DLSU Prof on Leni Robredo invoking Rule 65 of PET for dismissal of Marcos election protest: “They are wrong.” Read why!

Leni Robredo and her lawyer wants PET to adhere to its Rule 65 in relation to Marcos’ electoral protest.

In short, Robredo wants the outright dismissal of Bongbong Marcos protest because according to Robredo’s understanding of Rule 65, the only basis for settling a protest is the ballot recount. [Rappler]

Meanwhile, DLSU professor Antonio Contreras said Robredo and her lawyer’s assertion was wrong.

Contreras remarked that the PET is not designed to be just an adding machine.

The PET, according to Contreras is mandated to look at other “proofs” and to take into account “all circumstances” before they can claim that protestant Marcos will most probably fail to make out his case.

Definitely Contreras asserted that the missing ballots, wet ballots, tampered ballot boxes and missing ballot images would qualify as “proofs” and significant “circumstances” that can bolster his ability to make out his case.

Contreras ended the post by asking what part of PET Rule 65 mentioned “substantial recovery” as claimed by the Robredo camp?

You may read Antonio Contreras full FB post below.

The PET is not designed to be just an adding machine.

And it is in Rule 65.

Basa.

“If upon examination of such ballots and proof, and after making reasonable allowances, the Tribunal is convinced that, taking all circumstances into account, the protestant or counter-protestant, will most probably fail to make out his case, the protest may fortwith be dismissed.”

Robredo, her lawyers and apologists make it appear that the only basis for settling a protest is the ballot recount.

They are wrong.

The PET is also mandated to look at other “proofs” and to take into account “all circumstances” before they can claim that protestant Marcos will most probably fail to make out his case.

Certainly, missing ballots, wet ballots, tampered ballot boxes and missing ballot images would qualify as “proofs” and significant “circumstances” that can bolster his ability to make out his case.

At full tank ina. Pwede ba. Hanapin niyo nga kung saan binanggit dyan ang “substantial recovery.”

Nakakabobo na sa totoo lang.

Your comment?

Source: Antonio Contreras

Add Comment