SC denies ex-Arroyo lawyer's appeal to abolish PET

The Supreme Court has denied election lawyer Romulo Macalintal's motion for reconsideration seeking to abolish the Presidential Electoral Tribunal. The Supreme Court's 15-member bench convenes itself as the PET, with the chief justice sitting as ex-officio chair and the 14 other associate justices as members. The PET resolves election contests relating only to the presidential and vice presidential races. In a 14-page decision promulgated last June 7, the high court unanimously affirmed its Nov. 23, 2010 ruling that said the creation of the tribunal is expressly mandated by the 1987 Constitution. "We cannnot agree with his insistence that the creation of the PET is unconstitutional. We reiterate tht the abstraction of the Supreme Court acting as a Presidential Electoral Tribunal from the unequivocal grant of jurisdiction in the last paragraph of Section 4, Article VII of the Constitution is sound and tenable," said the high court. The Charter states that: "The Supreme Court, sitting en banc, shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of the President or Vice President, and may promulgate its rules for the purpose." Associate Justice Eduardo Nachura wrote the SC's decision before he retired last June 13. Currently, the PET is resolving the electoral protest filed by former senator and incoming Transportation Secretary Manuel Roxas II against Vice President Jejomar Binay, who beat him by about 700,000 votes in the May 2010 polls. Macalintal's appeal In his motion for reconsideration, Macalintal cited a concurring opinion to the SC's majority decision nullifying Executive Order No. 1 for being unconstitutional. The contested order created the Truth Commission which would have investigation the various corruption scandals that hounded the administration of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Macalintal, who also served as election lawyer of Mrs. Arroyo, said he shared Associate Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro's view that the President has no authority to create the Truth Commission because only Congress has the power to create the office. The lawyer added that just as the President cannot create the truth body, so is the Supreme Court barred from constituting itself as a Presidential Electoral Tribunal. The high court, however, did not agree with this. "Petitioner's application of our decision in [the legality of EO No. 1] to the present case is an unmitigated quantum leap," the SC said. It explained that the Charter's provisions on the separate powers of the executive and judicial branches are different. "And as previously adverted to, the basis for the constitution of the PET was, in fact, mentioned in the deliberations of the members of the Constitutional Commission during the drafting of the present Constitution," the Supreme Court said. The SC did not indicate whether its decision is already final but the Rules of Court prohibit the filing of second motions for reconsideration.Section 5, Rule 37 provides that: "No party shall be allowed a second motion for reconsideration of a judgment or final order." — RSJ, GMA News