PET to Calida: Explain why you should not be cited in contempt

The Supreme Court, sitting as the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET), has ordered Solicitor General Jose Calida to explain why he should not be held in contempt for seeking the inhibition of Associate Justice Marvic Leonen from the Marcos-Robredo election protest case.

Calida filed a motion seeking Leonen's recusal from the case last week, citing similar arguments as former senator Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. who had filed his own motion just hours prior.

Both Calida and Marcos accused Leonen, the justice-in-charge of the protest, of being biased against the Marcos family. They also claimed the case has been delayed under Leonen's watch.

The PET denied both motions on Tuesday.

The denial came with an order for the solicitor general, as well as Manila Times journalist Jomar Canlas, whose reports Marcos and Calida cited in their motions, to  "show cause why they should not be cited in contempt."

The tribunal's official resolution was not immediately available.

GMA News Online has reached out to the OSG for comment, but it has yet to reply as of posting time.

According to the Rules of Court, a person who misbehaves in or near a court such that they obstruct proceedings, disrespects the court, shows "offensive personalities toward others," refuses to be sworn or to answer as a witness, or to subscribe to an affidavit when required to do so may be cited in contempt and punished with a fine and/or up to 10 days of imprisonment.

In his motion for Leonen's inhibition, Calida, through his office, admitted he is not a party to the election protest. The Office of the Solicitor General's (OSG) function is to represent the government in legal proceedings.

But he justified his participation by invoking his role as the "People's Tribune." 

This is the same justification the OSG had made for its participation in the preliminary investigation of the sedition complaint against members of the opposition, including Vice President Leni Robredo, last year.

Robredo's camp said it considers Marcos and Calida's motions as an act of collusion, but Marcos claimed he and the solicitor general have not discussed the case.

Calida campaigned for Marcos in the 2016 elections, where the former senator lost to Robredo by 263,473 votes.

Alleging election fraud, Marcos is challenging Robredo's victory in a protest that has been pending for more than four years.

In 2018, Calida also appeared to side with Marcos by taking the position that the PET should maintain its 50-percent shading threshold during the recount of ballots from Camarines Sur, Iloilo, and Negros Oriental.

Robredo had been moving for the use of the 25-percent shading threshold, which she said was the standard used by the Comelec itself in the elections.

The PET eventually set aside the 50-percent threshold. — RSJ, GMA News