Bongbong's now having preliminary hearings on his disqualification cases. Thing is, he was a no-show, for which Commissioner Guanzon reprimanded him. Another thing is, Bongbong's legal team have 48 hours to make a position paper, as Commissioner Guanzon denied their request for a 15-day extension.
Well, Bongbong's had one case dismissed for failure to show material misrepresentation that he was not convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, which is a ground for disqualification.
The troubling part of the COMELEC's rationale is that since the CA removed the prison sentence, the perpetual disqualification from running for public office is also removed. However, that only applies in the RPC provisions and convictions. In the RPC kasi, you have the prison sentence and the accessory penalty. The accessory penalty attaches upon the sentence, not just the conviction. For examplez if you're sentenced for murder, which carries with it the penalties of reclusión temporal to death (now just 40 years if reclusión temporal), you also get an accessory penalty of perpetual absolute disqualification, which is basically, you can't vote or hold public office.
However, under the Tax Code, violations of which was where Bongbong was found guilty, the penalty attaches upon conviction.
The relevant provision is Art. 277 of the 1977 Tax Code.Pero, 1977 Tax Code says as follows: If the tax offender is a public officer or employee, the maximum penalty prescribed for the offense shall be imposed and, in addition, he shall be dismissed from the public service and perpetually disqualified from holding any public office, to vote and to participate in any election.
In this provision, the penalty of disqualification from public office attaches
upon conviction, not upon the imposition of the imprisonment penalty. So you can't say that Bongbong can't be disqualified just because the sentence was removed. The conviction was still retained.
