Case Digest (G.R. No. L-47883)
Facts:
The case Lakas ng Bayan (LABAN) v. Commission on Elections & Nacionalista Party centers around a petition filed by LABAN against the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) and the Nacionalista Party on March 25, 1978. The petition requested the Supreme Court to prohibit COMELEC from granting the Nacionalista Party the rights and privileges of a separate political party, particularly concerning its appearance on the official ballot for the elections scheduled on April 7, 1978, for the Interim Batasang Pambansa. LABAN sought to nullify a COMELEC decision dated February 25, 1978, which dismissed its petition in Election Case No. 1978-3. The premise of LABAN's petition was that the listing of the Nacionalista Party in the official ballot would confer undue advantages to the candidates of the Kilusan ng Bagong Lipunan (KBL), which also endorsed Nacionalista candidates. LABAN argued that this arrangement had direct and consequential effects, giving the KBL candidates a favored pos
Case Digest (G.R. No. L-47883)
Facts:
The petitioner, Lakas ng Bayan (LABAN), filed a petition for prohibition and certiorari against the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) and the Nacionalista Party (NP). LABAN sought to enjoin COMELEC from granting NP the rights and privileges of a separate political party in the April 7, 1978 elections for the Interim Batasang Pambansa. LABAN argued that listing NP in the official ballot gave undue advantage to the Kilusan ng Bagong Lipunan (KBL) candidates, who were also NP candidates. LABAN claimed that COMELEC favored NP by center-setting and giving it "star billing" in the ballot, allowing KBL candidates to be voted for in six ways compared to LABAN's two. LABAN also contended that NP had become an adjunct of KBL, losing its independence and violating Section 140 of the Election Code, which prohibits a candidate from being in the ticket of more than one party. LABAN further argued that separate recognition of KBL and NP would give them future accreditation rights, media advantages, and increased campaign spending and watchers.Issues:
- Whether COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion by allowing NP to adopt all KBL candidates while maintaining a separate listing in the ballot.
- Whether COMELEC violated Section 140 of the Election Code, which provides that a candidate may be in the ticket of only one political party, group, or aggrupation.
- Whether the listing of NP in the ballot gave undue advantage to KBL candidates, violating the constitutional mandate of fairness and equality in elections.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)