Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • MPL Comment On SQA

    Uploaded by

    Joris Recto
    21 views54 pages

    Original Title

    MPL Comment on SQA

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    21 views54 pages

    MPL Comment On SQA

    Uploaded by

    Joris Recto

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 54
    REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES SUPREME COURT Manila MAGKAKASAMA SA SAKAHAN, KAUNLARAN (MAGSASAKA) _PARTY-LIST, represented by its Secretary- General, ATTY. GENERAL D. DU, Petitioner, -versus- G.R. No. 262975 COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS z and SOLIMAN VILLAMIN JR., SB Respondents. a 5 | ge * z | ae 2 | 4 COMMENT/OPPOSITION & (To the Motion to Issue Writ of Preliminary Injunction and/or Temporary Restraining Order) COMES NOW, the Private Respondent SOLIMAN A. VILLAMIN JR., through the undersigned counsels and unto this Honorable Court, most respectfully states that: 1. On 20 October 2022, private respondent Villamin, through counsels, received a copy of the Notice dated 18 October 2022 and issued by the Honorable Supreme Court En Banc, requiring the Respondents to file, within ten (10) days from notice, a Comment on petitioner’s Motion to Issue Writ of Preliminary Injunction and/or Temporary Restraining Order dated October 10, 2022. 2. _ Private respondent has until 30 October 2022 to file his Comment/Opposition to Petitioner's Motion. Said date fell on a Sunday and holidays, Villamin has until the next working day to file the same. Thus, this Comment/Opposition to Petitioner’s Motion is timely filed 3. Petitioner in his Motion prayed of the Honorable Court that: a. A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (TRO) and/or = WRIT OF _ PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION be IMMEDIATELY ISSUED to PRESERVE/RESTORE the status of PETITIONER and to PREVENT the ILLEGAL ACT of the COMELEC from rendering the Decision in this Petition nugatory and of no legal effect, prior to the promulgation of NBOC Resolution No. 22-0953 confirming the proclamation of ROBERTO GERARD L. NAZAL, JR. as Representative of MAGSASAKA Party-list and the subsequent issuance of a Certificate of Proclamation in favor of ROBERTO GERARD L. NAZAL, JR. and RESTRAIN and/or UNDO their consequent effects pending the resolution of this case; b. A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (TRO) or STATUS QUO ANTE (SQA) ORDER/WRIT OF — PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION be IMMEDIATELY ISSUED to PRESERVE/RESTORE the status of PETITIONER prior to the denial of the issuance of the Certificate of Proclamation in favor of Magsasaka Party-list as well as the assailed Resolution of the COMELEC First Division dated 25 November 2021 and the COMELEC En Banc Resolution dated 9 September 2022 in SPP No. 21-002 (MIP) and SPP No. 21-003 (MIP) to RESTRAIN and/or UNDO their consequent effects pending the resolution of this case; ORDER the Proclamation of MAGSASAKA Party-list as a winning party-list in the May 9, 2022 National and Local Elections and issue a Certificate of Proclamation in favor of PETITIONER MAGSASAKA Party-list and First Nominee Bernie F, Cruz. ° Page 2 of 3, 4. In the same Notice the Honorable Court issued a Status Quo Ante Order effective immediately, and continuing until further orders from the Court. 5. Petitioner centers his Motion upon the supposed ineligibility of Roberto Gerard L, Nazel, Jr. who petitioner claims is a founder and nominee of Pasahero Party-List according to Section 15 of Republic Act No. 7941. In support of such claim, petitioner has attached screenshots of Facebook posts of authors /originators who did not even authenticate their posts by permissible means allowed by Republic Act No. 8792.1 Petitioner’s Motion is actually in a bid to make up for the lost remedy of a Petition to Deny Due Course to or Cancel the nomination of nominees of a party-list which should have been initiated ten (10) days from submission of the proof of publication. 6. Public respondent COMELEC En Banc In accordance with the rule-making authority granted by Section 18 of the Party-List System Act? has promulgated Sections 1 and 4, Rule 5 of Resolution No. 93663 which reads as follows: SECTION 1. Petition to Deny Due Course and/or Cancellation; Grounds. —A verified petition seeking to deny due course the nomination of nominees of party-list groups may be filed by any person exchusively on the ground that a material misrepresentation has been committed in the qualification of the nominees. " Electronic Commerce Act, Republic Act No, 8792, [June 14, 2000}. ? Republic ActNo. 7941. Rules and Regulations Governing the: 1) Filing of Petions for Registration; 2) Filing of Manifestation of Inient to Pactcipate; 3) Submission of Names of Nominees; ané 4) Filng of Disqualification Cases Against Nominees of Patty-List Groups or Organizations Participating under the Party-List System of Representation in Connection with the May 13, 2013 National and Local Elections, and Subsequent Elections Thereafter, COMELEC Resolution No. 9366, [Febnary 21, 2012). Page 3 of 33 SECTION 4. When to File Petitions. — Petitions for denial/cancellation/ disqualification of party-list nominces shall be filed as follows: a. Petition to deny due course or cancellation of nomination of party-list nominees shall be filed within five (5) days after the publication of the list of nominees; and b. Petition for disqualification of party-list nominees shall be filed at any day not later than the date of proclamation. xxx The above period to file Petitions of such nature have been amended by COMELEC Resolution No. 10690* to read as: 7. proof of SECTION 8. When to File Petitions. — Section 4, Rule 5 paragraph (a) of COMELEC Resolution No. 9366 is hereby amended to read as follows: (a) Petition to deny due course to or cancellation of nomination of party-list nominees shall be filed within ten (10) days from the date of publication of the list of nominees by the EID, or in case of subsequent publication by reason of substitution, within ten (10) days from the submission of proof of publication by the party-list groups, organizations, or coalitions of its new and complete list of nominees, with respect to the substitute nominees; and YOK KK KX" Private respondent Villamin has submitted the publication of MAGSASAKA's new/substitute list of nominees on 11 May 2022, 07 June 2022 and 08 June 2022 and within ten (10) days therefrom, petitioner has ‘in the Matter of Setting the Last Day forthe Filing of Certain Documents in Con 9 May 2022 on with the Fy 27, 2001] National and Local Elections, COMELEC Resolation No. 10690, (Ja Page 4 of 33 not initiated any petition questioning the qualifications or eligibility of any of the submitted new/substitute nominces. 8. Petitioner failed to exhaust adequate remedies available to it.’ He must not be allowed now to use this Petition for Certiorari, this Motion, or even a Supplemental Petition, as a substitute for the lost remedy of filing petitions to deny due course to or cancel a nomination. 9. Petitioner must not be allowed to seek refuge in a Petition for Certiorari after having lost, through his own fault and negligence, the remedy available to him in COMELEC Resolution No. 9366, as amended by COMELEC Resolution No. 10590. 