VP electoral protest

TIMELINE: Marcos-Robredo election case

Patty Pasion

This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.

TIMELINE: Marcos-Robredo election case

LEGAL BATTLE. One year later, former senator Ferdinand Marcos Jr continues to challenge the victory of Vice President Leni Robredo in the May 2016 elections.

(6th UPDATE) Here are the key moments in the legal battle between Vice President Leni Robredo and her rival in the May 2016 polls, former senator Ferdinand Marcos Jr

It’s been a year since election day, and also a year since the country saw one of the most nail-biting vice presidential races to date.

Then-Camarines Sur 3rd District representative Leni Robredo, a reluctant politician thrust into the national limelight, went up against then-senator Ferdinand Marcos Jr, son and namesake of the late strongman.

Robredo won by only a slim margin. On the eve of Robredo’s oath-taking, Marcos filed an election protest, claiming there was massive cheating in the polls.

Aside from dealing with the election protest, Robredo has had other challenges in her first year as vice president – she resigned from the Duterte Cabinet, faced online attacks and rumors, and is now the subject of draft impeachment complaints.

Marcos, as he insists that the vice presidency was “stolen” from him, has been visiting loyalists around the country to thank them for their support during the elections. Even out of office, the former senator updates the public about his activities on social media.

With Robredo and Marcos’ legal battle far from over, the two rivals continue to cross paths. Here are the key moments in their election case:

May 6, 2016 – Marcos first floated the idea of cheating in the elections during his miting de avance in Mandaluyong City, where he questioned Robredo’s topping the ABS-CBN’s survey conducted by Pulse Asia. Other polls at the time showed the two were in a statistical tie.

TIMELINE: Marcos-Robredo election case

May 10 to 11, 2016 – At around 3:40 am of May 10, Robredo grabbed the top spot from Marcos in the partial and unofficial canvassing of votes. Shortly after, Marcos’ representatives called for a news conference and insinuated that Robredo and the Liberal Party rigged the elections.

The Marcos camp sustained their allegations against Robredo, saying that the transparency server of the Commission on Elections (Comelec) was tampered with, as proven by the change in the hash code. This opened debates on the infamous hash code issue and statistical explanations on Robredo’s surge over Marcos.

Robredo, from the start, denied the cheating allegations. The Comelec also explained that the altered script was only due to a cosmetic change for names with “ñ” appearing with a “?”.

May 20 to 24, 2016 – Marcos’ representatives, former Abakada representative Jonathan dela Cruz and lawyer Amor Amorado, filed a series of complaints before the Comelec, seeking an explanation for the script change. They also filed a criminal case against Smartmatic and Comelec representatives before the Manila Prosecutor’s Office for allegedly violating the cybercrime law.

TIMELINE: Marcos-Robredo election case

May 27, 2016 – Robredo emerged winner in the official canvassing of votes, coincidentally on the birthday of her late husband, former interior secretary Jesse Robredo.

June 29, 2016 – Marcos filed an election protest versus Robredo before the Supreme Court (SC), sitting as the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET). He contested the results in 27 cities and provinces, covering 39,221 “clustered” precincts which are composed of 132,446 “established” precincts. He also sought the nullification of votes in Basilan, Maguindanao, and Lanao del Sur, where massive poll fraud allegedly occurred.

Robredo was sworn in a day after, on June 30, 2016.

TIMELINE: Marcos-Robredo election case

July 12, 2016 – The PET ordered the Comelec to safeguard all poll materials in all 92,509 clustered precincts used in the May elections. It also directed Robredo to file her response to Marcos’ election protest.

August 15, 2016 – Robredo filed her response and a counter-protest. In her response, the Vice President asked the SC to junk Marcos’ protest since the change in the hash code did not affect the election results.

Her lawyers, Romulo Macalintal and Bernadette Sardillo, also argued that Marcos’ camp failed to specify how the alleged cheating happened and failed to show evidence of cheating in the Mindanao provinces where he wants votes nullified.

