Metro Manila (CNN Philippines) — A week since a leaked memo sparked a row between two officials of the Commission on Elections (Comelec), Chairman Andres Bautista proposed to create an “ethics committee” within the poll body.
“I also proposed the creation of an ethics committee similar to what they have in the Supreme Court (SC) in respect of actuations of members of any collegial body, including the chairman,” Bautista said on Friday (January 15).
Related: Comelec en banc to tackle Guanzon comment
The root of the issue: whether or not Comelec Commissioner Rowena Guanzon had the authority to submit a pleading before the SC on her own — without the express approval of the Comelec en banc.
Official resolution
Also on Friday, the Comelec en banc released Resolution No. 10039 to “ratify and validate” the comment Guanzon submitted on January 7. The comment was a response to one of Sen. Grace Poe’s two petitions to overturn Comelec rulings cancelling her certificate of candidacy (COC) for president for “misrepresenting” her citizenship and residency.
In the January 7 memo, Bautista threatened to declare the comment “unauthorized” if Guanzon failed to explain why she skipped seeking the en banc’s approval. In a statement posted on her Twitter page, Guanzon reasoned that she and her staff were pressed for time to beat the deadline.
Bautista himself earlier admitted Comelec would be hard-pressed to submit pleadings to the SC on time after Solicitor General Florin Hilbay opted out as the poll body’s counsel. In fact, Comelec asked the SC to extend the deadline. However, Bautista insisted Guanzon went out of bounds.
Guanzon also said the en banc, when they discussed the matter on January 5, did not require her to show them or let them sign her comment before submitting it to the SC.
En banc session
CNN Philippines obtained a transcript of the January 5 Comelec en banc session. In it, Guanzon agreed that there needed to be an en banc resolution declaring her and Commissioner Arthur Lim as representatives to the January 19 oral arguments at the SC.
Here is a portion of the exchange among Bautista, Guanzon and Commissioner Luie Guia:
Guanzon: So is it necessary, Chair, for us to have an en banc resolution on who will argue for the commission?
Bautista: I think we should just decide that later on, if there are two divisions and (the cases) will not be consolidated.
Guanzon: One each?
Bautista: Then I think the division should be given kumbaga autonomy, freedom to choose who their gladiator will be.
Guia: Yeah but there would have to be an en banc resolution.
Guanzon: There has to be an en banc resolution.
It is unclear from the exchange, however, if the two needed to get consensus from the en banc to file their pleadings.
Towards the end of the session, Bautista told Guanzon: “In the meanwhile (sic), why don’t we just come up with your early argument and then you know, obviously, we will also break that out to the media and then again, we will explain why we are doing it because nga we don’t want it to be moot and academic.”
The conflict between Bautista and Guanzon made headlines and prompted speculations that Comelec was in disarray. Both officials denied this.
At the height of the fallout, Bautista gathered the commissioners to figure out a way to move forward. On Tuesday (January 12), the en banc, including Guanzon, made a rare statement to media, saying the en banc decided to affirm Guanzon’s comment and that they remained united.
Guanzon said the statement showed ‘that the Commission on Elections en banc is united in ensuring the electorate and the public that we are prepared to defend our decisions in the Supreme Court and the integrity of our commission.”
“All’s well that ends well,” said Lim, adding that they will release an official resolution, if not that day, then the day after, to solidify their decision.
When the document finally came out three days later, it curtly gave the authorization that Guanzon’s earlier submission lacked. It officially appointed Lim and Guanzon as Comelec’s representatives to the SC oral arguments.
It also bore a handwritten note from Bautista: “Subject to continuing discussions regarding the procedure in the filing of pleadings in the Supreme Court and the creation of an ethics committee.”
Speaking to reporters later in the day, Bautista explained the Commission en banc had to act swiftly and approve Guanzon’s comment but it doesn’t mean a Comelec member may now submit pleadings to the SC without consulting the other members.
“Kasi medyo rush itong issue on the comment of Commissioner Guanzon, [so we said] why don’t we just first decide what to do with the comment of Commissioner Guanzon. We can deal with (the procedure) next time,” Bautista said.
In an earlier interview, Bautista said the row with Guanzon was just a “misunderstanding” on the procedures, adding that it was uncommon for Comelec to have to defend itself before the high court.
Guanzon reacted to that, saying “it was nice” of Bautista to acknowledge the misunderstanding.
With a committee to oversee matters of ethics, Bautista said he and his fellow Comelec members were hoping a squabble over authority and procedures would never happen again.
