The Supreme Court (SC) ruled that the Commission on Elections (Comelec) cannot remove or destroy privately-owned political campaign materials displayed on private property.

In a decision written by Associate Justice Jose Midas P. Marquez, the SC declared unconstitutional the Comelec’s confiscation and destruction of privately-owned political campaign materials displayed on private property.

The SC ruled that Republic Act No. 9006, the Fair Election Act, and Comelec Resolution No. 10730, only permit the Comelec to regulate the election propaganda owned by candidates and political parties.

It stressed that the law and the resolution do not allow the Comelec to regulate the political speech of private persons on private property.

The SC’s decision granted the petition filed by St. Anthony College of Roxas City, Inc. (St. Anthony College) against the Comelec.

In its petition St. Anthony College told the SC that the school and other private persons were the owners and co-owners of tarpaulins, posters, murals, and other materials displayed on their premises, expressing support and soliciting votes for former vice president Maria Leonor Gerona Robredo, who was a candidate for president in the May 9, 2022 national and local elections.

It said that the Comelec confiscated and destroyed their campaign materials pursuant to the Comelec’s “Oplan Baklas” under RA 9006 and Comelec Resolution 10730.

The SC said that while the Comelec may validly implement “Oplan Baklas” against candidates and political parties, it cannot implement “Oplan Baklas” against private individuals expressing their political preferences or support for a candidate or political party.

In the incidents at St. Anthony College, the SC said there was no legal bases for the Comelec’s entry into the private property and the removal and their privately-owned campaign materials.

It stressed that it “has always protected political speech as one of the most important expressions guaranteed by the Constitution, and freedom of speech and expression is at the core of civil liberties and must be protected at all costs for the sake of democracy.”

It noted that while it acknowledged “the zeal and dedication with which the Comelec performs its duties and fulfills its mandate to ensure free and fair elections, the best intentions cannot justify impermissible infringements on constitutional rights.”

At the same time, the SC held that “the Comelec’s implementation of ‘Oplan Baklas’ as against St. Anthony, et al., is unconstitutional as it exceeded the bounds of permissible regulation under RA 9006 and Comelec Resolution No. 10730.”

The SC’s public information office (PIO) said a copy of the decision will be posted on the court’s website – sc.judiciary.gov.ph – once released officially.