were taken under oath. Those claims can be considered an admission against interest and cannot be merely brushed aside. P

11

PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHER AS MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF ELECTION INSPECTORS continued from p.1O would be given the privilege of not working for the BEI then the law should have made it express and not subject to unavailability of other qualified voters.

Again, it is of public knowledge that the job of a BEI is not a walk in the park. The teachers, due to their previous elections experiences would opt to take advantage of this newly minted law in favor of their interests. The other qualified voters, aware of the possible hazards and threats of working as a BEI, would not readily apply as such.

This concern is bolstered by the fact that Section 4 of the bill provides that “notwithstanding the last paragraph in the immediately preceding section, a public school teacher may refuse from rendering election service on grounds, such as but not limited to, health, age, or security concerns.”

If this were the case, then there may not be anyone volunteering to be part of the BEI anymore. In relation to this, how would the COMELEC handle accepting reasons for declining a BEI appointment? Instead of just handling appointments for the BEI, there would be an added job of handling refusal of appointments and searching for substitutes.

Effect on the 2016 National Elections “In the 2016 elections, the provisions of the said law would not yet be applicable for it is still pending approval

by President Aquino. The benefits are to take effect during the 2019 elections,” says Patrick Arcellana from the Legal Network for Truthful Elections (LENTE).

Arcellana added, “The effect of the law is that there is a manifestation of the efforts of the teachers regarding their own rights. It shows that their collective voices are properly heard.”

As to the concern that a huge number of teachers would prefer not serving during the 2016 national elections, Arcellana is positive that teachers will still opt to work as BEI. “They personally have expressed their desire to serve during the elections as responsible organs of society. It is just that they want better and safer working conditions for their fellow teachers.”

Conclusion This amendment of the Omnibus Election Code is an important step towards better protecting the lives of our public school teachers. However, manpower will still a problem. The solution must start from the root of the problem: the unscrupulous activities of people behind these election-related violence. The latter is the main reason why not only teachers, but also other people veer away from serving during the elections. If election-related violence is slowly, if not permanently eradicated, then there would be little need to require qualified voters to volunteer, as they would initiate the volunteering themselves. P

12

LEGAL

THE COMPLICATED SITUATION OF PREMATURE CAMPAIGNING: Revisiting the doctrine laid down in Penera v. COMELEC

By Erica May O. Gana

AT PRESENT, candidates for both national and local office can no longer be held liable for premature election campaigning. Section 80 of B.P. Blg. 881, also known as the Omnibus Election Code, defined the offense in the following manner: Sec. 80. Election campaign or partisan political activity outside campaign period. – It shall be unlawful for any person, whether or not a voter or candidate, or for any party, or association of persons, to engage in an election campaign or partisan political activity except during the campaign period: Provided, That political parties may hold political conventions or meetings to nominate their official candidates within thirty days before the commencement of the campaign period and forty-five days for Presidential and Vice-Presidential election.

In an article written by William Depasupil in 2015 entitled “Comelec powerless vs premature campaigning,” COMELEC Chairperson Andres Bautista admitted that the provision of the Omnibus Election Code punishing premature campaigning was rendered inutile by the Supreme Court in Penera v. COMELEC (G.R. No. 181613, 25 November 2009), where the Court ruled that due to the wording of R.A. No. 9369, the law which amended the Omnibus Election Code, both local and national candidates cannot be held liable for premature campaigning prior to the beginning of the campaign period; thus, premature campaigning was effectively removed as an election violation.

Antecedent Facts of the Penera Case The question regarding premature campaigning was brought to the attention of the Supreme Court when, on 2 April 2007, a Petition for Disqualification was filed against Rosalinda Panera, a candidate for the position of Mayor of the municipality of Sta. Monica, Surigao del Norte. A disqualification case against the candidates for Vice Mayor and Sangguniang Bayan who belonged to the same political party were likewise filed before the COMELEC’s Regional Election Director of Region XIII. According to petitioner Edgar Andanar, who was likewise running for the position of Mayor of Sta. Monica, Penera was unlawfully engaging in premature election campaigning when, a day before the start of the authorized campaign period, Penera and her partymates participated in a motorcade in an attempt to advertise that they were running for positions in local government.

Both the Second Division of COMELEC and the COMELEC en banc ruled in favor of Andanar and held Penera guilty of premature campaigning. They held that the pieces of evidence presented by Andanar – various affidavits and pictures which support the allegation that a motorcade was conducted

by Penera and her partymates – were sufficient to show that Penera violated Section 80 of the Omnibus Election Code.

alleged misconduct, a candidate and could therefore not be punished under Section 80 of the Omnibus Election Code – the Court held that even though one is not officially a candidate after the filing of one’s COC but before the start of the campaign period, one nevertheless expresses his intent to run as a candidate in the upcoming elections upon the filing of one’s COC. Thus, the Court held that the commission by an “unofficial candidate” of the acts defined under Section 79 (b) of the Omnibus Election Code can be “logically and reasonably construed for the purpose of promoting his/her candidacy.”

