G.R. No. 206020 - United Transport Koalisyon vs. Commission on Elections

Republic Act No. 9006 (“Fair Elections Act”) was enacted on February 12, 2001. Section 9 authorizes COMELEC to set up common poster areas and mandates equitable allocation of public spaces for campaign materials.
On January 15, 2013, COMELEC issued Resolution No. 9615 implementing R.A. 9006 for the May 13, 2013 elections. Section 7(f) prohibits posting campaign materials outside authorized common poster areas, and Section 7(g) items (5)–(6) classify public utility vehicles (PUVs) and public transport terminals as “public places,” subject to a penalty of franchise revocation and election offense.

On January 30, 2013, 1-United Transport Koalisyon (1-UTAK), a party-list group owning private PUVs and terminals, petitioned COMELEC for clarification, arguing that the prohibition infringes their free-speech and property rights.
On February 5, 2013, COMELEC En Banc denied reconsideration via Minute Resolution No. 13-0214, holding that owners of PUVs/terminals holding franchises or certificates of public convenience are subject to COMELEC regulation under Section 4, Article IX-C of the Constitution to ensure equal opportunity and prevent excessive campaign spending.

1-UTAK filed a petition for certiorari under Rules 64 and 65 of the Rules of Court, assailing Sections 7(f), 7(g)(5) and 7(g)(6) of Resolution No. 9615.
Petitioner contends the provisions unlawfully restrain their free-speech and property rights, exceed COMELEC’s authority, and fail the O’Brien test. COMELEC defends the regulation as content-neutral, within its constitutional supervisory power, necessary for equalizing campaign opportunities, and justified under the captive-audience doctrine.

Whether Sections 7(f), 7(g)(5) and 7(g)(6) of COMELEC Resolution No. 9615 violate the free-speech rights of PUV and transport-terminal owners.
Whether the assailed provisions constitute an unconstitutional prior restraint, failing the O’Brien test for content-neutral regulations.
Whether permitting campaign materials on PUVs and terminals would impair the constitutional objective of equal campaign opportunity, time, and space.
Whether COMELEC’s power under Section 4, Article IX-C of the Constitution extends to regulating the ownership (as opposed to the franchise or permit) of PUVs and terminals.