On the same day, the Marcos camp filed a manifestation on the Comelec’s proposal to strip vote-counting machines (VCMs) and laptops of election data. The former senator’s camp argued that this violated the PET order to preserve election paraphernalia.

TIMELINE: Marcos-Robredo election case

September 28, 2016 – Manila City Prosecutor Edward Togonon junked the cybercrime complaint filed by the Marcos camp over the hash code controversy. The case was dismissed for lack of merit and insufficiency of evidence.

October to November 2016 – The Comelec began returning 1,356 leased VCMs to Smartmatic on October 27 despite Marcos’ earlier manifestations before the PET, opposing the move. The Comelec had told the PET on October 22 that these were unused VCMs that were given to the poll body for contingency.

The Comelec also started data stripping in its warehouse in Sta Rosa, Laguna on October 26. Data were found in these supposedly unused SD cards, prompting Marcos to ask the PET to order the Comelec to bare the SD cards’ contents.

January 20, 2017 – Marcos’ lawyer urged the PET to move forward with the election protest by setting a preliminary conference where issues will be simplified.

February 16, 2017 – The PET declared Marcos’ protest as sufficient in form and substance, and denied Robredo’s appeal to junk Marcos’ protest.

February 27, 2017 – Robredo filed a motion for reconsideration on her junked appeal.

March 6, 2017 – Marcos’ camp accused Robredo’s lawyers of delaying the proceedings. Macalintal has since denied this, saying that they are only correcting the irregularities in Marcos’ protest.

April 10, 2017 – The PET ordered Marcos to pay P66 million and Robredo P15.43 million as service fees for the contested precincts. Both were given until April 17 to settle the first installment – P36 million for Marcos and P8 million for Robredo. The second tranche – P30 million for Marcos and P7.5 million for Robredo – is due on July 14.

April 12, 2017 – Robredo’s camp filed a motion, asking the PET to defer their payment until an initial recount of votes has been done in 3 provinces to be identified by Marcos. They also argued that Marcos should pay for all the precincts since he is questioning the integrity of the whole automated elections system.

TIMELINE: Marcos-Robredo election case

April 17, 2017 – Despite the Marcos camp’s earlier pronouncement that they would file a motion for reconsideration on the amount required of them, Marcos paid the first half of the service fee. He said the money was pooled from resources of friends and supporters.

April 20, 2017 – Marcos asked the SC to junk Robredo’s counter-protest over non-payment of her service fee.

April 25, 2017 – The PET ordered Robredo to pay the P8-million fee on May 2. It also set the preliminary conference for Marcos’ protest on June 21.

May 2, 2017 – Robredo paid the first tranche. She said she used her own money and borrowed cash from relatives.

May 5, 2017 – Robredo asked the PET to remove from its records Marcos’ motion to junk her counter-protest over the issue of non-payment.

TIMELINE: Marcos-Robredo election case

June 1, 2017 – Marcos once again asks the PET to expedite the process of his election protest. He urges the court to order the decryption and printing of the ballot images from the SD cards used in the 36,465 clustered precincts.

This covers the provinces of Cebu, Leyte, Negros Occidental, Negros Oriental, Masbate, Zamboanga del Sur, Zamboanga del Norte, Bukidnon, Iloilo, Bohol, Quezon, Batangas, Western Samar, Misamis Oriental, Camarines Sur, Palawan, Albay, Zamboanga Sibugay, Misamis Occidental, Pangasinan, and Isabela; plus Iloilo City, Bacolod City, Cebu City, Lapu-Lapu City, Zamboanga City, and the 2nd District of Northern Samar.

June 6, 2017 – The PET postpones the June 21, 2017 preliminary conference and reset it to July 11, 2017.

On the same day, the PET orders the creation of a panel of commissioners to preside over matters concerning the election case. Retired Justice Jose Vitug was assigned chairperson of the panel with lawyers Angelito Imperio and Irene Ragodon-Guevarra as members.

