.
.

ARMM elections still in limbo despite preparations

by Eric Jude O. Alvia (NAMFREL Secretary General)
May 3, 2011
from NAMFREL Election Monitor Vol.2, No.8
.
Recent developments in past weeks have bolstered the likelihood of the ARMM elections being held as scheduled on August 8, 2011. The first, being the momentary slowdown of legislative action to pass a law to postpone and synchronize the ARMM elections; the second, is the preparations being made by the Comelec to conduct the ARMM elections even as there has been an impasse in the Senate on the decision to hold the regional polls as scheduled as House Bill (HB) no. HB 4146 and Senate Bill (SB) no. 2756 face stiff opposition in the Senate; the third, is the petition filed in the Supreme Court (SC) seeking a temporary restraining order (TRO) on initiatives seeking the postponement of the regional polls.

Legislation held up
Despite these recent events, the Palace remains optimistic that Congress will pass a measure seeking to postpone the ARMM elections. Currently, it awaits the release of a Senate committee report on local governments which would influence the decision to pass a counterpart Senate bill to enact the law. The cancelation of the Ombudsman’s impeachment trial has also provided the Congress ample time to resolve this impasse as it resumes sessions on May 9. Postponement advocates believe that the existing ARMM polls setup
violates the constitutional provision to have synchronized elections. To avoid a leadership vacuum, the Palace would appoint officers-in-charge (OICs) in view of the expected vacancy when the election is postponed, the planned appointments has loomed as a contentious issue during public hearings and congressional sessions.

Although the proposed bill to postpone the elections had been certified urgent by the Palace and had been passed in the House, its passage in the Senate remains uncertain. It is facing rough sailing in the Senate where even senators allied with the Palace appear reluctant to support it. Moreover, the Senate local government committee claims that the Senate would need time to debate the legal and constitutional issues involved in deferring the polls.

Election activities push & release of guidelines in preparation for ARMM elections
Sensing that pushing the bill postponing the ARMM elections has already run out of time, Comelec recently released resolutions that may indicate that it is not hopeful that the Senate is keen on postponing the ARMM elections. Already, the Comelec has undertaken a registration of new voters in the ARMM provinces and is now in the process of ''cleansing'' the list of voters.

Based on Comelec Resolution (CR) no. 9211 (supplementing CR no. 9198), candidates would be given one week to file their COCs. The Comelec has set the filing of certificates of candidacy (CoC) for the ARMM polls despite pending House and Senate bills seeking to defer it.

On April 19, Comelec promulgated CR no. 9198 prescribing the period for filing of certificates of candidacy and the holding of political conventions to select and nominate official party candidates from May 9 to 14. However, to bid more time to finish activities related to the preparation for the filing & the holding of conventions, Comelec issued CR no.9211 on April 28 to postpone the filing period to May 14 to 18 while conventions must be held no later than May 18, 2011. The resolution sets the election period to begin on May 10 until September 7 (120 days). The campaign period will be from June 24 to August 6.

Also last week, Comelec promulgated CR no. 9212 which contains rules and guidelines on the filing ofcertificates of candidacy and nomination of official candidates of registered political parties who intend to run in the ARMM elections. The resolution contains requirements for all candidates to file their CoCs, completing the contents of the CoCs, where to file, requirements for certificates of nomination for official candidates by political parties & independent candidates, receipt and recording of certificates filed, rights of watchers, delivery, distribution, preparation, withdrawal, classifying nuisance candidates, petitions to deny or cancel CoCs, and
grounds and effect of disqualification.

The poll body has repeatedly said that it does not want to suffer another delay in their preparations similar to what happened in the Barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan elections on Oct. 25 last year when proposals were also made to postpone the local and youth elections.

Filing of TRO with the SC
To complicate matters in hoping that the legal and constitutional aspects of postponement will be adjudicated by the High Court, the SC has issued a resolution ordering the Comelec, Palace and Congress to file their comments on whether or not the ARMM elections should push through. The order gave the respondents 10 days to file their comments on the petition of some ARMM residents, requesting the SC to issue a TRO on the polls postponement and declare as unconstitutional Republic Act No. 9333 (or the law fixing the date of regular
elections in ARMM to second Monday of August) and to declare as invalid HB 4146 seeking to move the ARMM elections to 2013. The SC order was issued after finding the petition “to be sufficient in form and substance."

Two petitions were filed by barangay officials and concerned voters in the ARMM led by Datu Michael Kida of the Maguindanao Federation of Autonomous Irrigators Association and lawyer Alex Macalawi of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines-Marawi City chapter, along with eight others asking the SC for the issuance of a TRO against the Senate, Congress, Comelec, OP, DBM and the Treasury to stop the planned postponement of the ARMM elections. The group proposes to hold it instead on Sept. 12, 2011.
 
The group contends that the postponement violates the ARMM Organic Act and believes that the region’s organic law should take precedence over other laws and further argues that this would deny the voters their right to elect their officials for a period of two years, in the process violating their right to equal protection of the law. This is the first time that a group has questioned in court the postponement of the ARMM polls which has previously been postponed six times. Given the legislative process and the tight schedules of filing of COC's, the campaign period, and the advance election related preparations, this leaves little time for the ARMM postponement law to be passed.
.
 
.
.
.