Comment Opposition

1

Republic of the Philippines REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

9th Judicial Region Branch 24 Zamboanga City FERDAUS W. RADJA,

ELEC PROTEST CASE

NO.

I-125

Protestant, -for-

-ersusCARLNAN A. CLIMACO

Protestee!

JUDICIAL REVISION AND RECOUNTING OF BALLOTS

"----------------------------------------" COMMENT/OPPOSITION COMMENT/OPPOSI TION TO THE PROTESTEE’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

C#$%& C#$%& '#(, '#(, Protes Protestan tantt through through undersi undersigned gned counse counsell and unto nto this )onora orable Court, most ost respe espec ctfully ully submi bmits this Comment*#pposition to the Protestee+s $otion for Reconsideration and states that !

.ast 2/ 0e 0ecember 21 21, th the Pro Protestant rec receied a copy copy of the $otion for Reconsideration filed by herein Protestee see3ing see3ing to reconsider reconsider the #rder of the )onorable )onorable Court dated 9 0ecem ecembe berr 21, 1, hich hich ord ordered ered the Reis eisio ion n of the the Counter-protested precincts

2!

5he Protestant respectfully opposes the Protestee+s $otion for Reconsideration hich anchored on the premise that a post-reisio post-reision n determinatio determination n of the merit or legitimacy legitimacy of  the protest prior to reision of the counter-protest must be done by the )onorable Court under the rules proided under  &ection 1, Rule 1 of 6!$! 'o! 1-4--&C! 7t is submitted that the )onorable Court correctly ordered the Reision of the Counter-protested precincts as it as in accordance ith the e8er e8erci cise se of its its sound sound udi udici cial al disc discret retio ion n in order order to atta attain in substantial ustice on both parties

/!

Judicial discretion, by its ery nature, inoles the e8ercise of the udge:s indiidual opinion and the la has isely isely proide proided d that that its e8erci e8ercise se be guided guided by ell-3 ell-3no non n rules hich, hile alloing the udge rational latitude for the opera operati tion on of his his on on indi indiid idual ual ie ies, s, pre preent ent them them from from  getting out of control!  5hus, it is submitted that the )onorable

1  Paderenga v. Court of Appeals ;!R! 'o! , 99=-1