SC rules Leo Marcos guilty of indirect contempt

The Supreme Court (SC) on Monday said it has found Francis Leo Marcos guilty of indirect contempt for abusing court processes in connection with his withdrawn senatorial bid in the 2025 elections, imposing a P30,000 fine.

In a decision penned by Associate Justice Maria Filomena Singh, the SC En Banc ruled that Marcos misused judicial processes when he withdrew his candidacy just days after obtaining a temporary restraining order (TRO) he had sought against the Commission on Elections (COMELEC).

Marcos had filed a certificate of candidacy for senator in 2025, but the COMELEC declared him a nuisance candidate, citing his lack of political affiliation and platform, as well as the similarity of his surname to Senator Imee Marcos, which the poll body said could confuse voters.

He elevated the matter to the Supreme Court, arguing that his rights to due process and equal protection were violated because he was not allowed to defend himself. 

Marcos also asked the Court to issue a TRO to stop the COMELEC from excluding his name from the official ballots while his petition was pending. 

The SC granted the TRO. However, two days later, the COMELEC informed the Court that Marcos had withdrawn his candidacy, effectively rendering his petition moot. 

The poll body then removed his name from the candidates’ database and proceeded with ballot printing.

The Court subsequently ordered Marcos to explain why he should not be cited in contempt.

In his explanation, Marcos apologized and said he withdrew his candidacy after learning that ballot printing had already begun, claiming that keeping his name on the ballot would delay the process and incur additional costs for the government.

The SC rejected his explanation, stressing that Marcos should have fully considered the consequences of filing a petition before the Court or withdrawing his candidacy immediately after securing a TRO.

Citing Rule 71, Section 3 of the Rules of Court, the High Court underscored that any act showing disrespect for the judiciary threatens the authority of the courts and public confidence in the legal system.

“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,” the Court said, warning that loss of faith in the courts could lead to disorder and lawlessness.

The High Court ruled that Marcos’ actions constituted indirect contempt for misusing its processes and wasting judicial time. 

The SC also noted that his conduct “weakened public confidence in both the electoral system and judicial authority, and made a mockery of the COMELEC and the Court itself.”

Aside from imposing the fine, the SC dismissed Marcos’ petition challenging his classification as a nuisance candidate for being moot and lifted the TRO previously issued against the COMELEC.