FACTS:

This case involves a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, with an application for a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction filed by Ang Ladlad LGBT Party (Ang Ladlad) against the Resolutions of the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) dated November 11, 2009, and December 16, 2009, which collectively denied Ang Ladlad accreditation as a party-list organization under Republic Act No. 7941 (the Party-List System Act). Ang Ladlad is an organization composed of individuals who identify as lesbians, gays, bisexuals, or transgendered persons (LGBTs). Initially incorporated in 2003, Ang Ladlad applied for registration with the COMELEC in 2006, but the application was denied on the basis that the organization lacked a substantial membership base. Ang Ladlad subsequently filed another petition for registration on August 17, 2009.

Ang Ladlad argued before the COMELEC that the LGBT community constitutes a marginalized and under-represented sector, facing exclusion, discrimination, and violence due to their sexual orientation and gender identity. The organization asserted compliance with the 8-point guidelines from Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party v. Commission on Elections, presenting its national membership base and platform of governance. However, on November 11, 2009, the COMELEC (Second Division) dismissed their petition on moral grounds, citing religious texts and arguing that Ang Ladlad promotes immorality offensive to public morals and religious beliefs.

Ang Ladlad sought reconsideration, but three commissioners and the COMELEC Chairman upheld the previous decision, stating that Ang Ladlad’s sexual orientations do not benefit the nation as a whole and do not fall within the purposes of the party-list law. In response, Ang Ladlad filed a petition with the Supreme Court on January 4, 2010, to annul the COMELEC's resolutions and to grant its application for accreditation. The Supreme Court issued a temporary restraining order on January 12, 2010, halting the implementation of the COMELEC's resolutions. The Commission on Human Rights and other parties intervened, supporting Ang Ladlad's position that the denial of accreditation on moral grounds violated constitutional guarantees and international obligations against discrimination based on sexual orientation.

ISSUES:

1. Whether the denial of accreditation to Ang Ladlad LGBT Party on moral grounds contravened constitutional guarantees against the establishment of religion and the rights to privacy, freedom of speech and assembly, and equal protection of laws.

RULING:

1. Granting of Petition - The Supreme Court granted the petition, holding that the denial of Ang Ladlad's accreditation on moral grounds was a grave violation of the non-establishment clause in the Constitution, which mandates government neutrality in religious matters. It was further ruled that moral disapproval without more is not a sufficient governmental interest to justify the exclusion of homosexuals from participation in the party-list system.

PRINCIPLES:

• Non-Establishment Clause: Government neutrality in religious matters is required by the Constitution, ensuring that no law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

• Equal Protection Clause: No person or class of persons is to be deprived of the same protection of laws that is enjoyed by other persons or classes in the same place and in like circumstances.

• Freedom of Expression and Association: Every group has the right to advocate for its views and participate in political processes under the same basis as other groups, free from undue government interference.

• International Human Rights Law: The principle of non-discrimination, especially concerning electoral participation, is in line with international commitments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).