Tale of two bets

Quite the opposite results arrived at by the Commission on Elections (Comelec) this week.

Rabid opponents of the Villars were disappointed when the disqualification case for vote-buying against Senate bet Camille Villar was tossed out, the Comelec ruling that there was no sufficient evidence presented by the complainants.

Prior to this, the ongoing demolition job against the Villars had been going full speed ahead, what with bombshell revelations about the water crises in the areas controlled by the Villars, as well as continuing anecdotes about the allegedly shoddy condominiums they’ve been peddling.

Let’s not forget the deathless comments on that 2021 news article about solving traffic on EDSA by year 2022. Unfortunately for then secretary of the Department of Public Works and Highways Mark Villar, who made the famous vow when he was still in office, this headline has become a favorite punching bag every time someone is stuck in traffic, ready to be resurrected as and when needed. Yes, it’s 2025, and traffic in the capital has not been solved. Neither has it become better. And we all look to Mark Villar when it’s time to grumble about it.

It therefore seemed like the stage was set for a disqualification which, given the disgruntled milieu, as well as the disfavor with which Camille herself is seemingly viewed by the current political administration, was going to be just a matter of time. Certainly, this outcome would be acceptable to the public, so it was perfect timing.

But lo and behold --the election body has allowed her to continue campaigning. I actually made that bold bet (that the case would go nowhere) with a group of friends who were more vociferous. Given her slide in the rankings, my theory was that perhaps, the resources of those opposed to her would be better deployed if they didn’t spend it on pressuring the election gods to disqualify. After all, if she was going to lose anyway, why invest further in her loss?

And so, Camille Villar has been allowed to go past this inconvenient roadblock, and sprint towards the finish line. Will she land in the top 12? We will find out soon enough. As it is though, the Comelec has given her social media trolls ammunition to proclaim that see, she’s not a vote-buying vampire.

The separate disqualification case filed against congressional bet for Pasig Ian Sia, however, did not go as well for candidate Sia. It wasn’t vote buying that did him in, but his misogynistic invectives against single and/or fat women. Given that these were recorded, there was plenty of evidence for the Comelec to rely on.

Reportedly, candidate Sia has proffered the argument that he was merely exercising his freedom of speech when he joked about offering solace to single women once a year. Perhaps, a deeper dive into Constitutional law parameters on free speech is needed for the Ateneo Law graduate.

Are there lessons to be learned from these cases? Aside from the apparent difference of the amount of evidence available to the Comelec, the cynical might well point to the comparative pockets of the bets. The Villars have deeper pockets --much deeper! This case isn’t necessarily a distraction to the candidate, who can afford the best lawyers (and an unlimited supply of them) to shoulder the burden of defending her.

Candidate Sia, on the other hand, might have found himself struggling to formulate arguments and meet deadlines for his defense. Was it by his lonesome self? Or was he supported by a beleaguered legal team willing to look past his principles? Even if his party has enormous resources to challenge popular incumbents like Roman Romulo and Vico Sotto, they’re not exactly infinite. How much was allocated to fund his legal defense?

Perhaps we will find out, when and if the necessary motions for reconsideration and appeals are lodged with the appropriate bodies. Will candidate Sia bring out the big guns? I bet there’s not going to be much legal thunder.

Meanwhile, votes can still be cast, votes will still be counted. Will the voters vote wisely though?