Francis Leo Marcos Cited in Contempt by Supreme Court

A senatorial candidate in the May 2025 elections was held in indirect contempt by the Supreme Court (SC) for withdrawing his candidacy two days after his petition against his disqualification for being a nuisance candidate issued by the Commission on Elections (Comelec) was granted temporarily. Held for indirect contempt and ordered to pay a fine of P30,000 was Francis Leo Marcos. In a decision written by Associate Justice Maria Filomena D. Singh, the SC said that individuals cannot simply bend the legal system to suit their personal whims. The Comelec declared Marcos a nuisance candidate due to his lack of political affiliation and governmental platform, and the similarity of his surname to that of another candidate, Sen. Imee Marcos, which could cause confusion among voters. Francis Marcos challenged the Comelec ruling before the SC. He argued that the Comelec violated his right to due process and equal protection when he was not afforded a chance to defend himself. He pleaded for the issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO). The SC issued the TRO. But two days later, the Comelec informed the SC that Francis Marcos had withdrawn his candidacy and thus, the petition had become moot. The Comelec deleted his name and continued the printing of the ballots. The SC ordered Francis Marcos to explain why he should not be cited in contempt for his actions that showed disrespect for the SC’s processes. He apologized to the SC and explained that he withdrew his candidacy after learning that ballot printing had already begun and that including his name would delay the process and be costly to the government. In a press briefer issued by its Office of the Spokesperson, the SC ruled that Francis Marcos’ actions amounted to indirect contempt for misusing the court’s processes and wasting its time. It pointed out that his actions weakened public confidence in the electoral process and diminished the respect owed to judicial authority, effectively making a mockery of both the Comelec and the SC. It said that Section 3 of Rule 71 of the Rules of Court punishes conduct that disrespects the dignity and authority of the court. It also said that the rule is necessary to preserve order in judicial proceedings and ensure the stability of the courts. It declared: “Any act of disrespect towards the Judiciary strikes at the heart of its authority and undermines the very foundation of trust upon which our legal system stands.... If the people lose confidence in the Court, the last bastion to which they turn for justice and the protection of their rights, they may believe that justice is no longer attainable through lawful means. Such a loss of faith does not merely weaken institutions; it invites disorder and fuels lawlessness.”