GIFT DEADLINE: Today, the Feast of the Three Kings, closes the Yule season. Among other things, today is the deadline for people intending to give valuable gifts to government officials.

Until midnight today, such offerings are still gifts that graft-busters are likely to treat with more understanding in keeping with the season. But after today, such gifts will look more like bribes.

* * *

REELECTION: Six out of every 10 readers emailing feedback to my Postscript last Thursday (“My forecast: Erap sure to run and likely to win”) said that former President Joseph “Erap” Estrada is barred from running for president in 2010.

The main point of most (8/10) of the reactions, pro or con, revolves around the meaning of the word “reelection” in Section 4, Article VII (Executive Department), of the Constitution which says in full:

“The President and the Vice-President shall be elected by direct vote of the people for a term of six years which shall begin at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following the day of the election and shall end at noon of the same date, six years thereafter. The President shall not be eligible for any re-election. No person who has succeeded as President and has served as such for more than four years shall be qualified for election to the same office at any time.” (Underscoring supplied)

* * *

S.C. TO COME IN: With the way the “Can Erap run?”question is being kicked around without being resolved, the Supreme Court will have to settle the matter the moment Erap decides to run for president as he had hinted.

For the question to be raised finally before the SC, Erap has to run. The tribunal does not function as a “tanungan ng bayan,” or street corner consultant that one asks for instant legal opinion.

While the question hangs, laymen and legal eagles alike are free to throw in their two pesos’ worth of opinion.

Although the score at this point (based on feedback received at my email addresses) appears to be for Erap’s being barred from running in 2010, those of us who see no legal impediment continue arguing.

* * *

RAMOS BID: A spokesman of former President Fidel V. Ramos allowed himself to be sucked into the debate, adding that if Erap could run after being president for a while, then his boss Mr. Ramos could also run.

No problem. Let them both run. It would be a spectacular battle royal having the former presidents Erap Estrada and Eddie Ramos locked in a showdown. We could sell tickets and raise funds for street children.

I have a pertinent question, though: If and when Mr. Ramos runs for president as suggested, WILL HE BE RUNNING FOR REELECTION? Or just running again?

Maybe his spokesman can answer that one first.

* * *

WEBSTER: This brings me back to my contention that a former president running for the same office after a gap of nine years is NOT RUNNING FOR REELECTION, but is simply running again.

On this point, I would rather believe the lexicographer Noah Webster than Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez.

The justice secretary says that Erap’s running for president in 2010 -- or almost a decade after he vacated the presidency -- would be running for “reelection.”

The Constitution, he intones, does not allow such a comeback. He is referring to that part of Section 4 of Article VII that says, “The President shall not be eligible for any re-election.”

* * *

SITTING PRESIDENT: In my third paragraph above, I purposely reprinted the complete text of Section 4 for ready reference. Read it carefully and form your own opinion while we await a definitive ruling from the Supreme Court.

Section 4 starts with “The President….” It is talking of the duly elected President who shall serve a term of six years, etc…. Continuing, the section adds “The President shall not be eligible for any re-election.”

Note that the section is still talking of the same President, not just of any president or just any person who had served as president. It continues to talk of the elected President, the incumbent who, it says, “shall not be eligible for any re-election.”

This interpretation makes sense, because only a sitting or incumbent official can move for reelection, or to run for the same post he is OCCUPYING but which he is about to vacate with the coming end of his term.

* * *

AFRAID OF ERAP?: Going back to Mr. Ramos’ case, he cannot run for reelection, not because he is not qualified (he is eminently qualified!) but because he is not the sitting president.

But certainly, while Mr. Ramos cannot run for “reelection,” he can “run again” for president. Unless, of course, the general is afraid to lose to private citizen Erap.

Those who are afraid of an Erap comeback are raking up dead issues. They are even exhuming the moldy minutes of the Constitutional Convention that produced the 1987 Constitution.

Many lawyers, including a Supreme Court justice, have told me that we go to the Con-Con minutes only if a common word used in the Charter is not clear.

But the common English word “reelection” as used in Section 4 is crystal clear. I may not be a grizzled justice secretary, but that word and its meaning in Section 4 are quite clear to me.

* * *