Republic of the Philippines Supreme Court Manila

Miriam Defensor-Santiago Petitioner, Versus Commision on Election (COMELEC) and Fidel Valdez Ramos Respondent. x-----------------------------------------------x G.R. No. 123456

COMMENT/OPPOSITION

RESPONDENT

Fidel

V.

Ramos,

thru

counsels

respectfully

submits

this

Comment/Opposition relative to the petitioners Petition for Certiorari under rule 65 of the Rules of Court, depose and states:

PREFARATORY STATEMENT

The voice of the people if the supreme law, Vox populi est suprema lex, this universal maxim passes the power to the people to choose the leader they want to appoint. Our Constitution also expressly states that Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them. (Section 1, Article II, 1987 Constitution). In which Our Constitutions respects and give great credence to the voice of its people.

THE PARTIES

Petitioner Miriam Defensor-Santiago, senator of the Republic of the Philippines, represented by its counsel Charmaine Joy Reyes. Private Repondent Fidel V. Ramos former President of the Philippines and candidate for 2016 Presidential election represented by its counsels Dayme Louie Teoxon and Don Dave Mc Lynn Ladaga. Public Respondent Commission on Election (COMELEC) issuing the assailed RESOLUTION SPA NO. 16-003.

FACTS OF THE CASE

On December 31, 20145, Fidel V. Ramos filed before the Commission on election his Certificate of Candidacy for the 2016 Presidential Election. On January 9, 2016, Miriam Defensor-Santiago filed a Petition for Disqualification against the Respondent docketed as COMELEC SPA No. 16-003. On the same month, the Commission on Election (COMELEC) En Banc rendered its RESOLUTION No. 16-026 allowing the Respondent to run again as President of the Republic of the Philippines.

ARGUMENTS

1. The Philippines is a democratic and republican state. In which it support its constitutional provision that the Filipino electorate is given the opportunity and afforded with widest field of choice to choose among the presidential candidates whom they will vote and give their trust to lead our country.

2. The limitation that a president should and cannot run for a president only affects the present President. The constitution avoids the situation that the present president might use his position just to establish his candidacy again and not to do his work. Nonetheless, we are of the opinion that the limitation is only for the present

president because if it also limits the former presidents the constitution must expressly prohibit it.

3. Let the Filipino electorate decide, in which our constitution expressly provides in section 4, Article VII, that the President shall be elected by a Direct vote of the people.

DISCUSSION

As stated in the petition, we are in the affirmative that it is best to discuss the three arguments jointly. The Present petition to disqualify Fidel Valdez Ramos is a clear attempt to eliminate him as one of the choices and to deny him of his right to run as President. We should not deny the Filipino their right to choose among the candidates who will be our leader. As stated Earlier that limitations should only be applied to the present President to avoid its non-performance of his duty to serve the Philippines. Disqualifying a candidate due to doubtful claims will not result to a free and fair election. While it is permissible in this jurisdiction to consult the debates and proceedings of the constitutional convention in order to arrive at the reason and purpose of the resulting Constitution, resort thereto may be had only when other guides fail as said proceedings are powerless to vary the terms of the Constitution when the meaning is clear. Debates in the constitutional convention "are of value as showing the views of the individual members, and as indicating the reasons for their votes, but they give us no light as to the views of the large majority who did not talk, much less of the mass of our fellow citizens whose votes at the polls gave that instrument the force of fundamental law. We think it safer to construe the constitution from what appears upon its face." The proper interpretation therefore depends more on how it was understood by the people adopting it than in the framers's understanding thereof. (Civil Liberties Union vs. the Executive Secretary, op. cit. G.R. 83896, February 22, 1991) The better policy approach is to let the people decide who will be the next President. For on questions, this court may err but the sovereign people will not. To be sure, the constitution did not grant to the unelected members of this court the right to elect in behalf of the people. (Tecson vs. Commission on Elections, op. cit., 424 SCRA 401)

Both the two Jurisprudence respects the power of the Filipino electorate to choose and then decide the next president of the Philippines and in disqualifying a certain candidate would be tantamount to the denial of the right to freely choose and decide their next leader. Therefore, let us allow the Filipino electorate to choose among the presidential candidates cause if we allow it will encourage the people to vote fair and square. After all the Filipinos have so much experience in our elections. We are on the opinion that today, they are now intelligent to choose the best that will be the next leader.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed to this Honorable Court that the Petition to disqualify former President Fidel Valdez Ramos to run as President in the upcoming May 2016 Presidential election be outrightly dismissed and; Affirm the Promulgation of COMELEC En Banc Resolution No. 16-026. Other relief, just and equitable, under the premises are likewise prayed for.

February 4, 2016, in the City of Manila.

Dayme Louie Teoxon Counsel for Private Respondent

Don Dave Mc Lynn Ladaga Counsel for Private respondent

LADAGA TEOXON &ASSOCIATES

13th floor, 013 Corporate Center 123 Valero Street, Salcedo Viallage, Makati City, Philippines Tel: (04) 847-92-21