10. Public respondent COMELEC En Bane’s finding validity in private respondent Villamin’s Manifestation of Intent to Participate in the 2022 Party-List System of Representation and the corresponding nomination documents submitted thereafter should be given due weight and credence by the Honorable Court. After all, the Court is not a trier of facts. The Court will have to rely, absent any clear showing of grave abuse of discretion, on the factual findings of public respondent COMELEC En Banc - the authority tasked by the Constitution to administer and enforce election laws.¢ 10.1 The finding that a nominee is disqualified for ineligibility or that he or she may have made material misrepresentations, being questions of fact, should have been made by the public respondent COMELEC and should not be presented here and only now. 11. In Penera v. Commission on Elections,’ the Court ruled that it is not the function of the Court to review, examine and evaluate or weigh the probative value of the evidence presented. Further, the Court ruled that: The sole function of a writ of certiorari is to address want of jurisdiction or grave abuse of 5 Ambit, Jr v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 143398, [October 25, 2000], 398 PHIL 287-291. £ Matalam v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 123230, [April 18, 1997], 338 PHIL 447-474, "G.RNo. 181613, [September 11, 2609], 615 PHIL. 667-718 Page 5 of 33 discretion, and it does not include a review of the tribunal's evaluation of the evidence. Because of its fact-finding facilities and its knowledge its knowledge derived from actual experience, the COMELEC is ina peculiarly advantageous position to evaluate, appreciate and decide on factual questions before it. Factual findings of COMELEC, based on its own assessments and duly supported by evidence, are conclusive on this Court, more so__in the absence of a grave abuse of discretion, arbitrariness, fraud, or error oflaw in the estioned resolutions. Unless any of these causes are clear! substantiated, the Court will not interfere _with __ the indings of fact of the COMELEC.® Grave abuse of discretion is such a capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment equivalent to lack of jurisdiction. Mere abuse of discretion is not enough. It must be grave, as when it is exercised arbitrarily or despotically by reason of passion or personal hostility. The abuse must be so patent and so gross as to amount to an evasion of a positive duty or to a virtual refusal to perform the duty enjoined or to act at all in contemplation of law. 12. This Court has invariably followed the principle that in the absence of any jurisdictional infirmity or an error of law of the utmost gravity, the conclusion reached by respondent Commission on a matter that falls within its competence is entitled to the utmost respect. Petitioner’s reliance on insisting upon the ineligibility of the Party’s nominee based on _the applicability of Section 15 of Republic Act No. 7941 is misplaced. * Emphasis and Underscoring Supplied. Proceso Sidro v. Commission on Elections and Nestor Tejano, G.R. No. L-64033, (July 25. 1983], 208 PHIL. 671-675. Page 6 of 33 13, Petitioner theorizes that the current MAGSASAKA’s Party-List Nominee No. 1, Roberto Gerard L. Nazal Jr., is disqualified as such for allegedly failing to change his sectoral affiliation within six (6) months before the 09 May 2022 elections using as basis an incomplete and conveniently spliced Section 15 of Republic Act No. 7941.10 14, In particular, petitioner is shown to have omitted! this specific portion in Section 15 specially and specifically devoted to “any lected — party-list representative”, viz.: SECTION 15. Change of Affiliation; Effect. — Any elected party-list representative who changes his political party or sectoral affiliation during his term of office shall forfeit his seat: Provided, That if he changes his political party or sectoral affiliation within six (6) months before an election, he shall not be eligible for nomination as party-list representative under his new party or organization. 15, Petitioner's bad faith is shown in its deliberate omission of the particular portion of the law relied upon. Obviously, the clear import of said omitted part is to distinguish the elected party-list representatives from nominees who are yet to be elected and give it a different treatment. 16. Ifwe are to follow Petitioner's reading of Section 15 of Republic Act No. 7941, then what is the purpose of this provision? But the more appropriate question is, why is the Petitioner so afraid of it that it has to avoid and omit it in his citations? 17. Obviously, a reading of the entire section cancels out the very foundation of Petitioner’s motion. 18. Very obvious as well is the intention to hoodwink the Honorable Court to micro-read in isolation portions of Section 15, Republic Act No. 7941 to favorably © party-List System Act, Republic Act No, 7941, [March 3, 1995] 1 Paragraph 10 of Petitioner's Mation Page 7 of 33 suit his arguments, rather than appreciating the cited provision in its entirety as it should be done. 19. There is a replete of statutory construction canons that mandates this holistic approach, as follows: 19.1. In Philippine International Trading Corporation vs. Commission On Audit": “It is a rule in statutory construction that every part of the statute must be interpreted with reference to the context, ie. that every part of the statute must be considered together with the other parts, and kept subservient to the general intent of the whole enactment. Because the law must not be read in truncated parts, its provisions must be read in relation to the whole law. ‘The statute's clauses and phrases must not, consequently, be taken as detached and isolated expressions, but the whole and every part thereof must be considered in fixing the meaning of any of its parts in order to produce a __ harmonious __ whole. Consistent with the fundamentals of statutory construction, all the words in the statute must be taken into consideration in order to ascertain its meaning.” 19.2. In Chavez vs. Judicial and Council's: “The particular words, clauses and phrases should not be studied as detached and isolated expressions, but the whole and every part of the statute must be considered in fixing the meaning of any of its parts and in order to produce a harmonious whole. A statute must be so construed as to harmonize and give effect to all its Bar "2 G.R.No. 183517, June 22, 2010. GR Ne 207042, July 17, 2012. Page 8 of 33, provisions whenever possible. In short, every meaning to be given to each word or phrase must be ascertained from the context of the body of the statute since a word or phrase in a statute is always used in association with other words or phrases and its meaning may be modified or restricted by the latter.” 20. Mr. Nazal Jr. is not an elected representative of any party-list, neither is he a nominee of any other party- list group for purposes of the 2022 party-list system of representation or any election year prior, nor is he a member of any other party-list group. 