Case Digest (G.R. No. 205357) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In G.R. No. 205357, decided on September 2, 2014, GMA Network, Inc. (together with ABS-CBN Corporation, ABC Development Corporation, Manila Broadcasting Company, Newsounds Broadcasting Network, Radio Mindanao Network, and the Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas) filed a petition for certiorari and injunction assailing COMELEC Resolution No. 9615, later amended by Resolution No. 9631, which reinterpreted Section 6.2 of the Fair Election Act (RA 9006) to limit television and radio campaign advertisements on an aggregate basis (120 minutes TV, 180 minutes radio for national candidates; 60 minutes TV, 90 minutes radio for local) instead of per station. Petitioners also challenged provisions on criminal sanctions (Section 7(d)), definitions of “political advertisement” (Section 1(4)), the “right to reply” (Section 14), and election-offense classification (Section 35). Petitioner-intervenor Senator Alan Peter S. Cayetano similarly questioned the aggregate-time rule. The COMELEC c Case Digest (G.R. No. 205357) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Parties and Proceedings
- Petitioners
- Broadcast networks: GMA Network, Inc.; ABS-CBN Corporation; ABC Development Corporation; Manila Broadcasting Company, Inc.; Newsounds Broadcasting Network, Inc.; Radio Mindanao Network, Inc.
- Industry group: Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas (KBP)
- Petitioner-Intervenor
- Senator Alan Peter S. Cayetano
- Respondent
- Commission on Elections (COMELEC)
- Statutory and Regulatory Background
- Republic Act No. 9006 (“Fair Election Act”), Sec. 6.2
- National candidates/parties entitled to 120 minutes TV, 180 minutes radio per station.
- Local candidates/parties entitled to 60 minutes TV, 90 minutes radio per station.
- COMELEC Resolutions for 2004–2010 Elections
- Interpretations applied Sec. 6.2 on a “per station” basis.
- COMELEC Resolutions for 2013 Elections
- Resolution No. 9615 (Jan. 15, 2013)
- Changed interpretation of Sec. 6.2 to an “aggregate total” basis: 120 minutes TV, 180 minutes radio per candidate/party for national posts; 60/90 minutes for local.
- Imposed notice requirements for guestings, reporting requirements for ad contracts and airtime logs.
- Prescribed sanctions (Sec. 7(d)) including criminal liability and possible suspension/revocation of franchise.
- Included a “right to reply” provision (Sec. 14).
- Resolution No. 9631 (Feb. 1, 2013)
- Amended certain procedural requirements but retained aggregate interpretation.
- Petitioners’ Contentions
- Aggregate interpretation (Sec. 9(a))
- Violates freedom of speech and of the press, right of the people to information, and right to suffrage.
- Arbitrary, vague, oppressive burden on broadcasters to monitor aggregate airtime.
- Infringes equal protection.
- Sanctions on broadcasters (Sec. 7(d))
- Criminalizes acts not penalized by law; punitive and excessive.
- Right to reply (Sec. 14)
- Prior restraint; unconstitutional exercise of regulatory power.
- Due process
- Failure to hold prior public hearing before adopting Resolution No. 9615.
- COMELEC’s Defense
- Authority
- Exercise of constitutional powers (Art. IX-C, Secs. 2(7) and 4).
- Rule-making powers to “supervise or regulate” and to “amplify” guidelines under RA 9006.
- Standing and Remedies
- Broadcast networks lack personal rights; remedies of certiorari/prohibition unavailable.
- Substance of Provisions
- Aggregate rule furthers equal access; within statutory mandate.
- Reporting and notice requirements are reasonable monitoring measures, not prior restraint.
- Right to reply enshrined in Constitution and RA 9006 (Sec. 10); mere collateral attack on the law.
- No public participation requirement for COMELEC regulations.
- Procedural
- Held public hearings; TRO improvidently issued.
Issues:
- Procedural Issues
- Proper remedy and availability of certiorari/prohibition.
- Petitioners’ standing (locus standi).
- Requirement for prior notice and hearing in rule-making.
- Substantive Issues
- Constitutionality of COMELEC Sec. 7(d): criminal sanctions and franchise revocation for broadcasters.
- Constitutionality of COMELEC Sec. 9(a): aggregate airtime limits for campaign ads.
- Constitutionality of COMELEC Sec. 14: right to reply.
- Validity of undefined terms in Resolution No. 9615 (e.g., “political advertisement”).
- Alleged violation of:
- Freedom of speech, of expression, and of the press (Art. III, Sec. 4).
- People’s right to information (Art. III, Sec. 7).
- People’s right to suffrage (Art. V, Sec. 1).
- Equal protection (Art. III, Sec. 1).
- Due process (Art. III, Sec. 1).
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)