Commission on Elections Chairman Andres Bautista was able to dodged a big bullet in his way.
And this bullet was not just an ordinary bullet but a career
threatening one, the impeachment case filed by Former congressman Jacinto Paras
and lawyer Ferdinand Topacio last week was dismissed in favor of the COMELEC
chair. The House Justice committee found
the complaint insufficient in form, paving the way for getting Bautista off the
hook.
Manila Times seasoned columnist Antonio P. Contreras in his
September 23, 2017 column titled “The
People are not yet through with Andy Bautista” explains that the dismissal of
the impeachment complaint against the COMELEC chair does not make it a washing
of all his accountabilities to the citizenry, and this is not because of his
marital woes with his wife but because of his alleged ill gotten or unexplained
wealth which he did not declare in his statement of assets, liabilities and new
worth (SALN) and the possible rigging of the national elections because of the
alleged commissions he took from Smartmatic.
Commission on Elections Chairman Andres Bautista (Photo credit to Philstar) |
I have quoted the full article below:
THE elected representatives of the people, or at least the
26 members of the justice committee of the House of Representatives, including
majority leader Rudy FariƱas and its chair, Rep. Rey Umali, have decided to
dismiss the impeachment complaint filed against Commission on Elections
(Comelec) chairman Andy Bautista on the grounds that it was insufficient in
form.
The fatal flaw ranged from a wrong verification, to the
claim that it appeared to have been submitted to the
House and not to the justice committee, to the allegation that those who filed it have no personal knowledge of what they alleged.
House and not to the justice committee, to the allegation that those who filed it have no personal knowledge of what they alleged.
The junking of the petition was simply based on a
technicality, and not on the substance of the allegations.
And yet we already heard Andy Bautista proclaiming that the
dismissal is the beginning of his exoneration.
It behooves one to ask by what figment of imagination Bautista could claim that a dismissal based on alleged deficiency in form can lead to a celebration of his innocence of the charges.
It behooves one to ask by what figment of imagination Bautista could claim that a dismissal based on alleged deficiency in form can lead to a celebration of his innocence of the charges.
Bautista should be reminded that while he may have the
presumption of innocence on his side, this is simply because the people’s
representatives have denied the complainants the chance to prove his guilt.
But we, the people, are not yet done with him.
But we, the people, are not yet done with him.
The people have an enormous interest in Andy Bautista’s
case, and it has nothing to do with his marital problems but with the
allegations made about his possible wealth which he did not declare in his
statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN). Also of interest is his
alleged taking of commissions from a law firm in relation to a legal service
provided to Smartmatic, which was the provider for the automated election
system,
At the very heart of these allegations is the fact that
they could cast a cloud of doubt over the integrity of our election system, one
that Andy Bautista presides over.
In fact, if it is true that the electoral process was
compromised by his acts, then such would have been a blatant attack on our
democratic institutions, and would have violated the political rights of the
people.
Article 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(UDHR) explicitly states that “the will of the people shall be the basis of the
authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine
elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by
secret ballot or by equivalent free voting procedures.” This is reiterated in
letter b or Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR).
Hence, Andy Bautista’s case is of utmost importance to our
democracy, for its integrity hangs in the balance based on his guilt or
innocence. Such would have been clearly established had the House justice
committee allowed substance to take precedence over mere technicality.
While one can be skeptical of the remaining remedy in the
hands of the House, where one third of the entire membership can decide to
reverse the decision of the justice committee, which frankly is a remote
possibility, everything is not yet lost for the people.
Even if Andy Bautista is an impeachable official, and the
dismissal of the impeachment complaint filed against him effectively inoculates
him with another year of immunity, there is nothing in the Constitution and the
laws that prevent the Ombudsman or the Department of Justice through the
National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) from investigating his actions.
Also, there is nothing that bars the Senate, and even the
House, from investigating matters pertaining to the issues raised in the
impeachment complaint, either in their oversight functions or in aid of
legislation.
We also have to take comfort in the fact that many of the
allegations against Andy Bautista are in the nature of a conspiracy. He
allegedly has received commissions from a private law firm on an
election-related matter. He has admitted that the bank accounts that he failed
to declare in his SALN are all joint accounts for which his co-depositors are
not impeachable officials, and therefore do not have the same kind of immunity
that he has. As such, parties who are mentioned can be investigated, and if
found with probable cause then appropriate cases can be filed. Even as Andy
Bautista is immune from suit, his acts will be scrutinized through the acts of
others. The nature of conspiracies is that finding a co-conspirator guilty can
imply the guilt of the other. Putting those others named on trial will
technically, and indirectly, implicate Andy Bautista.
Hence, even if he remains in his post as Comelec chair for
the next 12 months, thanks to the House justice committee, his political
capital and his legitimacy will be severely eroded in the event that anomalies
involving him will be found in legislative inquiries, or found to have probable
cause in investigations by the NBI or the Ombudsman.
The pressure will be intense on Andy Bautista. And after
one year if he survives and refuses to step down, then a more robust
impeachment complaint can be filed, fortified by findings from the
investigations that can be initiated against him and others with whom he had
joint deposits, or had questionable transactions with.
By then, the people would have the prudence to follow the
correct format. And there would be no more need to establish personal knowledge
since allegations will now be based on the outcomes of the official
investigations. Hence, the House justice committee will no longer have any
reason to dismiss such impeachment complaint on the basis of a mere
technicality.
Andy Bautista said that the recent dismissal of the
impeachment complaint will enable him to live a normal life, with business as
usual.
The people will have to make sure that he will not have
that pleasure.
0 comments