Because of such violation, Aznar was disqualified, in accordance with the mandate of Section 68 of the same Code that a candidate who is found by the COMELEC guilty of violating Section 80 shall be disqualified from However, the Supreme Court also continuing as a candidate. held that it is only after the offender officially becomes a candidate at September 2009 Decision the start of the campaign period When the case was elevated to can the offender’s premature the Supreme Court, the justices campaigning be considered for his initially upheld the ruling of the or her disqualification. The Court COMELEC en banc. In finding that reasoned that this is because it only Aznar’s conduct of a motorcade at the start of the campaign period was sufficiently established by the that the advantages of the offender’s evidence presented by both parties, premature campaigning would the Court held that the conduct of accrue to the offender’s benefit. the same is a form of partisan political activity which falls squarely within To further support its argument, the definition of “election campaign” the Supreme Court likewise alluded or “partisan political activity” under to the legislative intent behind Section 79 (b) of the Omnibus the prohibition against premature Election Code. campaigning which is “to level the playing field for candidates To determine whether the conduct of public office, to equalize the of the motorcade was punishable as situation between the popular or rich an act of premature campaigning, the candidates, on one hand, and lesserCourt first lengthily discussed the known or poorer candidates, on change in the definition of the term the other, by preventing the former “candidate.” from enjoying undue advantage in exposure and publicity on account of Under Section 79 (a) of the their resources and popularity.”

Code, a candidate is defined as “any person aspiring for or seeking an November 2009 Resolution elective public office, who has filed In a surprising turn of events, the a certificate of candidacy (COC) Supreme Court, in resolving the by himself or through an accredited matters raised in Penera’s Motion political party, aggroupment, or for Reconsideration, overturned coalition of parties.” its earlier decision and adopted the position of Justice Carpio in his However, when R.A. No. 9369 dissent. was passed, Section 15 of the same changed the definition of “candidate” Justice Carpio, in writing for by considering persons who filed the Supreme Court, held that the their COC as candidates only at majority decision was going against the start of the campaign period the clear intent of the law, particularly for which they filed their COC. the intent behind Section 15 of R.A. Furthermore, Section 15 states No. 9369, when it ruled that a person that “unlawful acts and omissions who files a COC may be considered a applicable to a candidate shall effect candidate even before the beginning only upon the start of the campaign of the campaign period. period.” Section 15 is a reproduction of Section 11 of R.A. No. 8436 which In the case of Lanot v. COMELEC provided for the specifications of the (G.R. No. 164858, 16 November official ballots in case of an automated 2006), the Court had recognized election. that when legislators drafted Section 11 of R.A. No. 8436 and effectively In arguing against the position moved the deadline for the filing of taken by Justice Antonio Carpio the COC to an earlier date, they did in his Dissenting Opinion – that so intending only to give ample time Penera was not, at the time of the for printing the official ballots; the

lawmakers did not intend that the persons who submitted their COC to meet the earlier deadline be deemed as a candidate before the election period should begin.

The new position taken by the Supreme Court was further strengthened by its review of Section 15 of R.A. No. 9369, which clearly mandates that election offenses can be committed only when the campaign period begins; thus, the Court deduced that the only consequence of the same is that such acts, if committed before the beginning of the campaign period, are lawful.

Application of the Penera Doctrine According to Chairman Bautista, the decision of the Supreme Court in Penera tied the hands of COMELEC and disabled the constitutional body from policing activities before the start of the campaign period. It became difficult for COMELEC to ensure a level playing field for both rich and poor candidates (Depasupil, W., 2015).

Recently, however, COMELEC may have found a way to sidestep the Supreme Court’s ruling in Penera.

According to Atty. Alberto Agra, a professor in the Ateneo Law School and a known expert in election law, while there is nothing in law prohibiting premature campaigning, COMELEC released a number of resolutions which proscribed certain acts before the commencement of the campaign period. One such prohibited act is the posting of election propaganda outside COMELEC-designated areas.

The Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA), in a campaign entitled Oplan Baklas, enforced these resolutions by taking down illegally posted election propaganda beginning 9 February 2016, the start of the campaign period for candidates vying for national office and before the commencement of the campaign period for local officials. The implication of the conduct of this campaign, according to Atty. Agra, is that local candidates are being treated as “quasi-candidates” by the COMELEC since the rules meant for candidates are being applied to them even before they are deemed by law to be such.

As of the writing of this article, however, no candidate has filed a case questioning the acts of MMDA and COMELEC as contrary to the Penera ruling. P