Early birds face disqualification
SC junks filing
of candidacy rule
BY EVANGELINE DE VERA
THE Supreme Court yesterday came out with a ruling widening the grounds for disqualification of a candidate for premature campaigning and effectively bars the current "infomercials" of aspirants in the March 2010 elections.
The Supreme Court, in affirming the disqualification of winning mayoral candidate in Surigao del Norte in the 2007 elections, rejected as a defense a) the offender’s having not filed her certificate of candidacy yet, and b) that no speeches soliciting votes or raising the hands of the candidate have been made.
The court said campaigning is allowed only during the campaign period, which is 90 days before the election for national candidates and 45 days for local candidates.
It added making speeches or holding interviews for or against the election of any candidate for public office, the holding of political caucuses, publishing or distributing campaign literature and directly or indirectly soliciting votes fall under regulated partisan political activity.
The vote on the case of Rosalinda Pereña of Sta. Monica, Surigao del Norte, was 8-7, with ponente Associate Justice Minita Chico-Nazario upholding Section 80 of the Omnibus Election Code which says, "It shall be unlawful for any person whether or not a voter or candidate, or any party or association of persons, to engage in an election campaign or partisan political activity, except during the campaign period."
It further said that premature campaigning may be committed even by a person who is not a candidate.
"We cannot stress strongly enough that premature campaigning is a pernicious act that is continuously threatening to undermine the conduct of fair and credible elections in our country, no matter how great or small the acts constituting the same are," the Court ruled.
The dissent supported the current interpretation of Commission on Election rules which says there can be no premature campaigning by a person who has yet to file his certificate of candidacy.
The SC affirmed the July 24, 2007 and Jan. 30, 2008 resolutions of the Comelec disqualifying Pereña on the complaint of Edgar Andanar.
Andanar alleged that a day before the campaign period for the 2007 election which started March 30, Pereña summoned supporters to join her in filing her certificate of candidacy. A motorcade followed.
Under Section 79, the election law classifies as partisan political activity the following acts:
Forming organizations, associations, clubs, committees or other groups of persons for the purpose of soliciting votes and/or undertaking any campaign for or against a candidate.
Holding political caucuses, conferences, meetings, rallies, parades or other similar assemblies, for the purpose of soliciting votes and/or undertaking any campaign or propaganda for or against a candidate.
Making speeches, announcements or commentaries, or holding interviews for or against the election of any candidate for public office. Publishing or distributing campaign literature or materials designed to support or oppose the election of any candidate.
Directly or indirectly soliciting votes, pledges or support for or against a candidate.
"Obviously, it is only at the start of the campaign period, when the person officially becomes a candidate, that the undue and iniquitous advantage of his/her prior acts, constituting premature campaigning, shall accrue to his/her benefit," said the Court.
Pereña claimed that the "motorcade" was but a couple of jeepneys used by her supporters who accompanied her when she filed her candidacy. The same supporters also threw candies to the crowd.
She said no speech was made by any person or was there "grandstanding for the purpose of raising the hands of the candidates in the motorcade," only background marching music.
Concurring with Nazario’s ponencia were Associate Justices Consuelo Ynares-Santiago, Renato Corona, Antonio Eduardo Nachura, Teresita Leonardo-de Castro, Lucas Bersamin, Mariano del Castillo and Roberto Abad.
Dissenting were Chief Justice Reynato Puno, Justices Leonardo Quisumbing, Antonio Carpio, Conchita Carpio-Morales, Presbiterio Velasco Jr., Arturo Brion, and Diosdado Peralta.
In his dissenting opinion, Carpio said the ponencia’s application of Sections 80 is erroneous.
Carpio said the filing of a certificate of candidacy does not make the person a candidate. He can be considered a candidate only upon the start of the campaign period.
He said the only purpose for the early filing of COCs is to give ample time to Comelec for the printing of the ballots.
"…Before a person can commit the crime, there must first be another person who is already considered by law a ‘candidate’… Thus, there can be no premature ‘election campaign’ or partisan political activity’ unless there is a ‘candidate,’" he said.
"Therefore, despite the filing of her COC, the law does not consider Pereña a candidate at the time of the questioned motorcade which was conducted a day before the start of the campaign period," he added.
| 