20.1. Mr. Nazal’s name first appeared in MAGSASAKA Party-List’s Certificate of Nomination dated 31 May 2022 as its Nominee No. 4 and again in its 06 June 2022 Certificate of Nomination as its Nominee No. 1, following the notarized withdrawal of acceptance of nominations of Cortez, Villamin and Obumani. A copy of the certified true copy of this Certificate of Nomination is hereto attached as ANNEX “1”, 21, Thus, Mr. Nazal is not a political turncoat as Petitioner would have the Honorable Court believe. Simply, the afore-quoted provision of law finds no application here. Petitioner failed to discharge the burden of proof to show that Mr. Nazal is a nominee or even a member of Pasahero Party-list. 22. Petitioner submits as proof of Mr. Nazal’s ineligibility or disqualification unauthenticated screenshots of Facebook posts and unauthenticated news article content. 23. Petitioner’s submitted pieces of documentary evidence with an Affidavit of Authenticity are inadmissible Page 9 of 33 for being violative of the Electronic Commerce Act! and the Rules on Electronic Evidence.'5 24. Section 11 of the Electronic Commerce Act provides that electronic documents, electronic data messages and electronic signatures, shall be authenticated by demonstrating, substantiating and validating a claimed identity of a user, device, or another entity in an information or communication system, among other ways, as follows: xxx xKx (bk) The electronic data message or electronic document shall be authenticated by proof that an appropriate security procedure, when applicable was adopted and employed for the purpose of verifying the originator of an electronic data message or electronic document, or detecting crror or alteration in the communication, content or storage of an electronic document or electronic data message from a specific point, which, using algorithm or codes, identifying words or numbers, encryptions, answers back or acknowledgment procedures, or similar security devices. 25. In the case at bar, the Affidavit of Authenticity refers only to the screenshots of Facebook posts and the affiant Lejun P. Dela Cruz therein only attests to the genuineness of the screenshots and that the same are faithful reproduction of the contents therein. The Petitioner failed to ascertain, verify, and prove the original source of the screenshots, identity of the people who posted the said posts, and genuineness of the contents of the same. Logic and ordinary experience would show that in this digital world, any post can be made, fabricated, and manipulated. 26. Further, Lejun P. Dela Cruz merely testified that he personally took and downloaded the photos using his iPhone. He does not have the competence to authenticate the source and identity of the Facebook users of the individuals he named therein. * Electronic Commerce Act, Republic Act No. $792, Une 14,2000) + Rules on Electronic Evidence, A ML O1-7-01-SC., (une 17,2001) Page 10 of 33 27. While the evidence submitted by petitioner is captioned as Affidavit of Authenticity, upon perusal of the substance of the body of the said document, it is palpable that it is an Affidavit of Evidence and not that of the former. As stated by the Rules on Electronic Evidence: “RULE 9: METHOD OF PROOF Section 1. Affidavit of evidence. - All matters relating to the admissibility and evidentiary weight of an electronic document may be established by an affidavit stating facts of direct personal Knowledge of the affiant or based on authentic records. The affidavit must affirmatively show the competence of the affiant to testify on the matters contained therein.”16 28. In Crawford vs. Washington, the American Court laid down the difference between an Affidavit of Authenticity and an Affidavit of Evidence. The former is created for the sole purpose of providing evidence against a defendant. On the other hand, an Affidavit of authentication is created to authenticate or provide a copy of an otherwise admissible record. The former is testimonial and therefore subject to confrontation while the latter is not.!7 29. As stated earlier, petitioner only produced a document which tends to prove that the electronic evidence was obtained by a person, who in this case is Mr. Lejun P, Dela Cruz, who has direct personal knowledge of the Facebook posts but it does not in any way, however, prove the authenticity and genuineness of the contents thereof. 30. A perusal of the screenshots!* show that they have been authored by a Carlita Rivera and by a Gracemay Llave and yet the Affidavit of Authenticity!” attesting to the genuineness of the screenshots, particularly saying that they are faithful reproductions of the contents therein have ' Rules on Electronic Evidence, Rule 9, Section 1 Crawford vs. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004). ° Annex *C” of Petitioner's Motion. © Annex *C-1" of Petitioner's Motion, Page 11 of 33 been made by Mr. Lejun P. Dela Cruz, petitioner’s nominee no. 3. 30.1. Mr. Dela Cruz is the same person tasked to investigate the business activities of DV Boer, Inc. and who likewise revealed in the 03 November 2019 meeting of the Council of Leaders that illegally ousted private respondent Villamin as National Chairman that he happens to agree with the earlier statement of petitioner Du that there is prima facie basis and probable cause the DV Boer Farms violated the law, thus: “c. The report indicated that the SEC Advisory was authentic and genuine, and that there is an ongoing investigation by the SEC against DV Boer Farms. xxx In conchision, he stated that there is prima facie basis and probable cause that DV Boer Farms violated the law, and that the name of MAGSASAKA Partylist is being dragged into the quandary. 2K XK OK k. Those Council members present voted unanimously to suspend Soliman Villamin, Jr., Marianne Co, Joselyn Villamin, Soliman Villamin, Sr., Crisanto Cortez and Joseph Masacupan until their names and that of DV Boer Inc., are cleared of any impropriety, illegality or unethical behavior. They are also barred from participating in any decision-making or to represent the Party in public.” 31. The person seeking to introduce an electronic data message or electronic document in any legal proceeding has the burden of proving its authenticity by evidence capable of supporting a finding that the electronic data message or electronic document is what the person claims to be.2° » Blectronie Commerce Act, Chapter Il,, Section 11 Page 12 of 33 31.1. To reiterate, Mr. Dela Cruz is not competent to authenticate said digital content. He is neither the user of the Facebook account nor the author or originator of the Facebook posts. 32. In RCBC Bankard Services Corporation v. Moises Oracion,?! the Honorable Court did not consider the electronic evidence admissible. It states that: The Court cannot just concede that the pieces of documentary evidence in question are indeed electronic documents, which according to the Rules on Electronic Evidence are considered functional equivalent of paper- based documents and regarded as the equivalent of original documents under the Best Evidence Rule if they are print-outs or outputs readable by sight or other means, shown to reflect the data accurately. For the Court to consider an electronic document as evidence, it must pass the test of admissibility. According to Section 2, Rule 3 of the Rules on Electronic Evidence, ‘Jajn electronic document is admissible in evidence if it complies with the rules on admissibility prescribed by the Rules of Court and related laws and is authenticated in the manner prescribed by these Rules.” Rule 5 of the Rules on Electronic Evidence lays down the authentication process of electronic documents. Section 1 of Rule 5 imposes upon the party seeking to introduce an electronic document in any legal proceeding the burden of proving its authenticity in the