The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) led by Jose Calida moved for the inhibition of Supreme Court Associate Justice Marvic Leonen from the Marcos-Robredo election protest case on Monday.
Calida filed the motion just ours after defeated vice presidential candidate former Senator Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos, Jr. made the same motion.
Marcos claimed he and Calida were not in discussions about the election protest.
Like Marcos, the OSG claimed that Leonen was biased against the Marcos family and had acted with delay on the protest challenging Vice President Leni Robredo's victory in the elections four years ago.
Calida campaigned for Marcos in the 2016 polls.
"The People needs to know who the actual winner is in the vice-presidential race. It is unfair for the sitting Vice President to be accused of cheating, and equally unfair for the protestant to give him false hope in the guise of calculated yet very slow progress of the protest," the OSG said.
"A refusal to inhibit, given the political stakes involved, will destroy the reputation of an independent judiciary. Non-inhibition will likewise result to the sense that whoever loses the case was not accorded due process given the contrasting expectations," it added.
The OSG, whose task is to represent the government in legal proceedings, admitted it was not a party to the pending case but said it was acting as the "People's Tribune," in which it said it "represents the best interests of the State and may take an adverse position from the government agency under litigation."
This is the same justification the OSG cited for its participation in the preliminary investigation of the sedition complaint against members of the opposition, including Robredo, last year.
In moving for Leonen's inhibition and a re-raffle of the case, the OSG said the justice had "exhibited bias and partiality against the whole Marcos family in his dissent in the Marcos burial cases" and in other cases.
Leonen was one of a minority of justices who voted against the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos' burial at the Libingan ng mga Bayani in 2016.
The OSG also cited a report by the Manila Times saying that Leonen had "prejudged" the poll protest years before the case was assigned to him.
In addition, the OSG argued there hac been a "long delay" in the resolution of the case.
Marcos, in his own motion filed earlier on Monday, raised similar arguments. Asked whether he and Calida are "joining forces" towards the inhibition of Leonen, Marcos said he is "in no discussions" with the solicitor general and is unaware of the latter's plans.
This is not the first time Marcos had sought the inhibition of the justice-in-charge or ponente of his protest.
In 2018, he asked Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa to recuse from the case, similarly over alleged bias. The PET denied his motion and warned him that "any unfounded and inappropriate accusation made in the future will be dealt with more severely."
Calida, for his part, has previously made submissions to the SC, sitting as the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET), that appeared to favor Marcos' position.
In 2018, Calida took the position that the PET should maintain its 50-percent shading threshold during the recount of ballots from the pilot provinces of Camarines Sur, Iloilo, and Negros Oriental. Robredo was pushing for a 25-percent threshold.
The PET eventually set aside the 50-percent threshold.
The OSG has also recently told the PET that it could nullify elections as part of its mandate to decide all election contests for president and vice president. Marcos has asked for the annulment of election results in Maguindanao, Lanao del Sur, and Basilan due to alleged terrorism and voter harassment.
Robredo's camp, on the other hand, has been arguing that the protest should have been dismissed immediately following the recount in the pilot provinces, which resulted in the vice president's vote lead over Marcos increasing by some 15,000 votes. -NB, GMA News
