Scribd
Upload
83 views1 page

COMELEC Denies Pamatong's Candidacy

The petitioner, Rev. Elly Velez Pamatong, filed a certificate of candidacy for president which was refused by the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) as they deemed him a nuisance candidate. The COMELEC believed he could not wage a nationwide campaign or be nominated by a political party. The petitioner argued this violated his right to equal access to public service under the constitution. However, the court held that the equal access provision does not contain an enforceable constitutional right, but only a guideline for legislative or executive action. Valid limitations on who can seek elective office are found in provisions regarding nuisance candidates in the Omnibus Election Code and COMELEC resolutions. Therefore, the COME

Uploaded by

Ming
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
83 views1 page

COMELEC Denies Pamatong's Candidacy

The petitioner, Rev. Elly Velez Pamatong, filed a certificate of candidacy for president which was refused by the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) as they deemed him a nuisance candidate. The COMELEC believed he could not wage a nationwide campaign or be nominated by a political party. The petitioner argued this violated his right to equal access to public service under the constitution. However, the court held that the equal access provision does not contain an enforceable constitutional right, but only a guideline for legislative or executive action. Valid limitations on who can seek elective office are found in provisions regarding nuisance candidates in the Omnibus Election Code and COMELEC resolutions. Therefore, the COME

Uploaded by

Ming
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

REV. ELLY CHAVEZ PAMATONG, ESQUIRE, petitioner, vs.

COMMISSION ON
ELECTIONS, respondent

FACTS: Petitioner Rev. Elly Velez Pamatong filed his Certificate of Candidacy for President on
December 17, 2003. Respondent Commission on Elections (COMELEC) refused to give due
course to petitioner’s Certificate of Candidacy in its Resolution No. 6558 dated January 17,
2004. The decision, however, was not unanimous since Commissioners Luzviminda G.
Tancangco and Mehol K. Sadain voted to include petitioner as they believed he had parties or
movements to back up his candidacy On January 15, 2004, petitioner moved for reconsideration
of Resolution No. 6558. Petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration was docketed as SPP (MP) No.
04-001. The COMELEC, acting on petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration and on similar
motions filed by other aspirants for national elective positions, denied the same under the aegis
of Omnibus Resolution No. 6604 dated February 11, 2004. The COMELEC declared petitioner
and thirty-five (35) others nuisance candidates who could not wage a nationwide campaign
and/or are not nominated by a political party or are not supported by a registered political party
with a national constituency. Commissioner Sadain maintained his vote for petitioner. By then,
Commissioner Tancangco had retired.

ISSUE: WHETHER OR NOT THE RIGHT TO EQUAL ACCESS FOR PUBLIC SERVICE
WAS VIOLATED?

HELD: The "equal access" provision is a subsumed part of Article II of the Constitution, entitled
"Declaration of Principles and State Policies." The provisions under the Article are generally
considered not self-executing,2 and there is no plausible reason for according a different
treatment to the "equal access" provision. Like the rest of the policies enumerated in Article II,
the provision does not contain any judicially enforceable constitutional right but merely specifies
a guideline for legislative or executive action.3 The disregard of the provision does not give rise
to any cause of action before the courts.4 As earlier noted, the privilege of equal access to
opportunities to public office may be subjected to limitations. Some valid limitations specifically
on the privilege to seek elective office are found in the provisions9 of the Omnibus Election
Code on "Nuisance Candidates" and COMELEC Resolution No. 645210 dated December 10,
2002 outlining the instances wherein the COMELEC may motu proprio refuse to give due course
to or cancel a Certificate of Candidacy.

You might also like