The Supreme Court (SC) stopped the Commission on Elections (Comelec) from enforcing its Dec. 13, 2021 resolution which declared Norman Cordero Marquez a “nuisance candidate” and cancelled his certificate of candidacy (COC) for the May 9, 2022 senatorial election.
In a resolution that contained a temporary restraining order (TRO), the SC directed the Comelec to comment on Marquez’s petition within a non-extendible period of 10 days from receipt of notice.
The TRO was issued on Wednesday, Jan. 19, by Chief Justice Alexander G. Gesmundo “upon the written recommendation of the Member-in-Charge” (the justice to whom the petition was assigned during raffle).
A copy of Marquez’s petition was not available.
A check with the SC’s decisions online showed that Marquez had the same fate during the May 13, 2019 senatorial election when the Comelec also cancelled his COC.
He challenged the ruling before the SC which reversed the resolution of the Comelec. He did not win as senator, however, in the 2019 election.
SC records in the 2019 case showed that the Comelec cancelled Marquez’s COC with a ruling that he was “virtually unknown to the entire country except maybe in the locality where he resides,” and that “though a real estate broker, he, absent clear proof of financial capability will not be able to sustain the financial rigors of a nationwide campaign.”
Marquez told the Comelec in 2019 that he is a resident of Mountain Province and a real estate broker. He also said he is the co-founder and sole administrator of the Baguio Animal Welfare, an animal advocacy group.
Thus, he argued, that the Comelec should not have discounted “the potential for vastly untapped sector of animal lovers, raisers and handlers, and the existing local and foreign benefactors and donors who are willing and capable to (sic) subsidize the expenses of a social-media-enhanced national campaign."
The SC, in a decision written by the now retired Associate Justice Francis H. Jardeleza, granted Marquez’s petition as it reversed the Comelec’s ruling.
The 2019 decision stated:
“We find that the Comelec committed grave abuse of discretion in declaring Marquez a nuisance candidate on the ground of failure to prove financial capacity to sustain the financial rigors of waging a nationwide campaign.
“There is grave abuse of discretion: (1) when an act is done contrary to the Constitution, the law or jurisprudence; or (2) when it is executed whimsically, capriciously or arbitrarily out of malice, ill will or personal bias.56 Both elements appear to be present in this case.
“It bears reiterating that the Court acknowledges the Comelec’s legitimate objective in weeding out candidates who have not evinced a bona fide intention to run for office from the electoral process. Any measure designed to accomplish the said objective should, however, not be arbitrary and oppressive and should not contravene the Republican system ordained in our Constitution.
“Unfortunately, the Comelec’s preferred standard falls short of what is constitutionally permissible.”