G.R. No. 208062 - Social Weather Stations, Inc. vs. Commission on Elections

Petitioners Social Weather Stations, Inc. (SWS) and Pulse Asia, Inc. (Pulse Asia) are social research and public polling firms conducting pre-election surveys.
Respondent Commission on Elections (COMELEC) issued Resolution No. 9674 on April 23, 2013, directing survey firms (including SWS and Pulse Asia) to submit the names of all “commissioners,” “payors,” and “subscribers” of surveys published between February 12 and April 23, 2013.

On February 15–17, 2013, SWS conducted and published a senatorial preference survey.
On March 20, 2013, Rep. Tobias Tiangco (UNA Secretary-General) wrote COMELEC demanding disclosure of survey payors and subscribers; SWS provided only partial information.
COMELEC Law Department recommended enforcement; the En Banc issued an order on April 10, 2013, setting a clarificatory hearing for April 16, 2013. Pulse Asia was invited on April 12, 2013.
At the April 16 clarificatory hearing, COMELEC Chairman Brillantes described the proceeding as non-formal, clarificatory only.

Dispositive directive: within three days of receipt, submit names of all commissioners, payors, and subscribers of surveys published from February 12 to April 23, 2013, for confidential Commission use; future surveys must include the same disclosures on publication under RA 9006.
Cited bases: Constitution Article IX-C, § 2(1) (enforcement of election laws) and RA 9006 §§ 5.1–5.3 (Fair Election Act).

Petitioners alleged they did not receive a copy of Resolution 9674; letters of April 30, 2013, and a Notice of May 8, 2013, demanded compliance or threatened election-offense prosecution.
On July 1, 2013, COMELEC issued a subpoena notifying petitioners of a criminal complaint (E.O. Case No. 13-222) for alleged violation of RA 9006 and OEC § 264, to submit counter-affidavits by August 6, 2013. Petitioners claimed no service of the complaint or the resolution.

On July 26, 2013, petitioners filed a certiorari/prohibition petition under Rules 64 and 65, assailing Resolution 9674 as ultra vires, impairing contracts, curtailing free speech, prematurely effective, and violating due process.
This Court issued a TRO on July 30, 2013 enjoining enforcement pending resolution (limited to subscriber names), required COMELEC comment (filed October 10, 2013), and memoranda (filed May 16 and June 25, 2014).

The case was set for resolution after memoranda were filed; petitioners reiterated invalidity arguments on subscriber disclosure, free speech, contract impairment, effectivity clause, and due process in notice and complaint service.
COMELEC defended broad regulatory discretion, contemporaneous statutory construction, public-interest basis in equal access, and argued mootness of effectivity issue.

Whether Resolution No. 9674 is invalid for requiring disclosure of the names of “subscribers” to election surveys beyond RA 9006’s requirements.
Whether the disclosure requirement curtails petitioners’ freedom of speech.
Whether compelling disclosure of subscribers violates the constitutional prohibition on impairment of contracts (Art. III, § 10).
Whether Resolution 9674 took effect immediately upon publication in violation of RA 9006 § 13’s seven-day post-publication rule.
Whether COMELEC deprived petitioners of due process by failing to serve them with (a) a copy of Resolution 9674 and (b) the criminal complaint underlying E.O. Case No. 13-222 or specifying the election offense charged.