FORMER elections chairman Sixto Brillantes yesterday urged the Commission on Elections (Comelec) to withhold any actions on the withdrawal bid of disqualified Duterte Youth party-list nominee Ronald Cardema until other pending cases and issues filed against him and his group have been resolved.
Brillantes, in a five-page letter addressed to Comelec Chairman Sheriff Abas, urged the body to suspend action on the withdrawal petition until the Comelec en banc has ruled on Cardema’s Motion for Reconsideration on his disqualification case, the petition to have the Duterte Youth’s registration cancelled, as well as his corruption allegations against Commissioner Rowena Guanzon.
“We respectfully and humbly pray that the Honorable Commission en banc and/or the Chairman defer in the meanwhile any action on Cardema’s notice of withdrawal until the Resolution on Cardema’s MR; and until such time that the grounds and reasons cited by Cardema for the said withdrawal shall have been duly investigated and its truthfulness or falsity is confirmed and verified,” Brillantes said.
Similarly, he said they are also opposing Cardema’s demand that the Certificate of Proclamation for the Duterte Youth party-list be issued immediately now that he has already withdrawn his nomination.
Brillantes said there is a need for the poll body to first resolve the MR in order to avoid any lingering questions over the validity and legitimacy of Cardema’s nomination as a substitute nominee of Duterte Youth.
“Since Cardema is not withdrawing his MR, it would be the duty and obligation of the Commission to first resolve the said motion and should the Commission en banc decide to affirm the Resolution of the First Division rejecting Cardema’s substituted nomination, it should as a consequence similarly reject Cardema’s request to withdraw the same for he cannot withdraw an invalid substituted nomination,” he argued.
He also said that the pending petition for the cancellation of the registration of Duterte Youth as a party-list must also be resolved first.
“In the greater interest of justice and to avoid circuitous litigation, there is a need for a full and conclusive resolution,” he added.