June 20, 2017 – Robredo’s lawyers filed a motion before the PET insisting that Marcos must shoulder the P2.08 billion that the Comelec has incurred because of his election protest.

June 27, 2017 – A group of the Vice President’s supporters, named the Piso Para sa Laban ni Leni movement, asked the PET to allow them to pay a portion of her P7-million balance for the election protest.

The petitioners – all awardees of the Ten Outstanding Women Foundation – are former social welfare secretary Corazon Soliman, former human rights commissioner Paulynn Sicam, former Bases Conversion and Development Authority board director Zorayda Amelia Alonzo, award-winning singer Celeste Legaspi-Gallardo, Ateneo de Manila University Press director Karina Bolasco, and Museong Pambata founder Nina Lim-Yuson.

July 5, 2017 – Robredo’s lawyers asked the PET to reconsider its earlier decision that the election protest of Marcos is sufficient in form and substance.

July 11, 2017 – Preliminary conference for the electoral protest is held. The PET gives Robredo more time to pay the second tranche of the protest fee required of her. But no new deadline was given yet.

Marcos says in a press conference after the preliminary conference that he is hoping the ballot recount will start by September. Former solicitor general Estelito Mendoza seeks to be a “collaborating counsel” for Marcos.

August 10, 2017 – The PET bars the Piso Para sa Laban ni Leni movement from helping the Vice President pay for her remaining balance in the electoral protest.

August 18, 2017 – The PET grants the Vice President’s motion to defer the second installment of the P16-million fee for the counter-protest she filed against Marcos. The PET says it would direct Robredo to pay the second installment “only after substantial recovery in his (Marcos) designated 3 pilot provinces.”

The court alsoissues the guidelines in preparation for the ballot revision in the electoral protest.

The document contains the composition and hiring process for the members of the Revision Committee, the creation of an Exploratory Mission or Retrieval Team, and the compensation for individuals who will participate in the revision of the ballots.

August 23, 2017 – The Piso Para sa Laban ni Leni movement files a motion for reconsideration urging the PET to reconsider its decision prohibiting them from helping pay the Vice President’s remaining balance.

September 5, 2017 – The PET rejects Marcos’ first cause of action in the electoral protest and upholds the integrity of the 2016 elections.

On the same day, Robredo’s lawyers files an urgent manifestation and motion calling on the PET to order Marcos to pay P2 billion for the Comelec’s continued protection of all poll paraphernalia relevant to his election protest.

October 9, 2017 – Marcos submits 8,000 names in his list of proposed witnesses of alleged electoral fraud in the 3 ARMM provinces.

October 12, 2017 – The Robredo camp accuses Marcos of violating the PET’s rules when he sought the technical and forensic examination of election data in Basilan, Lanao del Sur, and Maguindanao.

October 23, 2017 – Comelec begins to decrypt and print the ballot images for Marcos’ 3 pilot provinces of Camarines Sur, Iloilo, and Negros Oriental.

October 30, 2017 – The PET rules Comelec must pay for the storage fees of election materials kept in foreign posts, not Marcos.

November 7, 2017 – The PET defers action once again on whether or not to allow the forensic and technical examination of election data in the 3 ARMM provinces.

The court also allows Robredo to gain access to the soft copies of the ballot images decrypted from secured digital cards in Camarines Sur, Iloilo, and Negros Oriental.

November 21, 2017 – Macalintal accuses Marcos of “misleading” the PET by including names of unregistered voters in its list of proposed witnesses from the 3 ARMM provinces.

November 23, 2017 – Marcos’ lawyers shot back that they put in names of members of the Board of Election Inspectors, who “were named as witnesses – and not as registered voters.”

December 5, 2017 – The PET rules only municipal treasurers and election officials will deliver the election paraphernalia to the PET Retrieval Team, who will then bring the ballot boxes to the SC-Court of Appeals Gymnasium in Ermita, Manila for the recount.

