Robredo supporters challenge Comelec 'Oplan Baklas' at SC
MANILA, Philippines — Supporters of Vice President Leni Robredo, who are all private individuals, have asked the Supreme Court to stop the Commission on Elections from enforcing its “Oplan Baklas."
Robredo’s supporters from Capiz, Cagayan, Isabela and Zamboanga City on Tuesday filed an Extremely Urgent Petition for Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus and asked the SC to issue a temporary restraining order to prohibit the poll body from implementing parts of its Resolution 10730.
Specifically, they asked the tribunal to stop the implementation of parts of the resolution with respect to dismantling and removing campaign materials that “are privately owned and privately funded” by volunteers and civilians posted within their private properties.
They also urged the high court to declare Section 21 (o), Section 24 and Section 27 of the same resolution “pursuant to the Comelec’s interpretation that the same shall apply to private citizens or volunteers who are all non-candidates and their private properties.”
Section 21 (o) states that no lawful election propaganda materials shall be allowed outside common poster areas
They also asked the SC to order the return or restoration of campaign materials that were removed by the Comelec from their private properties.
Supporters of presidential aspirants Leni Robredo and Isko Moreno are among the campaign teams that reported the removal of their campaign materials.
Diocese of Bacolod v. Comelec
The petition was heavily anchored on the 2015 case Diocese of Bacolod v. Comelec.
Petitioners argued that the assailed parts of the resolution are unconstitutional “for being a direct violation of the people’s constitutional rights to freedom of expression, due process of law, equal protection clause and property.”
They told the SC that since the early weeks of February, the Comelec started “trespassing into the private properties of private citizens who, in participation with the Peoples’ Campaign Movement, have independently installed within their own private premises a variety of their billboards, posters, tarpaulins, and murals.”
Citing Diocese of Bacolod v. Comelec the petitioners asserted that the poll body “has no legal basis to regulate the posting and the sizes of the election materials” as displayed by private citizens who are non-candidates and within their private properties.
Citing the Fair Election Act, they argued that the Comelec’s regulatory powers only cover political parties, party-list groups and bona fide candidates.
“[N]owhere in the Fair Election Act is it provided that campaign materials by private citizens shall also be covered by the size requirements imposed upon candidates and political parties, in general. Thus, no law exists providing for the regulation which the COMELEC intends to unduly impose upon the Petitioners,” the petition read.
Freedom of expression
They also said Comelec violated their constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression.
They asserted that the tarpaulins and posters, procured at their own expense, removed are their political expressions of support for their chosen candidates.
Citing the clear and present danger test, the petitioners said the Comelec also failed to justify the regulation, since there is “no compelling and substantial state interest endangered” by posting the election material to justify the curtailment of freedom of expression.
“In other words, while a size limitation may be imposed on election paraphernalia owned by candidates or his party, it cannot be done on election paraphernalia owned by non-candidates as in the case of Petitioners,” their plea read.
- Latest
- Trending
