Euro Canals News

Your most trusted news channel

THE Duty to Energize the Republic through the Enlightenment of the Youth, or Duterte Youth party-list, filed on Tuesday a petition before the Supreme Court seeking to block former Commission on Elections (Comelec) Commissioner Rowena Guanzon from assuming his seat as P3PWD party-list representative in the House.

In a 21-page petition filed by Duterte Youth Rep. Marie Cardema and Chairman Carlo Cardema, the petitioners also sought the issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) and/or preliminary injunction directing the respondent Comelec to refrain from issuing a certificate of proclamation to the substituting nominees of P3PWD led by Guanzon.

The petitioners said the TRO should also enjoin the House of Representatives from allowing Guanzon and substituting nominees from assuming as members of the lower house.

Aside from the Comelec and the House, also named as respondents were P3PWD party-list and its nominees led by Guanzon.

The petitioners are also asking the SC to annul the resolution issued by the Comelec approving the “illegal” and “belated” substitution of P3PWD’s nominees last June 14, 2022.

The Comelec resolution, according to the petitioners, was issued in violation of Comelec promulgated rules on party-list substitution since it was made after the elections.

The petitioners noted that under Comelec Resolution No. 9366 promulgated in 2012 as amended by Resolution No. 10690 on January 27, 2021, the withdrawal of nominations and substitution of nominees due to withdrawal shall be made not later than November 15, 2021.

“In this case, it is clear that the submission of resignation and withdrawal by the original nominees and certificates of nomination and acceptance of nomination of P3PWD’s new set of nominees on June 14, 2022 is in violation of the deadline set by the Commission’s own promulgated Resolution No. 9366, as amended by Resolution No. 10690,” the petitioners pointed out.

Even assuming that the mass resignation of P3PWD’s original nominees does not constitute voluntary withdrawal but incapacity or even death, the substitution is still illegal, according to the petitioners.