Case Summary (G.R. No. 206794)
The Assailed Resolution
The Money Ban Resolution prohibits cash withdrawals, encashment of checks, and conversion of monetary instruments into cash exceeding One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,000.00) from May 8 to May 13, 2013. It also prohibits the possession or transportation of cash exceeding Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,000.00) during the same period, deeming any amount above this threshold as presumed for vote-buying and electoral fraud. Additional prohibitions regard cash transactions of this nature as suspicious activities under the Anti-Money Laundering Act.
Parties' Arguments – Petitioners
The petitioners argue that Comelec lacks jurisdiction to issue the Money Ban Resolution, as its regulatory power under Section 4, Article IX-C of the Constitution does not extend to the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) or the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC). They assert that the Comelec can only regulate public utilities and entities with special privileges and further argue that the Comelec's power to deputize is limited to law enforcement agencies with presidential concurrence, which they claim has not been obtained. The petitioners contend that the Money Ban Resolution infringes on constitutional rights including due process, the right to property, and the presumption of innocence, as it unduly restricts cash transactions and presumes wrongdoing without proper justification.
Parties' Arguments – Respondent
In response, Comelec defends the validity of the Money Ban Resolution, asserting that it is constitutionally authorized to supervise financial entities during elections. Comelec claims its regulatory power applies to banks and financial institutions operating under the authority of the BSP. It argues that the power of deputization extends beyond law enforcement agencies to governmental instrumentalities, thereby including the BSP. Comelec also maintains that the President’s blanket concurrence covers the deputation of all government agencies, suggesting that such approval is already implicit.
Court's Ruling on Mootness
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition as moot and academic, determining that the Money Ban Resolution had a limited duration and was no longer in effect by the time of the ruling. The Court noted that since the Money Ban was only effective for the May 13, 2013 elections, and given that the resolution was not in force during the crucial voting period (after the Status Quo Ante Order was issued), the issues at stake ceased to be relevant. The Court emphasized that ju
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 206794)
The Case Overview
- The case involves the petitioners, Bankers Association of the Philippines and Perry L. Pe, who challenge the constitutionality and legality of the Commission on Elections (Comelec) Resolution No. 9688, issued on May 7, 2013.
- This resolution, referred to as the Money Ban Resolution, aimed to implement a ban on cash transactions to deter vote-buying during the upcoming May 13, 2013 elections.
- The petitioners sought a status quo ante order, a temporary restraining order, and/or a writ of preliminary injunction to prevent the implementation of the resolution.
The Money Ban Resolution
- The Money Ban Resolution imposed the following restrictions from May 8 to May 13, 2013:
- Withdrawal Restrictions: Prohibited the withdrawal of cash, encashment of checks, and conversion of monetary instruments into cash exceeding P100,000.00 per day across various financial institutions.
- Cash Possession Limits: Prohibited possession and transportation of cash exceeding P500,000.00 during the same period, with any excess presumed to be related to vote-buying.
- Suspicious Transactions: Established that any withdrawals exceeding P500,000.00 within one banking day were presumed to be for vote-buying purposes and categorized as suspicious transactions under the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2001.
The Amendment to the Resolution
- On May 9, 2013, Comelec issued Resolution No. 9688-A, amending the original Money Ban Resolution:
- Exemptions for Routine Transactions: Allowed withdrawals that were routine and regular, made in the ordinary course of business, per the Bangko Sentral ng Pili