manner provided therein. Section 2 of Rule 5 sets fort. the required proof of authentication: SEC. 2. Manner of authentication. - Before any private electronic document offered as authentic is received in evidence, its authenticity must be proved by any of the following means: 21 RCBC Bankard Services Corporation v. Moises Oracion, G.R. No. 223274, June 19, 2019. Page 13 of 33 (a) by evidence that it had been digitally signed by the person purported to have signed the same; (b) by evidence that other appropriate security procedures or devices as may be authorized by the Supreme Court or by law for authentication of electronic documenis were applied to the document; or (c) by other evidence showing its integrity and reliability to the satisfaction of the judge. As to method of proof, Section 1, Rule 9 of the Rules on Electronic Evidence provides: SECTION 1. Affidavit of evidence. - All matters relating to the admissibility and evidentiary weight of an electronic document may be established by an affidavit stating facts of direct personal knowledge of the ‘affiant or based on authentic records. The affidavit must affirmatively show the competence of the affiant to testify on the matters contained therein. Evidently, petitioner could not have complied with the Rules on Electronic Evidence because it failed to authenticate the supposed electronic documents through the required affidavit of evidence. As earlier pointed out, what petitioner had in mind at the inception (when it filed the complaint) was to have the annexes ‘admitted as duplicate originals as the term is understood in relation to paper-based documents. Thus, the annexes or attachments to the complaint of petitioner are inadmissible as electronic documents, and they cannot be given any probative value. 33. Authentication is of the utmost importance to litigation and setting them aside, ignoring them, or failing to properly preserve and establish their authenticity can be a grave mistake. Take the matter of Light (Kipp) v. Esbenshade, 35 Pa. D. & C.5th 58, 72 (C.P. 2013) that occurred in 2013. The Pennsylvania court provided the following opinion. Page 14 of 33, "Proper authentication of emails and other instant communications, as well as all computerized records, is of critical importance in an ever-increasing number of cases, not only because of the centrality of such data and communications to modern business and society in general, but also due te the ease in which such electronic materials can be created, altered, and manipulated.” 34. It is settled that upon him who alleges rests the burden of proof? Sadly, petitioner miserably failed to discharge said burden. 35. The duly notarized Certificate of Nomination for purposes of the 2022 Party-List System of Representation, received by public respondent on any date between October 1-8, 2022 or any date thereafter and the corresponding Certificate of Acceptance of Nomination duly signed by Mr. Nazal are the best and most conclusive pieces of evidence to prove one’s legitimate nomination to a Party-List organization. Absent these proofs, petitioner’s absurd claim must necessarily fall. Petitioner’s nomination of Bernie F. Cruz et al, is INVALID as it is not in compliance with Republic Act No. 7941 in relation to COMELEC Resolution Nos. 10690 and 10717. 36. In his Motion, petitioner prays of the Honorable Court to issue a Certificate of Proclamation to Bernie F. Cruz, their 1 nominee. And in the same Motion, petitioner alludes to public respondent's supposed grave abuse for failing to act on their Notice of Substitution naming Mr. Cruz as their 1% nominee. 37. Private respondent Villamin, having been adjudged as still MAGSASAKA Party-list’s National Chairman, is authorized by operation of law to sign nomination documents for the Party. Corollary to such # Mendoza v. Sy-Alvarado, EM. Nos. 15-006 (RCL)-A to 15-020 (RCL}-A, [April 22.2015], Page 15 of 33, authority is the obligation and duty to faithfully comply with all laws, rules and regulations relating to Party-list nominations. The same cannot be said of petitioner and his cohorts. 38. In an executive session of the COMELEC En Banc held on 14 September 2022, the Honorable Commission resolved in Resolution No. 22-0953? to adopt the recommendation of the Law Department as follows: “I MAGSASAKA (Villamin/Cortez/Cahigan. Faction) 1. To GRANT the WITHDRAWAL of KING M. CORTEZ as NOMINEE No. 1; 2.To GIVE DUE COURSE to the NOMINATIONS OF SOLIMAN A. VILLAMIN, JR. as the SUBSTITUTE NOMINEE NO, 2, JOREN Y. OBUMANI as the SUBSTITUTE NOMINEE NO. 3, ROBERTO GERARD L. NAZAL, JR. as the SUBSTITUTE NOMINEE NO. 4 and EMILIANO L. GUTIERREZ as the SUBSTITUTE NOMINEE NO. 5; 3. To GRANT the eventual RESIGNATION AND WITHDRAWAL of SOLIMAN A. VILLAMIN, JR, and JOREN ¥Y. OBUMANT as the Substitute Nominee Nos. 2 and 3, respectively; and by operation of law, Roberto Gerard L. Nazal, Jr. and Emiliano L. Gutierrez, Jr. will ascend as Nominee Nos. 1 and 2, respectively; 4.To GIVE DUE COURSE to the NOMINATIONS of Mark Anthony C. Camba as the Substitute Nominee No. 3, Enrequi Z. Castro as the Substitute Nominee No. 4 and Brando L. Salang-oy as the Substitute Nominee No. S. > ANNEX “4” of Private Respondent's COMMENT/OFPOSITION dated 27 October 2022 and ‘ANNEX “A” of Petitioner's Metion to Issue Writ of Preliminary Injunction and/or Temporary Restraining Order. Page 16 of 33 Accordingly, the New Nominees of MAGSASAKA shall now be: 1. Roberto Gerard L. Nazal Jr. 2, Emiliano L. Gutierrez Jr. 3. Mark Anthony C. Camba 4. Enrequi Z. Castro 5. Brando L. Salang-oy 5.To ISSUE a_ Certificate of Proclamation to Roberto Gerard L. Nazal Jr as MAGSASAKA Party-List Representative in the 19% Congress. I. MAGSASAKA (Du/Cabatbat Faction) 1.To NOTE the WITHDRAWALS of ARGEL JOSEPH T. CABATBAT as NOMINEE NO. 1, CRISOSTOMO C. BELTRAN as NOMINEE NO. 2, RAMID P. GUALBERTO as NOMINEE NO. 3, DANILO T. CARRANZA as NOMINEE NO. 4 and JEANNIE A. VILLANUEVA as NOMINEE NO. 5, 2.TO NOTE THE NOMINATIONS OF BERNIE FERRER CRUZ as the SUBSTITUTE NOMINEE NO. 1, ARIEL TOBIAS CAYANAN as the SUBSTITUTE NOMINEE NO. 2, LEJUN PADIL DELA CRUZ as the SUBSTITUTE NOMINEE 3, DANILO T. CARRANZA as the SUBSTITUTE NOMINEE NO. 4 and JEANNIE A. VILLANUEVA as the SUBSTITUTE NOMINEE NO. 5. & It must be further noted, however, that Nominees DANILO T. CARRANZA and JEANNIE A. VILLANUEVA were renominated as Nominee Nos. 4 and 5, respectively.” 