Alice Guo’s Political Future: Can She Still Run For Office?

September 27, 2024 Philippines Crime & Legal

Dismissed Mayor Alice Guo of Bamban remains in detention but is poised to potentially run in the upcoming elections despite a disqualification order from the ombudsman.

Solicitor General Menardo Guevarra stated on September 26, 2024 that Guo may still file her certificate of candidacy for the next elections. He clarified that none of the legal cases against her, including the ombudsman’s ruling, have reached a conclusive status.

“If the question is whether she can file her certificate of candidacy, the answer is yes,” Guevarra was quoted as saying by the Philippine Star. “It’s ministerial on the part of the Comelec (Commission on Elections) to accept her certificate of candidacy. But whether she’ll be able to or be qualified to run or not is another matter. That’s a totally different matter.”

He emphasized that while the Commission on Elections (Comelec) must accept her application, her eligibility to run will depend on the final outcomes of her ongoing legal battles.

“The cases that have been filed against Alice Guo, none of them have achieved finality. The one from ombudsman, which is the decision that dismissed and disqualified her perpetually from running for public office, I believe that is still not final,”

Guo has been embroiled in various controversies, including allegations of graft and human trafficking. The ombudsman’s decision to disqualify her from public office is still under appeal, and Guevarra indicated that if Guo’s team fails to challenge the decision effectively, it could become final and prevent her from running. He also mentioned that a ruling from Comelec regarding a misrepresentation case could similarly exclude her from the ballot.

Guevarra suggested that decisions in her pending cases may be made before the year ends, but these could be delayed by appeals, complicating her political future. He highlighted that timing will play a crucial role in determining Guo’s candidacy.

“Our assessment is that it is possible to have decisions from the trial courts before the end of the year,” Guevarra said, referring to her two cases: the quo warranto and the petition for the cancellation of Guo’s birth certificate. “But these decisions, even if they are favorable to the Philippine government, are subject to appeal. It’s the appeals that would delay [these cases].”

ON CASSANDRA ONG. Meanwhile, Katherine Cassandra Li Ong, a representative of a Philippine offshore gaming operator, is facing a 30-day detention for contempt of Congress.

Ong is currently detained at the Correctional Institution for Women (CIW) after being cited for contempt during a House committee investigation. The 24-year-old was found to have provided misleading information regarding her educational background, claiming she could not recall details about her time in the Alternative Learning System. This lack of clarity prompted lawmakers to suspect she was lying, leading to her detention.

Rep. Joseph Stephen Paduano, co-chair of the committee, openly accused Ong of dishonesty. “You’re lying, Ms. Cassandra Ong,” he asserted, emphasizing the seriousness of her repeated inability to provide straightforward answers. This contempt citation marks the second time Ong has faced such consequences.

Ong’s lawyer, Ferdinand Topacio, has raised concerns about the legality of her detention. He questioned whether the legislative branch has the authority to commit individuals to a facility operated by the executive branch, arguing that this raises serious legal and constitutional issues. Topacio expressed alarm over the pressure being exerted on Ong, suggesting that lawmakers may be overstepping their boundaries in pursuit of their narrative.

He argued that detaining Ong among convicted criminals undermines her presumption of innocence and violates several international human rights provisions. “It is deplorable that some House members have degenerated into monsters in their conduct of legislative investigations,” Topacio stated, condemning the treatment of individuals who refuse to conform to the committee’s expectations.