WHY does not the Supreme Court declare in clear and simple language that “Grace Poe Llamanzares is a natural-born Filipino” and thereby put to eternal rest all legal questions about the foundling’s citizenship from birth?

Why is the Supreme Court hesitant to say that directly? Why does the tribunal obliquely rule on Poe’s constitutional qualification by saying that the Commission on Elections should not have cancelled her Certificate of Candidacy for president?

Probably, Poe is constitutionally qualified, but we have been waiting for the Supreme Court to say so in clear and direct terms – resounding with moral certitude. At stake here is the nation’s fate under a leader who the Constitution requires to be a natural-born Filipino.

In a two-page resolution released yesterday, the Court denied with finality all the motions for reconsideration to reverse its March 8 ruling allowing Poe to run for president in the May 9 elections. It said the MRs failed to raise new substantial arguments.

Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno said in her 28-page concurring opinion that the resolution denying the MRs “accurately reflects the understanding of this Court—that the motions do not raise any new substantial argument, and that all the issues that the motions raised have already been passed upon in the March 8, 2016, decision.”

The 9-6 ruling said that there is no material misrepresentation on the part of Poe when she declared in her certificate of candidacy that she is a natural-born Filipino and a resident of the Philippines for 10 years. Therefore, it said, Poe should be allowed to run.

Instead of directly resolving the key issues of her natural-born citizenship and 10-year residency, the Court merely said that the Comelec committed grave abuse of discretion when it ordered Poe’s certificate of candidacy cancelled.

Associate Justices Marvic Leonen and Diosdado Peralta said in their concurring opinions that the Comelec is not authorized by the Constitution to rule on the qualifications of a President and Vice President. Such determination, they opined, rests with the Presidential Electoral Tribunal.

Peralta said: “I opted to join Justice (Alfredo) Caguioa in his view that a more thorough discussion of and ruling on Poe’s qualifications, specifically as to her natural-born citizenship, as well as her 10-year residency, are PREMATURE, the same being cognizable ONLY AFTER SHE HAD BEEN PROCLAIMED AS WINNER OF THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS AND THROUGH A PETITION FILED IN THE PET, and not the COMELEC, with the precise purpose of contesting what she had stated as her qualifications.”(Capitalization mine – fdp)

The ruling raises some questions, especially among non-lawyers seeking enlightenment from the highest court in the land, about the timely and proper sequence in the screening of candidates for president.

As we understand it, all aspirants must first satisfy the requirement enumerated in the Constitution (such as on citizenship and residency) before they can be allowed by the Comelec to run. We think Comelec approval of their CoC is not ministerial.

But the SC says that the Comelec cannot “prematurely” bar whom it deems not constitutionally qualified, and that the final determination of the candidate’s qualification will be performed by the PET – and only if the candidate wins and the winner’s qualification is questioned before the PET.

Why decide the constitutional qualification of the winning candidate onlyAFTER he/she is proclaimed president and not BEFORE? Is this not topsy-turvy logic and potentially dangerous?

■ Belmonte to bets: Show physical, financial fitness

IN THE HOUSE of Representatives, Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. threw presidential candidates a transparency challenge to disclose their health and financial status.

Stressing that the presidency is a job for which the applicant must show his/her fitness, Belmonte said:

“You are an applicant for a valued and critical position. Your employer is the Taongbayan and to get the job you ought to prove you are fully qualified. And since this is a top managerial position, you must show leadership experience and background and that you are physically fit for this 24/7 job, enough to lead for six years. Disclosing your health records will show if you are physically, mentally, emotionally and psychologically fit to become president.”

The challenge is timely in view of perceptions that some of the presidential candidates may not be physically fit to serve a full six-year term. The presidency is a man-killing 24/7 job, leaving no room for inferior performance and malingering.

We remember that when Belmonte ran in 1976 for World President of the Junior Chamber International, he (like other candidates) also had to pass through a stringent screening of his physical fitness for the job. He won the position and served with distinction.

As for the candidates’ disclosing their financial status, Belmonte said this would show their actual assets, net worth, and business interests, and ease any public suspicion of their amassing illegal wealth in office.

Postscript adds to Belmonte’s challenge by proposing that all candidates for president, vice president and senator be made to disclose the amount of their personal income tax payments during the past 10 years.

This proposed income tax payment disclosure is in addition to their Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Networth that all officials are required to file annually under Article XI, Section 17 (Accountability of Public Officers) of the Constitution.