39. The above recommendation of the COMELEC Law Department as adopted by public respondent Page 17 of 33 COMELEC En Banc in Resolution No. 22-0953, has been based on the following factual antecedents: 39.1. On 07 October 2021, private respondent Villamin, as National Chairman of MAGSASAKA PARTY-LIST duly signed and submitted to the COMELEC Law Department the notarized list of MAGSASAKA Party-List’s Certificate of Nomination, the Certificates of Acceptance of Nomination of its Nominees, the Joint Affidavit of the Chairman and Secretary General attesting that the nominees possess all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications provided by law and that they are neither candidates for any elective office nor have anyone of them lost their bid for an elective office in the concluded 2019 National and Local Elections; 39.2, On 07 May 2022, private respondent Villamin, as National Chairman of MAGSASAKA Party-List, has submitted to the COMELEC Law Department the following: (1) the respective Sworn Statements of Withdrawal of Domitila V. Cahigan as 1s Nominee, Octavius L. Dimagiba as 3" Nominee, Reymoncito A. Abundo as 4 Nominee and Ma. Rowena G. Guanzon as St Nominee; (2) the Certificate of Nominations of the New Nominees, in the following order: King Cortez, Soliman A. Villamin, Jr. (Substitute Nominee) and Joren Y. Obumani (Substitute Nominee); (3) Joint Affidavit dated 06 May 2022 of National Chairperson Villamin and Secretary General King M. Cortez stating that the nominees/substitute nominees possess all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications provided by law and that they are neither candidates for any elective office nor have anyone of them lost their bid for an elective office in the concluded 2019 National and Local Elections; (4) Certificate of Acceptance of Soliman A. Villamin Jr, as the New Nominee No, 2 and Joren Y. Obumani as the New Nominee No. 3 with Sworn Authority to Submit Certificate of Nomination and Certificate of Acceptance and Nomination; (5) Board Resolution 2" MAGSASAKA Party-List’s Nominees submitted by private respondent Villamin on 07 October 2021 Page 18 of 33, dated 28 April 2022 signed by Secretary General King M. Cortez and Chairperson Soliman Villamin, Jr.; 39.3. On 11 May 2022, MAGSASAKA submitted proof of publication of its new and complete list of nominees made in People’s Tonight and The Manila ‘Times on even date; 39.4. On 31 May 2022, the COMELEC Law Department received the following documents from MAGSASAKA Party-List through private Villamin’s authorized representatives: a) Certificate of Nomination of MAGSASAKA with the following Nominees: (1) King M. Cortez, (2) Soliman A. Villamin, Jr, (3) Joren Y, Obumani, (4) Roberto Gerard L. Nazal, dr. (5) Emiliano L. Gutierrez, Jr.; (b) Joint Affidavit of National Chairman Soliman Villamin Jr. and Secretary General King Cortez attesting to the fact that the nominces/substitute nominees possess all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications provided by law and that they are neither candidates for any elective office nor have anyone of them lost their bid for an elective office in the concluded 2019 National and Local Elections; (c} the Certificates of Acceptance and Nomination of Roberto Gerard L. Nazal Jr. as Nominee No. 4 and of Emiliano L. Gutierrez Jr as Nominee No, 5; and (d) the Secretary Certificate dated 31 May 2022; 39.5. On 03 June 2022, MAGSASAKA Party-List published in the Business World and in Malaya Business Insight, the list of its new/substitute nominees: King M. Cortez as its 1 nominee, Soliman A. Villamin, Jr. as its 2" nominee, Joren Y. Obumani as its 3 nominee, Roberto Gerard L. Nazal, Jr. as its 4% nominee and Emiliano L. Gutierrez Jr. as its 5% nominee. The proofs of publication were submitted to the COMELEC Law Department on 07 June 2022; 39.6. On 06 June 2022, MAGSASAKA Party-List submitted the following to the Law Department: (1) duly notarized withdrawal of acceptance of nominations of King M. Cortez and Soliman A, Villamin as nominee nos. | and 2, respectively due to Page 19 of 33 personal reasons and legal circumstances; (2) duly notarized withdrawal of acceptance of nomination of Joren Y. Obumani as nominee no. 3 due to health reasons; (3) the Certificate of Nomination of Roberto Gerard L. Nazal Jr., Emiliano L. Gutierrez Jr., Mark Anthony C. Camba, Enrequi Z. Castro and Brando L. Salang-oy; (4) Joint Affidavit of National Chairman Villamin and Secretary General Cortez attesting to the qualifications and none of the disqualifications provided by law of new/substitute nominees and the fact that and that they are neither candidates for any elective office nor have anyone of them lost their bid for an elective office in the concluded 2019 National and Local Elections; (5) the notarized Certificates of Acceptance of Nazal Jr. as the Party’s I* nominee, Gutierrez Jr. as the Party’s 2"¢ nominee, Camba as the Party's 3 nominee, Castro as the Party's 4! nominee and Salang-oy as the Party’s 5 nominee; 39.7. On 08 June 2022, MAGSASAKA Party-List published the new end latest nominees in the Business World and Malaya Business Insight and the proofs of its publication submitted to the COMELEC Law Department on even date. 40. The afore-mentioned factual antecedents confirm private respondent Villamin’s faithful compliance with Section 8 of Republic Act No. 794125 in relation to Section 6 of COMELEC Resolution No, 10090 and Sections 10 and 11 of COMELEC Resohution No. 1071727, ® An Act Providing for the Election of Party-List Representatives through the Party-List System, and Appropriating Funds Therefor. 2 tn the Matter of setting the last day forthe filing ofthe following: (1) Petitions for Registration of Pany-List Groups, Organizations, and Coalitons, (2) Manifestation of Intent to Participate, (3) Submission of Names of Nominees, (4) Filing of Disqualification Cases against Nominees of Groups, Omzanizations and Coaliors under the Panty-List System of Representation and Requiring Publication of Subetinte-Nominees ia Connection withthe 09 May 2022 National and’ Local Elections promulgated on 27 Jenuary 2021. 7 Rules and Regulstions Goveming: 1) Political Conventiors; 2) Submission of Nominees of Groups or Organizations Paicipating under the Party-List System of Representation; and 3) Filing ‘of Catiticates of Canditacy and Nomination of and Acceptance by Official Candidates of Regisered Political Pates or Coalitions of Pltical Parties in Connection withthe May 9, 2022 [National and Local Elections promulgated oa 18 Aigist 2021 Page 20 of 33 Section 8 of Republic Act No. 7941 states: Section 8. Nomination of _—_Party-List Representatives.Each registered _ party, organization or coalition shall submit to the COMELEC not later than forty-five (45) days before the election a list of names, not less than five (5), from which _ party-list representatives shall be chosen in case it obtains the required number of votes A person may be nominated in one (1) list only. Only persons who have given their consent in writing may be named in the list. The list shall not include any candidate for any elective office or a person who has lost his bid for an elective office in the immediately preceding election. No change of names or alteration of the order of nominees shall be allowed after the same shall have been submitted to the COMELEC except in cases where the nominee dies, or withdraws in writing his nomination, becomes incapacitated in which case the name of the substitute nominee shall be placed last in the list. Incumbent sectoral representatives in the House of Representatives who are nominated in the party-list system shall not be considered resigned.?