View full case

REV. ELLY CHAVEZ PAMATONG v. COMELEC

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. On January 15, 2004, petitioner moved for reconsideration of Resolution No. 6558. Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration was denied under Omnibus Resolution No. 6604 dated February 11, 2004. The COMELEC declared petitioner and 35 others as nuisance candidates who could not wage a nationwide campaign and/or are not nominated or supported by political parties. Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari to reverse the resolutions, arguing that they violated his right to equal access to opportunities for public service. Petitioner also attacked the validity of the form for the Certificate of Candidacy prepared by the COMELEC, claiming that it does not provide clear and reasonable guidelines for determining the qualifications of candidates.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the petitioner has a constitutional right to equal access to opportunities for public office.

  2. Whether the COMELEC committed errors in disqualifying the petitioner and in preparing the form for the Certificate of Candidacy.

RULING:

  1. The petitioner does not have a constitutional right to equal access to opportunities for public office. The provision in Section 26, Article II of the Constitution, which ensures "equal access to opportunities for public service," does not bestow a right to run for or hold public office. It is merely a privilege subject to limitations imposed by law. The provision does not contain any judicially enforceable constitutional right but merely specifies a guideline for legislative or executive action. The disregard of the provision does not give rise to any cause of action before the courts.

  2. The COMELEC did not commit errors in disqualifying the petitioner and in preparing the form for the Certificate of Candidacy. The petitioner's disqualification as a nuisance candidate was based on the provisions of the Omnibus Election Code and the COMELEC's own resolution outlining the instances where disqualification as a nuisance candidate is warranted. The COMELEC had the authority to determine the qualifications of candidates and to disqualify those who do not meet the requirements. The form for the Certificate of Candidacy prepared by the COMELEC was not invalid as it complied with the requirements set forth by law.

PRINCIPLES:

  • The provision in Section 26, Article II of the Constitution, which ensures "equal access to opportunities for public service," does not bestow a constitutional right to run for or hold public office.

  • The provisions under Article II of the Constitution, entitled "Declaration of Principles and State Policies," are generally considered not self-executing and do not contain any judicially enforceable constitutional rights.

  • The privilege of equal access to opportunities for public office may be subjected to limitations imposed by law.

  • The COMELEC has the authority to determine the qualifications of candidates and to disqualify those who do not meet the requirements.

  • The form for the Certificate of Candidacy prepared by the COMELEC is valid as long as it complies with the requirements set forth by law.