DEFEATED vice presidential candidate Ferdinand “Bongbong” R. Marcos, Jr. has asked the Supreme Court to reconsider the dismissal of his election protest, saying he was not given the chance to present all evidence.
“It is an integral part of procedural due process that the parties be given the opportunity to present all evidence relevant to settle all the issues involved,” he said in a 95-page motion for reconsideration.
In a separate statement, the son of the late dictator Ferdinand E. Marcos said the court sitting as the Presidential Electoral Tribunal had sacrificed his right to due process “in exchange for expediency.”
“What is at stake here is the second-highest position in the country,” he said. “This is not something to be taken lightly. To dismiss such an important election protest because of the absence of procedural rules is an affront to our constitutional right of due process.”
The 15-member tribunal in February rejected Mr. Marcos’s election case unanimously for lack of merit, as it ruled his claims “appeared bare, laden with generic and repetitious allegations and lacked critical information.”
Mr. Marcos filed the protest in June 2016 after narrowly losing to Ms. Robredo, alleging widespread fraud.
In the Philippines, the President and vice president are elected separately and can come from different political parties. Both are barred by law from seeking reelection. Their six-year terms will end in 2022.
A resolution released in Oct. 2019 showed that Ms. Robredo’s lead against Mr. Marcos in the pilot provinces of Camariñes Sur, Iloilo, and Negros Oriental — where he alleged cheating took place — rose by about 15,000 votes after the initial recount.
“Mr. Marcos would be the luckiest man in the world if he could reverse the unanimous decision by merely repeating the same issues and arguments already decided by the entire court,” Romulo B. Macalintal, Ms. Robredo’s lawyer, told reporters on Tuesday.
Justice Marvic Mario Victor F. Leonen, who wrote the decision, earlier said Mr. Marcos had failed to specify the precincts where fraud took place and how it happened. — Bianca Angelica D. Añago