The ball is in our hands
After so much noise, especially from retired Commissioner Maria Rowena Guanzon, the COMELEC First Division finally released its resolution, which dismissed the petitions for the disqualification of presidential candidate Ferdinand Marcos Jr.
Many people may disagree with the decision, as some even criticized it as fraught with flawed logic. Until now, the issue as to whether or not Marcos’ non-filing of income tax returns for years is a crime involving moral turpitude is not yet settled as a reversal is still possible. But the point is that the body tasked by our Constitution to resolve the DQ cases against Marcos has already discharged its constitutional duty.
Although the case may still have to go through the COMELEC En Banc, a reversal of the decision to dismiss the petitions is highly unlikely since the majority who voted for the dismissal are not expected to change their minds. The final legal battle will then happen at the Supreme Court. With only three months from the elections, the Supreme Court may not decide the cases before the election day.
In all probability, the Filipino people will decide the issue of non-filing of income tax returns or the tax evasion issue of Marcos as they choose their president. If Marcos is elected, the issue is judged as irrelevant by the people who elected him.
Even if Marcos is elected, a possible scenario is that the Supreme Court will later decide in favor of his disqualification after his election. Considering that the issue is a constitutional one, the Supreme Court has the power to resolve it with finality.
Suppose Marcos is disqualified by the Supreme Court but elected by the people. This will lead to a situation where the unelected justices deprive the people of being governed by their elected president.
However, the Supreme Court has been cautious in exercising its judicial power. In many cases, the Court has repeatedly stressed that the people’s sovereign will, as expressed through the ballot, must be given fullest effect. In case of doubt, political laws must be interpreted to give life and spirit to the popular mandate.
This judicial attitude will transform the issue of Marcos’ non-filing of tax returns and alleged tax evasion into a political and moral question.
Is the non-filing of tax returns for years a wicked, deviant behavior constituting an immoral, unethical, or unjust departure from ordinary social standards? Do you want the next president to have a record of conviction? The ball is in our hands, and your opinion is as good as mine. But at the end of the day, we all have to bow down to popular wisdom expressed on the ballot.