January 4, 2018 – Robredo files a motion for clarification and asks the PET that both camps be allowed to send representatives during the ballot retrieval process in the 3 pilot provinces.

Will the case be resolved before the next elections in 2022? That’s another nail-biting ending to watch out for.

January 10, 2018 – In a press conference, Marcos accuses the PET of giving him “unfair treatment.” He also denies he will run for senator in 2019, arguing there is no need for it as he already won as Vice President.

January 29, 2018 – Marcos accused Robredo anew of colluding with Comelec and Smartmatic to steal the poll victory. He argued the square marks in the ballot images point to electoral fraud.

But the marks are merely among the new features of the ballot introduced in 2016.

Last week of January to first week of February – The Marcos and Robredo camps trades barbs on various media interviews, accusing each other of filing motions to allegedly delay the ballot recount process.

February 6, 2018 – Marcos signs a joint manifestation withdrawing any pending motions before the PET that may delay the ballot recount. He challenged Robredo to sign this document, but her camp refused to do so.

February 8, 2018 – The PET sets the final start of the ballot recount on March 19, 2018.

Robredo also files a motion telling the PET they are withdrawing any pending motions that may delay the ballot recount, if any.

February 22, 2018 – The High Court reminds both the Marcos and Robredo camps to observe the sub judice rule and stop making any comments on the pending case.

March 19, 2018 – The recount for Camarines Sur ballots begins.

August 6, 2018 – Marcos files a motion seeking the inhibition of SC Justice Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa from his electoral protest, citing Caguioa’s “obvious bias” against him. Among his gripes is the non-dismissal of Robredo’s counter-protest despite her camp’s failure to pay the court service fee in full.

September 3, 2018 – The PET denies Marcos’ motion seeking the inhibition of Caguioa, saying that the “protestant’s narration may be good reading as a conspiracy theory and may even be fodder for discourse in social media, but his theories, when used as a ground to request for an inhibition of a Member of this Tribunal, must transcend fiction.”

December 10, 2018 – The Marcos camp files a motion for the PET to immediately examine voting records in Basilan, Lanao del Sur, and Maguindanao. His camp points to supposed evidence of voters’ substitution in these provinces from a separate electoral protest filed by ex-Sulu vice governor Abdusakur Tan against ARMM Governor Mujiv Hataman.

January 21, 2019 – The PET suspends ballot recount in two precincts.

January 22, 2019 – Both camps claim they were not informed of the reason behind the suspension. PET clarifies that recount is suspended only for damaged ballot boxes and that “the rest of the ballot boxes from the 3 pilot provinces were already recounted as of Monday, January 21.”

March 25, 2019 – Marcos attends a vigil conducted by his supporters outside the Supreme Court to mark the 1000th day of his protest.

March 26, 2019 – Marcos’ camp files an urgent motion enjoining the PET to resolve an earlier motion, filed in December, to subpoena election documents supposedly detailing substituted voting in Lanao del Sur, Basilan, and Maguindanao.

June 13, 2019 – Robredo’s camp files motion urging the PET to rule on the revision of pilot provinces. She also claims “clear victory” in the electoral protest.

July 2, 2019 – PET junks motion filed by Robredo’s camp urging the High Court to “immediately resolve” the election case, saying it’s “likewise premature.”

October 7, 2019 – Robredo camp files motion asking the PET to give both camps copies of the official committee report on the revision, recount, and reappreciation of ballots from Marcos’ chosen 3 pilot provinces.

October 9, 2019 – The High Court warns both camps against issuing public statements on the electoral dispute.

October 10, 2019 – Chief Justice Lucas Bersamin assures the public that there is no rigging of votes in the electoral protest.

October 15, 2019 – The Supreme Court, sitting as PET, rules to release the results of the recount of votes in the 3 pilot provinces (Negros Oriental, Iloilo, and Camarines Sur) in the vice presidential electoral protest. It also asks Robredo and Marcos camps to submit their comments on the results of the 3 pilot provinces picked by Marcos and his motion to nullify the results in Lanao del Sur, Basilan, Maguindanao.

