SC issues temporary halt order vs Comelec's 'Oplan Baklas'
MANILA, Philippines (Updated 4:47 p.m.) — The Supreme Court has temporarily stopped the implementation of the Commission on Elections “Oplan Baklas,” pending the resolution of the petition filed by supporters of Vice President Leni Robredo.
The SC Public Information Office on Tuesday said the Court en banc issued a temporary restraining order against the Comelec and Comelec spokesperson James Jimenez in connection with Oplan Baklas.
The high court also ordered the poll body to answer the petition within 10 days from receipt of SC resolution.
"In G.R. No. 258805, the Petitioners sought the issuance of a TRO, while the resolution of the petition is pending, prohibiting the Respondents from implementing Section 21 (o), Section 24 and Section 27 of the Comelec Resolution No. 10730," the SC PIO said in a statement.
The parts of the resolution are connected to the Comelec’s "order to dismantle, remove, destroy deface, and/or confiscate all election materials that are privately owned and private funded solely by volunteers and private citizens and posted and/or installed within their private properties," it added.
Petition
The petitioners, who are supporters of presidential bet Robredo from different areas, asked the SC to issue a TRO to prohibit the Comelec from enforcing part of the assailed resolution on March 1.
The petition was heavily anchored on the 2015 case Diocese of Bacolod v. Comelec.
They argued that Resolution 10730 is 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."
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.
They also raised that, based on the Fair Election Act, Comelec’s regulatory powers only cover political parties, party-list groups and bona fide candidates.
Petitioners also said the Comelec violated their right to freedom of speech and expression, as they asserted that tarpaulins and posters that were procured at their own expense and later 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