* Section 6 of COMELEC Resolution No. 10690 reads; SECTION 6. Withdrawal and Substitution Due to Withdrawal of Nomination. — Section 4, Rule 4 of Resolution No, 9366 is hereby amended by adding new provisions to be read as follows: "Section 4. Withdrawal of nomination or acceptance of nomination. — Withdrawal of nominations and substitution of nominees due to the withdrawal of the acceptance to the nomination shall be in writing and under 23 Brephasie Supplied Page 21 of 33 oath, and filed with the Law Department not later than NOVEMBER 15, 2021. Provided that NO substitution shall be VALID unless the party files with the Law Department a list of its substitute nominees, the certificates of nomination and acceptance of the substitute nominees, and an aifidavit executed by the secrelary-general and the chairperson or president of the party attesting that the substitute nominees possess all the qualifications and none of __ the disqualifications provided by law. The name of the substitute nominee shall be placed last in the list, The number of nominees in the new list shall be the same with the number of those previously submitted in the original list. Within five (5) days from the filing of the list of substitute nominees, the party shall cause the publication of its NEW and COMPLETE list of nominees in two (2) national newspapers of general circulation. The party shall submit proof of publication of its new list of nominees with the Law Department within three (@) days from completion of the said publication. No substitution hall be valid _ without compliance with the requirements on publication and submission of proof thereof. A nominee who withdraws his acceptance to the nomination shall not be eligible for re-nomination by the same party “29 or nomination by other parties.’ Sections 10 and 11 of COMELEC Resolution No. 10717 reads: SECTION 10. Nomination of —Party-List Representatives. — A person may be nominated in one (1) list only. Only persons who have given their consent in writing may ® emphasis and Underscoring Supplied. Page 22 of 33 be named in the list. The list shall not include any candidate for any elective office or a person who has lost his bid for an elective office in the May 13, 2019 National and Local Elections. No change of names or alterations of the order of nominees shall be allowed after the same shall have been submitted to the Commission except in cases where the nominee dies, becomes incapacitated, or there is valid withdrawal and substitution of nominees as provided in the succeeding sections, in which case, the name of the substitute nominee shall be placed last in the list. SECTION 11. Withdrawal of Nominations and Substitution of FParty-List Nominees. — Withdrawal of nominations and substitution of nominees due to the withdrawal of the acceptance to the nomination shall be in writing and under oath, and filed with the Law Department not later than November 15, 2021 (Monday). Provided that no substitution shall be valid unless the party files with the Law Department a list of its substitute nominees, the certificates of nomination and acceptance of the substitute nominees, and an affidavit executed by the secretary-general and the chairperson or president of the party attesting that the substitute nominees possess all the qualifications and none of __ the disqualifications provided by law. The name of the substitute nominee shall be placed last in the list, The number of nominees in the new list shall be the same with the number of those previously submitted in the original list. Within five (5) days from the filing of the list of substitute nominees, the party shall cause the publication of its new and complete list of nominees in two (2) national newspapers of general circulation. ‘The party shall submit proof of publication of its new list of nominees with the Law Page 23 of 33 Department within three (3) days from completion of the said publication. No substitution shall be valid _ without compliance with the requirements on publication and submission of proof thereof. A nominee who withdraws his acceptance to the nomination shall not be eligible for re-nomination by the same party or nomination by other parties. 41. To elucidate, petitioner, in utter bad faith, once more tries to convince the Honorable Court that there was “obeisance to the onerous requirements imposed by the COMELEC? 30 42. Truth is, there was no compliance with the safeguards imposed by public respondent COMELEC relating to Party-List Nominees. To illustrate: 42.1. The Certificate of Nomination was signed ONLY by General D. Du, their purported Secretary General and not by the Party’s legally recognized authorized representative, the National Chairman in the person of private respondent Villamin herein; 42.2, The reason for the withdrawal of acceptance of Crisostomo C. Beltran and Ramid P. Gualberto, their original nominee nos. 3 and 4, were not stated; 42.3. Danilo T. Carranza, their original nominee no. 4, has withdrawn the acceptance of his nomination to supposedly “to give way to the new council of the party” as shown in the 09 August 2022 Notice of Substitution filed with the COMELEC Law Department on even date; > Paragraph 3 of Petitioner's Motion Page 24 of 33 42.4. Jeannie A. Villanueva, their original nominee no, 5, has withdrawn the acceptance of her nomination to supposedly “to give way to the new council of the party” as shown in the 09 August 2022 Notice of Substitution filed with the COMELEC Law Department on even date; 42.5. In clear contravention of Section 6 of COMELEC Resolution No. 10690 and Sections 10 and 11 of COMELEC Resolution No. 10717, Danilo T. Carranza was re-nominated as nominee no. 4 and he has signed anew a Certificate of Acceptance of Nomination; 42.6. In clear contravention of Section 6 of COMELEC Resolution No. 10690 and Sections 10 and 11 of COMELEC Resolution No. 10717, Jeannie A. Villanueva was re-nominated as nominee no. 5 and she has signed anew a Certificate of Acceptance of Nomination; 42.7. The re-nomination of Carranza and Villanueva showed that the original list of their nominees have not been exhausted, as such, Bernie F, Cruz, Ariel T. Cayanan and Lejun P. Dela Cruz should not have been nominated, albeit illegally, as nominee nos. 1, 2 and 3. The rule is clear, only when the original list is exhausted can the party be allowed to submit a new list. Further, the names of Cruz, Cayanan and Dela Cruz, as substitutes, should have been placed last in the list, 42.8, Their submitted Certificate of Nomination lacked the Affidavit of the Secretary Gencral and Chairperson/President attesting that _—_—‘the new/substitute nominees possess all _ the qualifications and none of the disqualifications provided by law; 42.9. There was no compliance with the publication requirement of its new and complete list of nominees in two (2) national newspapers of general circulation within five (5) days from the Page 25 of 33 filing with the COMELEC Law Department the list of its supposed substitute nominees made on 09 August 2022; and 42.10. There was no compliance with the requirement to submit proof of publication of its new list of nominees to the COMELEC Law Department within three (3) days from completion of said publication. 43. The non-publication of the new list of nominees and the non-submission of the proof of publication thereof to the COMELEC Law Department rendered entirely the substitution/new list invalid and without any legal and binding effect. 44. Further, petitioner's failure to comply with the publication requirement absolutely reeks of bad faith, again. This failure, deliberate or otherwise, has resulted in the prevention of the filing of petitions to deny due course to or cancel the nomination™ of Bernie F. Cruz, Ariel T, Cayanan, Lejun P. Dela Cruz and the re-nominations of Carranza and Villanueva. 45. Thus, the 09 August 2022 substitution of their 06 October 2021 Certificate of Nomination is procedurally and substantially infirmed. 