Judiciary rejects petitions for certiorari and preliminary injunction

The University Student Government’s (USG) Judiciary branch denied both petitions filed by Santugon sa Tawag ng Panahon (Santugon) requesting for preliminary injunction and certiorari in a statement released last March 13.

In their separate decisions, the Judiciary rejected the request for preliminary injunction, citing that the petition holds no merit as the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) had the right to remove the ineligible candidates.

Meanwhile, they decided to reject the petition for certiorari and prohibition on the grounds that the agreement considering ineligible candidates and imposing four minor offenses was unlawful based on the Election Code.

The words on paper

Preliminary injunctions are frequently issued when there is an injustice in the system which causes more harm than good to a certain situation. They are filed to preserve the status quo and issued when a judgment has not yet been made. Considering this, the petitioners accompanied the petition with a request for a Temporary Restraining Order on the 2015 USG General Elections (GE).

In this case, the petition for preliminary injunction was based on the petition filed by Mikee De Vega and Jason Dizon during the USG plebiscite earlier this academic year–a situation which was also argued to be unlawful and unconstitutional.

The petitioners also mentioned that there was deprivation of the student rights because of the whole party’s ineligibility due to “mere technicalities.” Because of this, the petitioners felt that there was a breach of the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), stressing the need for an injunction to prevent further impending damages.

The Judiciary denied this petition for preliminary injunction because they wanted to uphold the control of the COMELEC over the GE, giving them the right to retract candidates even if they had already been recognized.

They also stated in their petition that if Alyansang Tapat sa Lasallista (Tapat) and an independent candidate were able to accept their ineligibility, Santugon should as well. Further, the Judiciary argued that the students’ rights were not violated since an election will still push through.

Certiorari, meanwhile, is issued when a party wants to appeal to a higher court based on a lower court’s decision. Prohibition is issued to prohibit a lower party to decide on matters that should be decided by the higher court.

In their second request, Santugon argued that COMELEC’s decision to retract the qualification of the candidates for the GE was unlawful because it violated provisions in the USG Constitution and the Election Code, such as violations of the students’ right to suffrage. The petitioners also stated that COMELEC was fully aware of violating the MOA initially and that they should have respected their prior decision.

To support this argument, Santugon cited that estoppel, or as defined in the petition, “[a means] to prevent persons from going back on their own acts and representations, to the prejudice of others who have relied on them” should have been taken into consideration to prevent further damages to the ongoing GE.

The Judiciary objected to the petition for certiorari and prohibition because it was agreed upon by all the involved parties that the MOA should be strictly followed. Therefore, COMELEC had valid grounds to declare candidates ineligible, regardless of the breach of contract.

“Typifies tyranny”

Tapat issued a statement last March 14 calling into question the arguments in Santugon’s petition. In their statement, Tapat recalled the incident in the 2010 GE where their entire slate was declared ineligible to run, citing that though they disagreed with COMELEC’s ruling, they still respected it on the grounds that it was based on the rule of law.

On the other hand, they claimed that Santugon has abused the process by not following the law and pushing for reconsideration. “It typifies tyranny. It sends the message that those behind the moves to defeat the COMELEC’s ruling are not bound by rules and legal commitments,” the statement said.

They also argued that Santugon’s argument of upholding estoppel was flawed, since Santugon was fully aware from the beginning that violations were being made and that the party was also knowledgeable of the requirements needed.

Furthermore, Tapat also argued that the declaration of ineligibility was not a violation of any rights, but is simply a consequence for not following the proper procedures.

Not always black and white

Santugon President Pam Ramos defended the party saying that, “Siguro what should [have] been cleared from the very beginning is how the MOA should be followed and how the certain provisions in the MOA [require strict compliance] kasi I think there are certain provisions that were not included.”

Santugon Outer Core President Jannine Sy also expressed her sentiments, saying, “There’s so much damage that had been done already, and we’ve exerted so much effort just to know that we can’t run in the end.”

USG Chief Legislator and Santugon’s supposed Vice President for Internal Affairs candidate Patrick Kahn, one of the authors of the petitions, feared that the recent events may affect the integrity of the elections, citing that the student body’s perception may have a negative impact on the overall outcome of the GE.

“I don’t want students to lose faith because it’s been such a black and white situation.

But in real life, the electorate process and laws are always molded, amended, and annulled in order to adapt to maintain the right to suffrage, which is to provide choices [and] provide informed decisions to the students,” he explained.

Nonetheless, Kahn accepted the Judiciary’s verdict, but hoped that beyond following the law to the letter, the welfare of the student body should have also been taken into consideration.

What’s next?

Kahn shared that the Legislative Assembly (LA) is already working on having special elections held before the end of the year to fill the missing positions in the USG resulting from the disqualifications.

According to the Election Code, a re-election should be held within the first four weeks of the following trimester of the academic year to fill vacancies. However, Kahn stated that the LA has the ability to make revisions in the code.

“We have legal precedence to hold in the third term, so we will be pushing to have those positions filled by the end of the year,” he furthered.

Should it push through, Kahn stated that the special elections will start by the end of March, right after the GE ends, and continue up to the first week of April.

Asked if the party has any further plans on the issue, Ramos replied, “We’re not done yet.”