Case Summary (G.R. No. L-24761)
COMELEC Implementation Guidelines
To implement RA 4421 for the November 1965 elections, the COMELEC:
- Required bonds from all national-office candidates, collectible by reputable bonding companies.
- Set bond amounts: ₱60,000 for President, ₱40,000 for Vice-President, and ₱32,000 for Senators and Representatives.
- Provided procedures for filing, forfeiture, and exceptions.
- Stipulated refusal of certificates of candidacy for candidates who failed to post bonds.
Effect on Prospective Candidates
The statute and its implementing rules imposed:
- Premium payments to bonding companies.
- A de facto property qualification, as candidates must pledge assets equal to the bond amount.
- A barrier to candidacy for persons lacking financial means, despite satisfying constitutional qualifications.
Constitutional Issues Raised
Petitioners argued that RA 4421:
- Imposes a property qualification inconsistent with the republican form of government and social justice principles under the 1935 Constitution.
- Unduly restricts the right to be voted for, which the Constitution limits only by age, citizenship, literacy, and residency.
- Violates the electorate’s freedom to choose among qualified candidates by arbitrarily excluding the poor.
- Denies equal protection of the laws by penalizing unsuccessful candidates with bond forfeiture, a sanction not imposed on winners.
Court’s Rationale
- Republican and social justice tenets require that political rights not depend on wealth. Sovereignty resides in all the people, rich and poor alike.
- The Constitution’s explicit qualifications for candidacy contain no property requirement. RA 4421 thus contravenes the constitutional scheme by effectively disqualifying financially disadvantaged but otherwise eligible individuals.
- The bond amount—equivalent to an entire year’s salary—imposes a substantial burden, as even that sum is deemed sufficient to finance a full campaign under the Revised Election Code.
- Forfeiture of the bond based on electoral performance introduces unequal treatment among candidates and punishes honest contenders who fall short of the prescribed vote threshold.
- While the Legislature may regulate elections to curb nuisance candidacies, it may not enact measures that unduly impede the citizen’
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. L-24761)
Procedural Background
- Consolidation of two petitions: G.R. No. L-24761 (Leon G. Maquera vs. Juan Borra, et al.) and G.R. No. L-24828 (Felipe N. Aurea and Melecio Malabanan vs. Commission on Elections).
- Filed directly with the Supreme Court challenging the validity and enforcement of Republic Act No. 4421.
- The Court acted to render a prompt decision without prejudice to a fuller opinion later.
Statutory Provision at Issue
- Republic Act No. 4421, Section 36-A, incorporated into the Revised Election Code:
- “All candidates for national, provincial, city and municipal offices shall post a surety bond equivalent to the one-year salary or emoluments of the position to which he is a candidate.”
- Bond forfeited in favor of the appropriate government entity if a non-winner candidate fails to obtain at least 10% of votes cast, provided there are no more than four candidates for the same office.
Commission on Elections’ Implementing Guidelines (July 20, 1965)
- Who must post: All candidates for President, Vice-President, Senator, and Member of the House of Representatives.
- Amounts fixed: ₱60,000 for President; ₱40,000 for Vice-President; ₱32,000 for Senators and Congressmen.
- Filing deadline: On or before September 10, 1965 (coinciding with certificate-of-candidacy deadline).
- Place of filing: Cash Division, Commission on Elections.
- Surety: Bonding company of reputable standing, acceptable to the Commission.
- Forfeiture condition: Failure of a non-winner to secure at least 10% of votes, determined by official canvass.
- Consequence of non-compliance: Refusal to process certificate of candidacy.
Factual Context and Effects
- Compliance costs: Candidates must pay premiums to bonding companies.
- Collateral requirement: Candidates must pledge property of equal value—own or third party’s.
- Practical