45.1. The claim therefore, alluding to public respondent’s grave abuse is false, misleading and again reeks of bad faith. Mr. Nazal possesses all the qualifications and none of the ! SECTIONS. When to File Petitions. — Section 4, Rule S paragraph (a) of COMELEC Resolution No. 9365 is hereby amended to read as follows: (@) Petition to deny duc course 10 oF cancellation of nomination of party-list nominees shall be ‘hed vithin ten (10) days from the date of publication of the ist of nominees by dhe EID, or incase of subsequem publication by reason of substitution, within fen (10) days from the submission of proof of publication by the partylist groups, organizations, or cealitions of is new and complete list of nominees, with respect tothe substitute nominees: and (nthe Matter of Setting the Last Day forthe Filing of Certain Documents in Connection with the (09 May 2022 National ané Local Elections, COMELEC Resclution No. 10630, January 27,2021)) Page 26 of 33 disqualifications to be a nominee for MAGSASAKA PartyList. 46. Mr. Nazal has been nominated in one (1) list only. 47, Mr. Nazal was not a candidate for any elective office or a person who has lost his bid for an elective office in the concluded 2019 National and Local Elections. A copy of the Affidavit of the Secretary-General and the Chairperson or President of the nominating party, sectoral party, organization or Coalition, attesting that the nominees/substitute nominees possess all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications provided by law as required under this Section and in Sections 11 and 12 of COMELEC Resolution No. 10717 is hereto attached as ANNEX “2.” 48. Mr. Nazal is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, a registered voter, a resident of the Philippines for forty-nine (49) years, able to read and write, a bona fide member of MAGSASAKA regional political party under the Party-List System ninety (90) days prior to the 09 May 2022 concluded National and Local Elections and is at least twenty-five (25) years of age on the day of the election. Most importantly, as the country’s top-agro-entrepreneur and farmer's welfare advocate, Mr. Nazal will be able to contribute to the formulation and enactment of appropriate legislation that will benefit the nation as a whole. 49. His track record in the cutting edge of technology and innovation in the agri-business sector, particularly in UAL Bioscience Corporation and HealthWellnessLifestyle (HWL), show his commitment to look for solutions that would make a positive and significant difference in the betterment of the agricultural indusiry and community in order to address the challenges related to enhanced agricultural yield and food security. He believes that what remains to be improved for farmers are their scalability, commercial viability and productivity: finally, he understands that policies open to technology should be in place provided that this is “balanced between producer-consumer and enforced by a Page 27 of 33, regulatory body that disincentivizes the syndical practices of old’? 49.1. Mr. Nazal has received various recognitions for his advocacy work for the agriculture sector some of which were from the Rotary International, Rotary Club of Biak-Na-Bato, Rotary District 3780 and Rotary Club of South Triangle, ANNEXES “3” and “3-A” hereof. 49.2. Mr. Nazal belongs to the Bulacan Chapter of Magsasaka Party-list with address at Barangay Pungo, Calumpit, Bulacan. This is where he spearheaded the campaign for Magsasaka Party-list for purposes of the 2022 Party-list elections as shown in ANNEXES “4” to “4-C” hereof. 49.3, For his assistance to the members of the Party during the COVID-19 pandemic, Mr. Nazal was given a Sertipiko ng Pagkilala by MAGSASAKA Party- List’s Secretary General, King Cortez on 18 April 2022 as shown in ANNEXES “5” to “S-C” hereof. 49.4. Despite the barrage of ridicule that petitioner and his cohorts had cast upon Mr. Nazal, he continues to enjoy the support of his fellow MAGSASAKA Party-list members for they know the good that he can bring in, as shown in ANNEXES “6” to “6-F* hereof. 50. While Petitioner and his cohorts were busy talking about how to help the agriculture sector, Mr. Nazal was already walking the talk. He knew that a collaboration with key stakeholders in the Philippines can make the transition to cco-sustainable, scalable, economical and efficient organic farming is necessary in addressing key issues such as, environmental degradation, accessibility to safe quality and affordable organic food for all Filipinos, food security and the health of the farming community. > baggy philstar.som /opinion’2022/00/302221 3268/leeder-in-hie field Page 28 of 33 51. Therefore, premises considered, the private respondent, through the undersigned counsels, most respectfully prays that the Motion to Issue Writ of Preliminary Injunction and/or Temporary Restraining Order be DENIED and the issued STATUS QUO ANTE ORDER be LIFTED. PRAYER WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed before this Honorable Court that the Motion to Issue Writ of Preliminary Injunction and/or ‘Temporary Restraining Order be DENIED and the issued STATUS QUO ANTE ORDER be LIFTED. Other reliefs just and equitable under the circumstances are likewise prayed for. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Quezon City for Manila City, 02 November 2022. MANUEL VENTURA & PARTNERS (MVP Law) Counsel for Private Respondent Soliman A. Villamin, Jr. Units 303A to 303C Fil Garcia Tower Kalayaan Avenue corner Mayaman Street, Quezon City, 1101 Landline No. 02.8.553.69.52 Mobile No. 0915.852.65.69 Office Email: info.muplaw@gmail.com Counsel’s Email: muplegalgroup@ymail.com MANUEL ANGELO B. VENTURA IIL Roll No. 57868 PTR No. 2532426 — 01/18/2022 — Quezon City IBP No. 199545 - 01/18/2022 - Quezon City MCLE Compliance No. V-0007304 (Pending Compliance for Updated MCLE) Page 29 of 33 5. -VELASQUEZ Réll No. 81619 PTR No, 3073935/ 25 May 2022/ Quezon City IBP No. 224695/ 25 May 2022/ Quezon City Admitted to the Philippine Bar: May 2022 LB ep rhenacoe Roll No. 79027 PTR No. 2596330/15 July 2022/Quezon City TBP No. 211115/15 May 2022/Manila 1 Admitted to the Philippine Bar: May 2022 EXPLANATION Pursuant to Rule 13, Section 5 of the Rules of Court, @ copy of the foregoing Comment/Opposition to the Motion to Issue Writ of Preliminary Injunction and/or Tempo: Restraining Order dated 10 October 2022 1s being s on the adverse parties through registered raail due to and distance constraints, and lack of manpowe: personnel. snalerlf once CERIZAR VICENTE 8. TORI. Counsel for Petitioner Atty. General D. Du #34 Matiyaga St, Bi ryahan, Quezon City Email Copy furnished: THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS Public Respondent Office of the Chairman, Commission on Elections, Palacio det Gobernador, Intramuros, Manila E-mail Sanus OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL (Counsei for the Public Respondent 134 Amorsolo Si., Legaspi Village, Makati City E-mail: Page 30/0733 Creal ce ‘VERIFIED DECLARATION I, ANGELINE DC. RODRIGUEZ, hereby declare that the documents (and annexes thereof) hereto ere submiitec electronically in accordance with the Efficient Use of Paner rule and are complete and true copies of thie document ana annexes filed with the Supreme Court. Signature: Printed Name: ANGELINE DC. RODRIGUEZ Position: Counsel for Private Respondent Soliman 4 Villamin, Jr. Date: 02 November 2022 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 2™ day of November 2022, affiant ANGELINE DC. RODRIGUEZ with IBP Roll of Attorneys No. 79027, bearing her photograph and signature. I acknowledge that the aifiant has read and understood the preceding contents and frecly and voluntarily executed the same. Doe. No. 24: sure s044 cia TOWER ae XAUAYAAN AVE, =n NAKAMAN S Page No. ol; SaGY. CENTRAL QUEZON CITY Book No. pl; Series of 2022. Page 31! 