Philippines – In their most recent accommodation to the Commission on Elections, candidates looking for the undoing of official competitor Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr’s. Certificate of Candidacy presented another affirmation expressing that the court has no records of the respondent’s consistence or installment of fine in his duty case.
In a 67-page Memorandum and Formal Offer of Evidence, candidates through their legal counselors drove by Theodore Te made a last bid for the Comelec’s Second Division to deny proper way or drop Marcos’ COC for the 2022 public decisions.
As an outcome of the abovementioned, additionally barring the name of respondent Ferdinand Romualdez Marcos Jr. from the rundown of true possibility for President in the authority voting form for the May 2022 National Elections.
The candidates blamed Marcos for making two material distortions in his COC. First was expressing he is qualified for the workplace he is trying to be chosen for, and when he pronounced after swearing to tell the truth by ticking the “no” case that he has never been viewed as obligated for any offense that conveys unending preclusion punishment.
As an issue of law and reality, respondent Marcos Jr. was, is, and still needs to be excluded to campaign for any position because of his conviction for abusing the [National Internal Revenue Code], which conveys with it the outcome of ceaseless preclusion/
In contending this, candidates refered to the Quezon City Regional Trial Court conviction of Marcos of non-documenting of his Income Tax Returns from 1982-1985 a similar contention brought up in discrete preclusion suits likewise recorded against Marcos.
They contended that Marcos’ conviction by conclusive judgment for abusing the assessment code “consequently and ipso facto conveys the punishment of unending preclusion.
Morever, This in any case, and regardless of the entry of more than a long time since the certainty of his criminal conviction, Respondent Marcos Jr., to this date, has pompously and stubbornly neglected to serve his criminal punishment as forced by the Regional Trial Court in its Decision dated July 27, 1995, as halfway attested by the Court of Appeals in its Decision dated October 31, 1997.