What was Bongbong Marcos thinking in skipping his disqualification hearing? On the case hangs his long-planned presidential run. He had announced to be preparing for it. The Comelec had notified him the previous week to attend. Commissioner Rowena Guanzon tweeted: “I will preside over the preliminary conference of Akbayan et al vs Marcos Jr. on Jan 7 at 9 a.m. Lawyers, prepare! I have low tolerance for incompetence... Parties must personally appear. Vax cards, face masks.”
BBM’s absence delayed the proceedings for an hour. Guanzon demanded to know why he would not join even only by Zoom teleconferencing. His lawyer claimed he was on quarantine, being unwell after exposure to two aides positive for COVID-19. Even online appearance was shunned lest BBM infect others.
Was BBM avoiding sticky questions, like his tax evasion for four years, 1982-1985, the reason for his DQ case? Or his publicists’ unverified claims of his having paid deficiencies, surcharges and fines for the criminal conviction?
Not even a medical certificate, Guanzon quizzed? Such excuse slip is basic in missing class or work, much more a hearing, petitioners remarked later.
The publicists posted online a doctor’s report of having visited BBM at 10 a.m. the day before and finding him slightly feverish, 37.8ºC, with “difficulty in speaking due to a painfully congested throat.”
Netizens swiftly retorted that BBM at 4:45 p.m. that same day had lively discussed in a radio show his anti-pandemic platform. There supposedly was no indication of feeling under the weather.
Confirming that, yet also blasting the netizens for “misinformation and lack of empathy”, the publicists disclosed that BBM had an earlier radio interview just before the doctor’s house call.
So why BBM’s refusal to show up for even a moment in that crucial hearing when he could speak at length about himself twice on the day he was sickly? Did he catch Zoomicron, netizens quipped. If Zoom-ing can infect, then why did he do it twice?
Guanzon then required the doctor to have his findings certified true. Notarization is basic in legal submissions. Guanzon’s intolerance of incompetence was evident.
Incompetence was also the point of netizens’ posts. The party’s actions and statements didn’t make sense. But some things are beyond comprehension, Carlo Cipolla propounded in “The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity”, 1976. The Italian professor of economic history advised thinkers tongue-in-cheek to accept that: One, always and inevitably, everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation. Two, the probability that a certain person will be stupid is independent of any other characteristic of that person (eg., wealth, education, position). Three, a stupid person is one who causes losses to another or to a group while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses. Four, non-stupid people always underestimate the damaging power of stupid individuals; they constantly forget that dealing or associating with stupid people always turns out to be a costly mistake. Five, a stupid person is the most dangerous type of person.
Guanzon intends to resolve the DQ by Jan. 17. Worries are that BBM may protract the case till she retires from the Comelec next month.
For the petitioners it is open and shut. BBM was convicted of tax evasion, four counts, by final Court of Appeals judgment in 1997. The National Internal Revenue Code perpetually bars a tax evader from public office. The Omnibus Election Code disqualifies anyone convicted of crime involving moral turpitude. That BBM was able to run for senator and VP thereafter is inconsequential. There is no court record of his having paid the P36,000-penalty for the four convictions.
What was BBM thinking in evading income taxes as vice-governor then governor for four years? Did he think that as son of then-dictator Ferdinand Marcos he could get away with it? Did he think they would be in power forever? Did he not care about losses he might incur later?
Whatever the outcome in Guanzon’s First Division, a petition pends in the Second Division for cancellation of BBM’s candidacy. That case alleges that BBM perjured twice in his candidacy certificate, hence invalid. He had sworn to be eligible to run and to never having been convicted for an offense that prohibits it.
Ignorance of tax, election, and perjury laws is no excuse, petitioners aver. What was BBM thinking when he “misrepresented” qualification for election? Did he do it by rote having done so before but unquestioned? Will not such a person do damage if he assumes the highest position in the land? Is there no danger of widespread emulation of tax evasion?