3 Republic of the Philippines) Quezon City) S.S. AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE I, BRYLLE TERRENCE A. GADONG, Ic. and a resident of 3 Interior 5 Lalcas Street, Bray Matandang Balara, Quezon City, after having been duly sworn in accordance with law, hereby acpose and state THAT: 1. I am the Liaison Officer/Messenger of MANUEL VENTURA & PARTNERS (MVP LAW). the counsel for Respondent Soliman Villamin Jr., in the case entitled “MAGKAKASAMA SA SAKAHAN, — KAUNALARAN (MAGSASAKA) PARTY-LIST, represented by its Secretary General, ATTY. GENERAL D. DU vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and SOLIMAN VILLAMIN JR.”: 2. On 02 November 2022, 1 caused a copy of «A COMMENT/ OPPOSITION dated 02 Novesber 2022 servec via registered mail to the other party due to time anc manpower constraints: CERIZAR VICENTE 8. TORIO Counsel for Petitioner Atty. General D. Du #34 Matiyaga St., Brey. Pinyahan, Quezon City Email THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS Public Respondent Office of the Chairman, Commission on Elections, Palacio del Gobernader, Intramuros, Mania Em: OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENER41, Counsel for Public Respondent Counsel for Public Respondent COMELEC Legaspi Village, Makati City ph AFFIANT FURTHER SAYETH NAUGHT. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, | have hereunto sei my hand this 2°4 day of November 2022 in Quezon City. Page 32.0133 af BRYLLE TERRENCE A. GADONG Affiant SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 2"! d of November 2022 in Quezon City, affiant exhibited to me his Tax Identification Number (TIN) ID with number 765- 302-630-000 issued by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), as competent proof of his identi) Doc. No. _p; Page No. pi; Book No. 02 ; Series of 2022. Page 35 9{ 33 ANNEX” fo” senor TIFT NOMINATION PURSUANT to the power and authority vested in me by the Constitution and By-Laws of MAGKAKASAMA SA _SAKAHAN KAUNLARAN (MAGSASAKA), a political party/scctoral party/organizationiccaltion duly acereiied by the Commission to participate in the May 9, 2022 National ‘and Local Elections under the party-list system, 1___SOLIMAN A. VILLAMINIR. __, Chairperson! President/ Secretary-General of aforesaid partylist group, hereby nominate in the order stated the following pariy-ist nominees: 1 hereby certify that the above nominees have all the qualifications and mone of the isqualificaions of perty-list nominees and that they are neither candidates for any elective office nor have anyone of them lost their bid fran elective office in the May 13, 2019 National and Local Elections. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, | hereunto affix my-algnature this. day of 2022, i Philippines. i SOLIMANA: VILLAMIN JR. ‘Charpersoa/Presideri/Secreany-Ceneral SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before methis day of __- 9 2022, at affient exhibiting to mean Identification document/cacd Which comming + Photograph and signature bearing Nodhyasgect Haar Pasissued by. eo sauce prem stowed yor pe ie. Ss yik vgn ein dren ts Se Sanatscrt snd ytcioy mao cnrpaon tus pita nd acoso mr en aa le mpd ee ERS aecyaSSpin peice oc COMET see al Acne fe Pate Yookne tego at fae finite of Nine ry Ceri etme Nonny pon a ey cr A, AGREES TASS erm ceeene son CoML dette emer tage ep iy Nt, tad nema lcm on Annex “C™ REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES ) MUNICIPALITY/CITY OF. 38s ANNEX " Z AEFIDAVIT We, KING M. CORTEZ, _and__SOLIMAN A. VILLAMIN JR. __, Secretary- General and Chairpersow/President, of_MAGKAKASAMA SA SAKAHAN KAUNLARAN, (QMAGSASAKA) (name of political pertysectoral party/organization/coalition). respectively. both of legal ages, Pilipinas and residen's of BLOCK 1 LOT 48 PHASE B, LEGIAN 2 SUBD. CARSADANG BAGO 1, IMUS CAVITE, and DV BOER FARM, BRGY. BALIBAGO, LIAN BATANGAS, after having been daly sworn to in accordenee with law, do hereby depose and say that: 1. MAGKAKASAMA SA SAKAHAN KAUNLARAN (MAGSASAKA) (name of political partysectoral — partorganiation/coalition), is a political ~—_—party/sectoral party/organization/coalition duly cccredited by the Commission to participate inthe May 9, 2022 ‘National and Local Elections under the party-list system; 2. Pursuant to the power and authority vested upon us by the Constitution and By-Laws of _MAGKAKASAMA SA SAKAHAN KAUNLARAN (MAGSASAKA) (name of political party/secioral party/organization/coalition), we hereby nominate in the order stated the following nominees/substitute nominees: SAME AuDRESS 1. ROBERTO GERARD 1. NAZALJR. MILKY WAY ST..BLUE RIDGE SUBD. _ 5. BRANDO L,SALANG-OV LOT 16 VILLA VERDE EAST. DULUMBAYAN. 3. The said mominces/substitute nominees have all the qualifications and none of the ioqualifications provided by law and that they are neither candidates for any elective office nor have anyone of them lost their bid for an elective office in the May 13, 2019 ‘National and Local Flections; 4, We are executing this affidavit to attest to the truthfulness of the foregoing statements. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our bands this__day of. 2022 at ange Philippines. EE _s cerriréo Macuine COPY GF THE GRIGINAL/RECORD OW FILE py", dae ANNEX "y. ieee SH SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this day! ch, 2022, a = affients exhibiting t me Identification documenis/cards which contain their photographs and signotures with the following details: Name: Iesued by: Issued ont KINGM. CORTEZ bhpesprt YH HB SOLIMAN A. VILLAMIN JR. Phpaspent rasatzaes NOTICEDISCLAIMER: All autherzod rsiplents of any personal dota, pers infration, wivleged information and sensitive [poscnal information contncd fa hs doctmnt, eluding ether periment decuments aoc! thereo that mre shared ty the ‘Commision on Electors In compkance wis exiting laws sod rules, wd i eaforiity withthe Duta Privacy ActoF2012 (RLA. No. 10173) anc ts implementing Rules and Regeatons 0s wel ste pernent Circa ofthe National Pivacy Commission, ac smialy Pou to eoeply ih sa ams, rcs and regulations. rating to das privacy sccurky.confelenalty, resection and accourtaiiy. LAH ae. « LvOMMISSION ONELECTIONS AGHIME GOP. GERTAMilnat MecoRD O€ PLE 495}py QniD JOUIBAOD 3I119SIG Seq - VSONIdS3 NYG Y 8107 42q0120 Jo AEP yZT STUB WEALD, W093 WANN ON SHAWAVS AXIVG VOW VS INV IVA ON SNOINLYAVN VN OLVE-VN-MVIE JO GN19 ANVLOY FHL JO WVdd0ud ONIGASS YIN MVEV1Vy ON SVLV9 VS Valvd ul “IVZVN "I GUVUAD OLAAION 0} payuasaid Ajpnoad st UOUBoIIyE yo aeNNAID See i 4, O8LE DIASIG werent Letcicigll al oh OVEN = ee e\8uel41 yinos jo.qnio Ase10y quap|seig 19/9 By. = 43A0) 1UDhy = 1ZOZ 18qWIE08q JO AeP a6LSIU3 UAAID eflo” eAANN Bu siauey Auleg eb es pyejew Bu Buojnzeyeu eu oxeg-eu-yelg Jo qn|D Aieqjoy 84340 wes6o1d Buipae IW Meqejey Bu sejen es eved "YP "Pe ) GP PVOU) POPE OL GACYVMY SI NOLLVIDS8ddV JO SLVOISILY3D SIHL NOILVID3audddvV AO ALVDISILYAD sojunuoddo § i BE suedg Auejoy Ul! | Aseqouy PIPPI WW WO KKK KKK 2 BY Ke ‘uxseing ‘tudumnyen es 7202 Taqy Bu gI-eyt uokeBu qoopeyBeurdy -ux e8u ypeSueBueu eu soqny eBur es esv-Bed we fuorm ArBiqiqded vs uonreseu eu eusesSoud Sureqy 241 Su ueySecceured vs poxsuypied ve soipyied Sueremeereur pury Sue

    You might also like