BONTOC, Mountain Province – The three-member Provincial board of Canvassers justified their previous action to proclaim substitute candidate lawyer Kathy LyllMayaen-Luis as Provincial Governor in lieu of her late father Gov. Leonard Mayaen after the May 9, 2016 elections and attacked the credibility of the complainant of the election offense filed against them before the law department of the Commission on Elections (Comelec).
In an 11-pagejoint counter-affidavit, former Mountain Province Election Supervisor Elenita Julia Tabangin-Capuyan, Provincial Prosecutor Golda B. Calaoa-Bagawi and Schools Division Superintendent Gloria B. Buya-ao apologized to the Commission for the referral of the other pleadings in their counter-affidavit because of the many cases that Salvador Liked filed against them involving the same issues.
The PBOC members argued the allegations against them that they joked with the laws and insulted the Commission and have taken the law into their hands by disregarding the resolution which they received in the morning of the proclamation day are baseless considering that their decision was a decision of the entire board and not the decision of the chairman alone.
Further, the PBOC members asserted their acts were not illegal and the proclamation of the younger Mayaen as Provincial governor did not result in the division of the people of the province since the records show that Mayaen as a substitute candidate received 60,664 votes which number represent more than a majority of the number of registered voters in the province.
Mayaen filed her certificate of candidacy as substitute for her late father who succumbed to cardiac arrest earlier on May 5, 2016 leaving her only two days to inform the people that she is running as the substitute of her father yet she was able to receive an overwhelming number of votes, thereby showing that most of the people approve the substitution.
The PBOC members argued that the resolution of the Comelec en banc denying the certificate of candidacy of Mayaen as substitute candidate only contained the signature of one Commissioner, thus, it is treated as a mere scrap of paper as the others did not sign and even if all of them signed, still it is not final and executor.
According to them the allegations for violation of the provisions of the Omnibus Election code against them is bereft of good basis because they never committed the violations that were charged on them because the complainant Liked is not credible to file such complaint considering that he was charged and convicted for falsification of public documents, libel and double registration based on several court decisions that were attached to their counter-affidavit.
The PBOC members prayed that the case filed against them be dismissed for lack of merit and insufficiency of evidence that would warrant the conduct of a full blown investigation by the law department.
However, Liked claimed the arguments of the PBOC members to defend their obviously unlawful actions are irrelevant, immaterial and tends to deviate from the real issues raised before the Commission, thus, the need for the law department to pursue the investigation of the case and render a decision that would find the PBOC members guilty of such illegal acts being complained of against them.