<div class="image-550">
<img src="https://cdn.kahimyang.com/resources-10/leonen-empeachment-sm.webp" loading="lazy" alt="Associate Justice Marvic Mario Victor Leonen" />
<div>
(Associate Justice Leonen)
</div>
</div>
<p>
But one cannot help but suspect the connection between Marcos and the complaint simply by inspecting the people around it, where pro-Marcos lawyer Lorenzo Gadon serves as the legal counsel of the citizen-complainant Edwin Cordevilla while Representative Angelo Barba of the Second District of Ilocos Norte, a Marcos relative, is the one who endorsed it at the House. The coincidence is simply too glaring.
</p>
<p>
The main bone of contention against Leonen is his alleged failure to file his statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN) for 15 years. This is the same issue that led to the ouster of Maria Lourdes Sereno as chief justice although in her case, it was not done through an impeachment but by a quo warranto petition, filed against her by Solicitor General Jose Calida. It must be mentioned that a similar move was also attempted by Gadon through Calida against Leonen, but their request for Leonen's SALN to enable them to file such a petition was rebuffed by the Supreme Court voting unanimously.
</p>


<p>
At the outset, and to refresh readers' memories, I was one of those who from the start supported the allegations of fraud in the election victory of Robredo in 2016. Until now, I firmly stand by my conviction that fraud was committed that deserves full investigation. It is also given that I supported the removal of Sereno and argued for the constitutionality of the quo warranto petition used against her. Both positions were based on my adherence to the rule of law, and that there are legal remedies to redress grievances and address wrongdoing, from election fraud to the failure to comply with legal requirements.
</p>
<p>
In principle, therefore, Cordevilla has every right to file an impeachment complaint against Leonen in order to hold him accountable. If found guilty, he should suffer the same fate as Sereno. That is the only way that justice can be served.
</p>
<p>
However, what I have a problem with is the possibility that this impeachment move is tied to the settlement of an electoral dispute, as a way of punishing or even pressuring Leonen. It is a fact that Leonen is the Associate Justice who is handling the Marcos electoral protest case. There is palpable frustration, even anger, in the Marcos camp and among his supporters over the delay in the resolution of the case. It hasn't helped that information leaked by confidential sources within the judiciary revealed Leonen's purported bias against Marcos. There was even a petition filed by Marcos himself asking Leonen to inhibit from the case.
</p>
<p>
And this brings us to the conclusion that this mess is not the problem, but is just an effect of a deeper problem that is so deeply embedded in our electoral system, particularly in the settlement of election controversies. This is the fatal outcome of a system where, in the age of computer technology, our system of settling disputes is so Jurassic that it takes forever to resolve an electoral protest. It is not uncommon for the real winner to be determined only days before the next elections. This is pure insanity and reeks of injustice not only on the candidate who pays for the protest proceedings, but will not be able to meaningfully serve, but also on the public for being denied the services of the real winner.
</p>
<p>
There is no reason whatsoever for the resolution of election disputes to take forever. And the idiocy of the long delays is even made more dramatically apparent when one looks at the case of the United States, where recounts, some of which are automatic based on the margins and are shouldered by the state, are speedily conducted, and where courts rule on election controversies in an expedited manner.
</p>
<p>
In the face of these delays, it is therefore understandable that frustrated candidates and their supporters may be forced to resort to other legal means. It makes us uncomfortable that the remedy of impeachment may have been availed of by Marcos supporters to push the process along. It is valid to ask if these people would have filed an impeachment complaint against Leonen, or would have minded the allegations of his failure to file his SALN, had he acted favorably on the Marcos case, or at least did not delay its resolution.
</p>
<p>

But it also behooves us to ask Justice Leonen what is taking him so long to resolve the case. And this question might as well be raised to the entire Supreme Court acting as the Presidential Electoral Tribunal, other electoral tribunals, as well as the Commission on Elections. Why is it that election protests are not acted upon expeditiously? Shouldn't they be given priority since they speak of the integrity of our elections, which is the cornerstone of our constitutional democracy?
</p>


Leonen impeachment an extension of Bongbong Marcos electoral protest