Facts:

The case involves two consolidated petitions: G.R. No. 147066 filed by petitioners AKBAYAN - Youth, SCAP, UCSC, MASP, KOMPIL II - Youth, and others, against the Commission on Elections (COMELEC), and G.R. No. 147179 filed by Michelle D. Betito against the same respondents. The petitions arose from the denial of a request for additional voter registration days prior to the May 14, 2001 General Elections. The petitioners, representing the youth sector, argued that approximately four million young Filipinos aged 18 to 21 were disenfranchised due to their inability to register before the December 27, 2000 deadline set by the COMELEC under Republic Act No. 8189.

On January 25, 2001, Senator Raul Roco convened a public hearing to discuss the possibility of extending the registration period. Following this, on January 29, 2001, two COMELEC commissioners submitted a memorandum suggesting that a two-day additional registration could be legally feasible. However, a consultation meet...

Facts:

1. Context of the Case: The case revolves around the right of suffrage and the petitioners, representing the youth sector, sought to compel the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) to conduct a special registration for new voters aged 18 to 21 before the May 14, 2001 General Elections.
2. Failure to Register: Petitioners claimed that around four million youth failed to register before the December 27, 2000 deadline set by COMELEC under Republic Act (R.A.) No. 8189, the Voter’s Registration Act of 1996.
3. Legislative Involvement: Senator Raul Roco, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Electoral Reforms, invited COMELEC to a public hearing to discuss extending the registration deadline. COMELEC representatives agreed to a two-day special registration but later reversed the decision.
4. COMELEC’s Decision: On February 8, 2001, COMELEC issued Resolution No. 3584, denying the request for a two-day special registration. Commissioners Rufino Javier and Mehol Sadain voted against the request, while Commissioners Luzviminda Tancangco and Ralph Lantion supported it.
5. Petitions Filed: Petitioners filed two petitions—G.R. No. 147066 (AKBAYAN-Youth et al.) and G.R. No. 147179 (Michelle Betito)—seeking to nullify COMELEC’s Resolution and to compel a special registration.

Issue:

1. Whether COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in issuing Resolution No. 3584, which denied the request for a special registration of voters.
2. Whether the Court could compel COMELEC, through a writ of mandamus, to conduct a special registration of new voters between the December 27, 2000 deadline and the May 14, 2001 elections.

Ruling:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Conclusion:

The Court upheld COMELEC’s decision, emphasizing that while the right to vote is fundamental, it must be exercised within the bounds of existing laws. COMELEC acted within its legal authority and discretion in denying the request for a special registration, and the Court could not compel it to act contrary to the law.