“Declaring one a nuisance candidate simply because he or she is not known to the entire country reduces the electoral process – a sacred instrument of democracy – to a mere popularity contest.”
In a unanimous full court decision, the SC – reiterating its previous rulings -- also declared: “The matter of the candidate being known (or unknown) should not be taken against the candidate but is best left to the electorate.”
The decision, written by Associate Justice Amy C. Lazaro-Javier and made public last Sept. 8, partly granted the petition of Norman Cordero Marquez who was declared a nuisance candidate by the Commission on Elections (Comelec) in the last May 9 senatorial elections.
But while the Comelec’s resolution that cancelled Marquez’s certificate of candidacy (COC) and declared him a nuisance candidate was nullified by the SC, his prayer for inclusion as candidate in the last May 9 senatorial election “is declared moot.”
When the Comelec cancelled his certificate of candidacy (COC), Marquez filed a petition with the SC which issued a temporary restraining order (TRO).
Despite the TRO, however, Marquez’s name was not included in the official ballots for senators and thus, he, failed to participate in the May 9 elections.
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.
Marquez, case records show, is a resident of Mountain Province and a real estate broker. He is also the co-founder and sole administrator of the Baguio Animal Welfare, an animal advocacy group.
A press statement issued by the SC’s public information office (PIO) stated that “while Marquez’s case has been mooted by the conclusion of the 2022 Elections, the Supreme Court found it necessary to resolve the matter since the same situation may recur in future elections.”
The PIO’ summary of the decision stated that the SC found that the Comelec committed several errors – “it shifted the burden on Marquez to prove that he is not a nuisance candidate, a burden supposed to be borne by the Comelec Law Department which made the allegation that Marquez did not possess bona fide intention to run for senator, but the Comelec Law Department failed to substantiate its claims.”
It said “the Court considered several indicators of Marquez’s serious intent to run -- his COC is a sworn document declaring his candidacy; this is not the first time he filed a COC; he has a Program of Governance in the event he wins; he exercised utmost vigilance in the protection of his candidacy; after he was declared a nuisance candidate in the 2019 Elections, he availed of judicial remedies to assert his right, and prevailed before the Court; and after his 2022 Elections COC was canceled again by the Comelec, he raised the matter before this Court to protect his interest.”
“The Court also noted that it is contrary to human experience that a candidate would go through such a rigorous process, not once, but twice, if he or she has actually no intent to run,” the PIO’s summary stated.
It stated that “the Court further stressed that a candidate is considered to have bona fide intent to run when he or she can demonstrate seriousness in running for office.”
“Neither the law nor the election rules impose membership in a political party as a requirement on persons intending to run for public office,” it said.
“The same is true for unpopularity, since it is not among the grounds for declaration of a nuisance candidate under Section 69 of the Omnibus Election Code. Hence, the Comelec erred in using Marquez’s status of being virtually unknown in the entire country to exclude him as candidate,” it also said.
Quoting from the SC decision, the PIO’s summary also stated:
“The Court nevertheless urged the Comelec to adopt a practicable plan or timeline to ensure that all cases which may result in the inclusion or exclusion of a candidate from the ballot are resolved at the earliest possible time, bearing in mind that Comelec dispositions are subject to review by the Supreme Court which also needs ample time to resolve such cases prior to election day.
“The Comelec should further consider that the aggrieved party will likely seek injunctive relief from the Court which might affect the timeline for necessary election preparations.
“While the Comelec cannot be faulted for zealously scrutinizing the qualifications of candidates for elective posts, it is reminded to be more circumspect in the pursuit of its mandate under the Constitution and the law.
“ACCORDINGLY, the petition is PARTLY GRANTED. The Resolution dated December 13, 2021 of the COMELEC Second Division in SPA Case No. 21-056(DC)(MP) and the Resolution dated January 3, 2022 of the COMELEC En Banc are NULLIFIED.
“The prayer of Marquez for the inclusion of his name in all the official ballots as a candidate for Senator for the May 2022 National and Local Elections is DECLARED MOOT.
“The prayer "to make the COMELEC suffer the pam of contempt of Court" because it "brazenly and contumaciously exhibited contempt" and " bold enough to defy the Court" in proceeding with its election preparations despite the Court's issuance of a TRO is DENIED.
“To avoid a recurrence of similar incidents in the future, the COMELEC is strongly urged to adopt a practicable plan or timeline to ensure that all cases which may result in the exclusion of a candidate from the ballot are resolved at the earliest possible time. SO ORDERED.”
(end)