News (Media Awareness Project) - Philippines: Editorial: The Sagacious Comelec |
Title: | Philippines: Editorial: The Sagacious Comelec |
Published On: | 2004-05-24 |
Source: | Manila Bulletin (The Philippines) |
Fetched On: | 2008-01-18 09:13:47 |
THE SAGACIOUS COMELEC
THE wish of the US Council of Foreign Relations Center for Preventive
Action for the election count to be "credible'' and "expeditious,''
would do with the addition of "sane.''
Comelec Chairman Benjamin Abalos just added another complication when
he announced that winners who have not undergone a drug-test would not
be proclaimed. This at the same time that Comelec is set to proclaim
the first six -- Mar Roxas, Bong Revilla, Nene Pimentel, Jamby
Madrigal, Richard Gordon, and Miriam Defensor Santiago -- in the
senatorial list.
What if the last six and those 13 and below were to obtain temporary
restraining orders (TROs) against the proclamation on the ground that
the leading winners have yet to show proof that they passed the drug-test?
After all, the Comelec is the first in history to have obtained a TRO
against the proclamation of Grace Padaca of Isabela. There's nothing
to prevent anyone from procuring the same restraining orders on all
the winners in these elections.
While it's true that GMA and her spouse did say that they took the
test, still proof will still be needed, although, of course, it's easy
for people in power to produce it.
As Chairman Abalos is sure to argue that drug-testing for public
officials, students, maids, and drivers is prescribed by law, thus
concluding that winners in political contests are not exempt, it won't
be far-fetched for mischievous people to ask whether the voters had
been drug-tested as well.
But then Comelec precinct personnel did not require voters to produce
proof that they had successfully passed the drug-test. In this case,
the elections will have been a failure by Comelec standards, and new
one must be held.
Of course, the very thought is ridiculous, but then the law is the
law, for if drug-testing is required of licenses and in various
employments, it logically applies in an undertaking (voting) more
vital to the country's welfare than driving a car, cleaning house,
managing traffic, or going to school (there being not enough schools,
anyway).
But that is not half as ridiculous as the Comelec decree.
THE wish of the US Council of Foreign Relations Center for Preventive
Action for the election count to be "credible'' and "expeditious,''
would do with the addition of "sane.''
Comelec Chairman Benjamin Abalos just added another complication when
he announced that winners who have not undergone a drug-test would not
be proclaimed. This at the same time that Comelec is set to proclaim
the first six -- Mar Roxas, Bong Revilla, Nene Pimentel, Jamby
Madrigal, Richard Gordon, and Miriam Defensor Santiago -- in the
senatorial list.
What if the last six and those 13 and below were to obtain temporary
restraining orders (TROs) against the proclamation on the ground that
the leading winners have yet to show proof that they passed the drug-test?
After all, the Comelec is the first in history to have obtained a TRO
against the proclamation of Grace Padaca of Isabela. There's nothing
to prevent anyone from procuring the same restraining orders on all
the winners in these elections.
While it's true that GMA and her spouse did say that they took the
test, still proof will still be needed, although, of course, it's easy
for people in power to produce it.
As Chairman Abalos is sure to argue that drug-testing for public
officials, students, maids, and drivers is prescribed by law, thus
concluding that winners in political contests are not exempt, it won't
be far-fetched for mischievous people to ask whether the voters had
been drug-tested as well.
But then Comelec precinct personnel did not require voters to produce
proof that they had successfully passed the drug-test. In this case,
the elections will have been a failure by Comelec standards, and new
one must be held.
Of course, the very thought is ridiculous, but then the law is the
law, for if drug-testing is required of licenses and in various
employments, it logically applies in an undertaking (voting) more
vital to the country's welfare than driving a car, cleaning house,
managing traffic, or going to school (there being not enough schools,
anyway).
But that is not half as ridiculous as the Comelec decree.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...