Comelec bares ‘complications’ in Marcoleta’s Soce issue
MANILA, Philippines — The Commission on Elections (Comelec) on Wednesday bared the “complications” behind the delayed release of the resolution on the case of Sen. Rodante Marcoleta over his alleged inaccurate disclosure in his statement of contribution and expenditure (Soce).
Comelec Chairperson George Erwin Garcia said the poll body is aware of the privilege speech of Senator Panfilo Lacson on Tuesday, in which the lawmaker asked why the resolution on Marcoleta’s case has yet to be issued.
Garcia said the Comelec en banc, in its session on Wednesday, is now discussing the complications surrounding the issue.
READ: Lacson says Marcoleta Soce ‘admission’ could be ‘indirect bribery’
The Comelec’s Political Finance and Affairs Department (PFAD) earlier issued a show cause order to Marcoleta, asking him to explain why some of his public statements allegedly did not match his Soce and statements of assets, liabilities, and net worth (SALN).
In an interview with Net25, Marcoleta was asked why his expenditure in his Soce was much higher than his declared assets. He said he did not declare some of his contributions at the request of friends who wanted to remain anonymous.
Marcoleta’s Soce, available on the Comelec website, showed no contributions, while his campaign expenditure reached P112,857,951.44. Meanwhile, his assets in his SALN amounted to P80,401,700.
Garcia said the PFAD already made a recommendation on the case, but the poll body last week received a referral from the Office of the Ombudsman regarding a complaint filed by election watchdog Kontra Daya against Marcoleta to review his Soce and SALN. He explained that since the Comelec has jurisdiction over Soces, the complaint was forwarded to its law department.
READ: Marcoleta faces perjury raps before Ombudsman over campaign donations
Garcia noted that the complication arises because any recommendation from the PFAD must still be elevated to the law department. He added that the Comelec cannot ignore the cases, as they are of the same nature, and Marcoleta has a right to due process.
“For example, if their (PFAD) recommendation is to file a case or complaint because they believe there is probable cause, it is submitted to the Comelec law department. But what if the law department is already handling a matter involving the same individual?” Garcia said in Filipino in an interview.
Garcia then pointed out that some may think the PFAD’s resolution should be released, bypassing the law department, since the cases involve the same allegations.
“So, is it possible to consolidate, to combine, or should they be treated separately? The reason they cannot simply be combined is that one recommends, while the other tries or litigates. But now they are in the same office. What should be done? Sorry, but that’s what complicates the matter,” he said in Filipino.
Garcia also said that nothing influenced the PFAD’s recommendation, as it conducted its own fact-finding investigation; however, he acknowledged that the complexity of the issue may not be fully understood.
READ: Lubiano-Escudero donation cleared by Comelec unit
Garcia likened the situation to the case of Senator Francis Escudero, who received a campaign donation from a contractor. He said there was no complication then, as the PFAD recommended terminating the case before a complaint was filed with the law department.
Garcia said Marcoleta’s defense is that he received the donations before the start of the 2025 election campaign period, citing the Peñera doctrine of the Supreme Court. Under this ruling, an aspirant is only considered a candidate once the campaign period begins.
“This is based on the Supreme Court decision in the Peñera vs. Comelec case, which states that a person should not be punished or charged for accepting gifts or donations before they are officially a candidate,” he added. /mcm
