Ada-Hocog’s TRO ends today

By
|
Posted on Sep 14 2005
Share

The court order that has temporarily halted the dispute between Covenant Party candidate Rose Nelly T. Ada-Hocog and the Commonwealth Election Commission expires today.

Whether or not the case will proceed depends on the enactment of Senate Bill 14-96, which now awaits the signature of Gov. Juan N. Babauta.

“It does not matter to my client whether a court order finds the [election] statute unconstitutional or the statute is modified. We’ll just find out. If the bill is signed before 9am [today], there will be no need for a hearing. Otherwise, we will ask the court to issue a long-term preliminary injunction,” said Matthew T. Gregory, attorney for Ada-Hocog.

The election commission has refused to certify the nomination of Ada-Hocog based on her failure to meet the two-year voter registration requirement allegedly provided by election law.

Ada-Hocog then sued CEC to stop a lottery that would determine the position of Precinct 1 candidates on the Nov. 5, 2005 election ballot. She also asked the court to provide its interpretation of eligibility requirements for House candidates, particularly the provision concerning a requirement for candidates to be a registered voter for at least two years.

The Superior Court originally issued a temporary restraining order that expired on Aug. 31. This order was extended until Sept. 15, following the introduction of Senate Bill 14-86. The bill seeks to remove the provision of Public Law 12-18 requiring a candidate for a House seat to be “a registered voter and a resident of the election precinct where he or she is a candidate for at least two years immediately preceding the date of election.”

The bill also proposes to shorten the residency requirement for House candidates from five years to three years.

Disclaimer: Comments are moderated. They will not appear immediately or even on the same day. Comments should be related to the topic. Off-topic comments would be deleted. Profanities are not allowed. Comments that are potentially libelous, inflammatory, or slanderous would be deleted.