October 18, 2019 – Robredo increases her lead over Marcos in the SC’s recount of votes in the 3 pilot provinces. SC’s recount shows Robredo with 1,510,178 votes from Negros Oriental, Iloilo, and Camarines Sur compared to Marcos’ 204,512 votes. In 2016, Robredo got 1,493,517 votes in these areas against Marcos’ 202,136 votes.

October 30, 2019 – Caguioa is no longer the member-in-charge after he voted to dismiss Marcos’ electoral protest. He was overruled by a majority of 11 magistrates. The case is then raffled off to Associate Justice Marvic Leonen.

January 7, 2020 – In a 593-page memorandum, Marcos asks the SC to “reconsider, review, and re-examine” the recount results in the 3 pilot provinces.

January 8, 2020 – Robredo’s camp urges the SC to “immediately dismiss” the electoral protest after she widened her lead over Marcos in the initial vote recount.

September 30, 2020 – The SC, sitting as the PET, votes 12-0 to move forward in the vice presidential electoral protest. The High Court also requires the Comelec to weigh in on the contested votes in Mindanao provinces, and the Office of the Solicitor General on the legality of the annulment of election scenarios.

November 3, 2020 – Comelec tells the SC that there was no failure of elections in 2016 in the contested provinces of Lanao del Sur, Basilan, and Maguindanao.

Meanwhile, Calida submits a 40-page comment to the High Court that leans toward Marcos.

November 9, 2020 – Marcos files a motion seeking the inhibition of Leonen from the vice presidential electoral protest. He also urges the SC to re-raffle the case to a new member-in-charge.

Solicitor General Jose Calida then submits another motion for inhibition against Leonen hours later, even though he is not a party to the case.

Both motions cite more or less the same reasons, even citing a Manila Times report about a leak from the Supreme Court itself. The article was written by reporter Jomar Canlas.

Following this, Robredo’s lawyers call Marcos Jr a “spoiled brat.”

November 9, 2020 – Marcos files a motion seeking the inhibition of Leonen from the vice presidential electoral protest. He also urges the SC to re-raffle the case to a new member-in-charge.

Solicitor General Jose Calida then submits another motion for inhibition against Leonen hours later, even though he was not a party to the case.

Both motions cite more or less the same reasons, with citations to a report on the Manila Times about a leak from the Supreme Court itself. The article was written by reporter Jomar Canlas.

Following this, Robredo’s lawyers called Marcos Jr a “spoiled brat.”

November 11, 2020 – Robredo’s lawyers file a counter-manifestation before the High Court, saying that all of its justices would be forced to inhibit if they were to follow the logic of Marcos’ request.

November 17, 2020 – The SC denies Marcos and Calida’s motions to inhibit Leonen. It also issues a show cause order to Calida and Canlas to explain why they should not be cited in contempt.

November 18, 2020 – Robredo asks the High Court to investigate possible collusion between Marcos and Calida.

November 24, 2020 – The SC withdraws its show cause orders against Calida and Canlas. Leonen says he would rather “forgive,” according to the letter he has sent the justices.

January 21, 2021 – The High Court says in a resolution that it was “deeply disturbing” that Calida joined the motion to inhibit filed by Marcos. It also warns Calida not to invoke his position as People’s Tribune haphazardly.

February 16, 2021 – The SC, sitting as PET, unanimously dismisses Marcos’ electoral protest. – with reports from Mara Cepeda and Pauline Macaraeg/Rappler.com

Add a comment

Sort by

There are no comments yet. Add your comment to start the conversation.

Summarize this article with AI

How does this make you feel?

Download the Rappler App!
Avatar photo


Patty Pasion

Patty leads the Rappler+ membership program. She used to be a Rappler multimedia reporter who covered politics, labor, and development issues of vulnerable sectors.