Posted on

Robredo Camp to Bongbong Marcos: Blame Yourself why the Electoral Protest is Delayed

Bongbong Marcos

welcome By: Elena Grace Flores

Leni Robredo’s Counsel, Atty. Romulo Macalintal fires back to Bongbong Marcos after the latter said that the VP’s camp is delaying the electoral protest. He said to Marcos that he should blame himself. Atty. Maria Bernardette Sardillo explained that it took Marcos around six months or so to submit a resolution to set the preliminary conference in motion. This should have followed immediately after the Supreme Court that sits as the Presidential Tribunal ruled that his protest is

Youtube video from; Elena Grace Flores
[VIDEO]: Kung mayroong dapat sisihin si dating Sen. Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., kung bakit tumatagal ang election protest na ihinain nito laban kay Vice President Leni Robredo ay ang kanyang sarili dahil depektibo ang kanyang ihinaing kaso.

Macalintal: Marcos’ Protest is Defective

“Now it can be told again. The alleged delay in the resolution of Marcos’ protest could not be attributed to Robredo; it is because of the ­defective protest filed by Marcos and the erroneous and unrelated cases he has been citing to support his actions,” said Macalintal. However, he did not elaborate on the alleged defects of the election protest filed.

PET Cannot Move Fast because of the Defects?

Macalintal put all the faults in Marcos’ shoulders for the delay. He declared; “Had his protest not been so defective, there would have been no reason for all these prelimi­naries issues to be resolved by the PET or Presi­dential Electoral Tribunal. So, Macalintal is really convinced by the way he talks that Marcos is at fault – and this is a manifestation of a dangerous liar. He truly believes in his lies.

Wrong Comparison?

The veteran election lawyer is not yet satisfied. He continued to mock Marcos by saying; “Like a vagrant, Marcos’ claim has no visible means of factual or legal support.” He explained that the comparison used such as the Garcia vs HRET or House ­Electoral Tribunal and Lloren vs Comelec in his petition at the PET to dismiss Robredo’s counter-protest has no basis because there were no similarities at all with his client’s case.

Robredo’s Non-Payment is not against the Law?

Robredo’s camp also believed that their holding on to the P8 Million payment as ordered by PET is not against any law. It is because they filed a motion for reconsideration two days before the deadline. However, Marcos’ camp has a different interpretation of the law. This is why they paid the P36 Million first before appealing to PET to lower the deposit. Sad to say, only the Supreme Court can answer who’s right.

Facebook Comments