News Roundup 17 May 2022
May 17, 2022 • 7 min Read
CebuPac places pilot under disciplinary review after ‘baseless’ post vs Robredo | INQUIRER.NET – A Cebu Pacific Air pilot is under disciplinary review after he posted an unfounded claim against Vice President Leni Robredo. The pilot earlier lambasted Robredo on social media site Facebook, alleging that the vice president caused flight diversions at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport after requesting that her flight be prioritized. Robredo, as vice president, is among the three persons who have a privilege of having landing and takeoff priority. The two others are the President, and the Senate President. “Since becoming aware of the social media post by one of our pilots in reference to a flight of Vice President Leni Robredo, I confirm that the pilot has made it clear to us that he had no basis for his claim and was purely speculative and careless on his part,” Cebu Pacific Air Flight Operations Vice President Captain Sam Avila said in a statement. “Cebu Pacific has very strict social media policies covering all of its employees and such a post should not have been published. This is recognized by the said pilot himself. He is currently under disciplinary review in accordance with our Company rules and standards,” he likewise shared. Avila likewise apologized to Robredo and the public for the pilot’s action. “While the pilot posted his commentary on his own accord, a post he has since removed, on behalf of Cebu Pacific, and as Head of our Pilot Group, I take command responsibility and apologize unreservedly to the Vice President and the general public for the actions of our pilot,” he said. “As professional aviators and free citizens of this country, we are free to express opinions, but we are also expected to carry out our roles and duties with utmost discernment and caution,” added Avila. Robredo, a presidential candidate, earlier said that disinformation and fake news remain as the biggest challenge to her bid for the country’s highest post. Preliminary findings of Tsek.ph, an academe-based fact-checking initiative, said that Robredo is the “biggest victim” of disinformation.
Duterte signs law extending validity of firearm licenses to 5 to 10 years | PHILSTAR.COM – President Rodrigo Duterte has signed into law a bill extending the validity period of the registration of and the license to possess firearms. Republic Act No. 11766 signed by Duterte on May 6 amended two provisions of the Comprehensive Firearms and Ammunition Regulation Act enacted in 2013. The new law states that all licenses to possess a firearm, regardless of type or classification, and the registration of the firearm shall be renewed every five or ten years, at the option of the licensee. The renewal date for both license to possess and registration of firearms shall be reckoned from the birthdate of the licensee unless sooner revoked or suspended. Previously, all types of licenses to possess a firearm shall be renewed every two years while the registration of the firearm shall be renewed every four years. The failure to renew the registration of the firearm on or before the expiration date shall cause the revocation of its license. The firearm whose license has been revoked shall be confiscated or forfeited in favor of the government after due process. The failure to renew a license or registration on two occasions shall cause the perpetual disqualification of the holder of the firearm from applying for any firearm license. The application for the renewal of the license or registration may be submitted to the Firearms and Explosives Office of the Philippine National Police (PNP) within six months before the expiration date of the license or registration of the firearm. One of the amended provisions also states that the permit to carry firearms outside of residence shall be valid for two years from the date of the approval of the application unless sooner revoked or suspended. The permit is issued by the police to any qualified person whose life is under actual threat or is in imminent danger because of the nature of his or her profession or business. An applicant needs to prove the actual threat to his or her life by submitting a threat assessment certificate. The new law expanded the list of persons who are considered to be in imminent danger to include elected incumbent and former officials and active and retired military and law enforcement personnel. Persons in the list are exempted from the requirement to present a threat assessment certificate. Previously, only members of the Philippine Bar, certified public accountants, accredited media practitioners, cashiers, bank tellers, priests, ministers, rabbi, imams, physicians, nurses, engineers and businessmen who are exposed to high risk of being targets of criminals are exempted from the requirement. The PNP chief has been tasked to come up with implementing rules and regulations within 90 days from the effectivity of the law. However, the law states that the non-issuance of the implementing rules and regulations will not prevent its implementation upon its effectivity.
Finally at SC: Petitioners bring fight vs Marcos’ candidacy to highest court | PHILSTAR.COM – The fight against the candidacy of Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., now presumptive president-elect, has reached the country’s highest court. After losing at the Commission on Elections, petitioners led by their counsel Theodore Te ran to the Supreme Court to ask it to “cancel and declare void ab initio the Certificate of Candidacy for President” filed by Marcos. They also asked the SC to issue a temporary restraining order to enjoin both Chambers of the Congress from canvassing the votes cast for Marcos and proclaim him — set on May 23 — pending the resolution of their petition. Petitioners ask the SC to annual and set aside the May 10 Resolution of the Comelec en Banc that junked their appeal to cancel Marcos’ COC, and the Jan. 17, 2022 resolution of the Second Division that dismissed their plea. “This Petition prays for the invalidation and reversal of the Questioned Comelec Resolutions for having been rendered in grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction,” their Petition for Certiorari read. “Respondent Comelec, by refusing to Cancel or Deny Due Course the [COC] of respondent Marcos, Jr. despite his having deliberately made false material representations on two material items, acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction,” they added. Like other legal challenges filed against Marcos’ candidacy, the Buenafe petition is also anchored on the presumptive president-elect’s conviction for non-failure of Income Tax Return for four years. For their case, the petitioners accused Marcos of “misrepresentations pertaining to his eligibility due to his prior convictions under the 1977 [National Internal Revenue Code.” But the petitioners also brought to SC the Marcoses’ family estate tax liability, estimated to have reached P203 billion due to surcharges and interest, as testament to Marcos Jr.’s “propensity to flour Philippine laws.” They noted that there is no showing that the Marcos heirs paid the tax due, and their team has also evaded questions by the media on the issue. Part of the petitioners’ prayer to the SC is to declare Marcos to “have never been a candidate in the 2022 National Elections.” “With Respondent Marcos Jr.’s Void COC, the Eligible Candidate with the Next Highest Number of Votes Should be Proclaimed,” they told the court,” they told the SC citing the case of Jalosjos. In the cited case, Jalosjos’ COC was declared void due to ineligibility during his filing, and the cancellation retroacted to the day of filing. Part of the ruling read: If a certificate of candidacy void ab initio is cancelled one day or more after the elections, all votes for such candidate should also be stray votes because the certificate of candidacy is void from the very beginning. The petitioners also cited the Velasco doctrine that explained the second placer rule. In it, the court said that when faced between provisions on material qualifications of elected officials and the will of the electorate, “we believe and so hold that we cannot chose the electorate will.”
