Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 4

Javier

Evidently, the 120-day period is merely the default election period. The Commission is not
precluded from fixing the length and the starting date of the election period to ensure free,
orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible elections. This is not merely a statutory but a
constitutionally granted power of the Commission. The Commission did not prescribe or define
the elements of election offenses. Congress already defined them through the Omnibus
Election Code, the Fair Elections Act, and other pertinent election laws.

Diambrang
Clearly, the prevailing ruling is that if the certificate of candidacy is void ab initio, the candidate
is not considered a candidate from the very beginning even if his certificate of candidacy was
cancelled after the elections.

Patad's disqualification arose from his being a fugitive from justice. It does not matter that the
disqualification case against him was finally decided by the COMELEC En Banc only on 14
November 2011. Patad's certificate of candidacy was void ab initio. As such, Diambrang, being
the first-placer among the qualified candidates, should have been proclaimed as the duly-
elected Punong Barangay of Barangay Kaludan, Nunungan, Lanao del Norte. However, due to
supervening events as we previously discussed, Diambrang can no longer hold office.

Garcia

The ruling Federico v. Comelec is not a precedent to the instant case. The rationale behind the
non-extendible 10-day prescriptive period is not difficult to deduce every candidate
interested in the outcome of the election is expected to be vigilant enough in protecting his or
her votes and would, therefore, enlist the aid of volunteer pool watchers in every clustered
precinct to guard against or document possible irregularities, or that the candidate would
personally be present at or, at the very least, would send representatives to the to the
canvassing areas to ensure the proper tallying of votes and to monitor the real-time results of
the elections as they are electronically transmitted.

Poe
1 In light of all these, it was arbitrary for the COMELEC to satisfy its intention to let the case fall
under the exclusive ground of false representation, to consider no other date than that
mentioned by petitioner in her COC for Senator. Petitioner appears to have answered the issue
immediately, also in the press. Respondents have not disputed petitioner's evidence on this
point. From that time therefore when Rep. Tiangco discussed it in the media, the stated period
of residence in the 2012 COC and the circumstances that surrounded the statement were
already matters of public record and were not hidden.
2 No. The lack of provision for declaring the ineligibility of candidates, however, cannot be
supplied by a mere rule. Such an act is equivalent to the creation of a cause of action which is a
substantive matter which the COMELEC, in the exercise of its rule-making power under Art. IX,
A, 6 of the Constitution, cannot do it. It is noteworthy that the Constitution withholds from the
COMELEC even the power to decide cases involving the right to vote, which essentially involves
an inquiry into qualifications based on age, residence and citizenship of voters.
SWS 1
To those whose end is to get a candidate elected, election surveys, when limited to their own
private consumption, are a means to formulate strategy. When published, however, the
tendency to shape voter preferences comes into play. In this respect, published election
surveys partake of the nature of election propaganda. It is then declarative speech in the
context of an electoral campaign properly subject to regulation.
SWS 2
Compelling governmental interest would include constitutionally declared principles. While it
does regulate expression (i.e., petitioners publication of election surveys), it does not go so far
as to suppress desired expression. There is neither prohibition nor censorship specifically aimed
at election surveys. The freedom to publish election surveys remains. All Resolution No. 9674
does is articulate a regulation as regards the manner of publication, that is, that the disclosure
of those who commissioned and/or paid for, including those subscribed to, published election
surveys must be made.

ER
Having determined that the subjectTV advertisements were done and broadcasted with
Ejercitos consent, it follows that Citizens United does not apply. In said US case, a non-profit
corporation sued the Federal Election Commission, assailing, among others, the
constitutionality of a ban on corporate independent expenditures for electioneering
communications under 2 U.S.C.S. 441b.
MAturan

No. We
have
already
settled
that
the
constitutional
proscription
under
the
Bill
of
Rights
extends
only
to
situations
of
extreme
corporeal
or
psychological
punishment
that
strips
the
individual
of
his
humanity.
The
proscription
is
aimed
more
at
the
form
or
character
of
the
punishment
rather
than
at
its
severity