Case Summary (G.R. No. 258449)
Background and Procedural History
On October 7, 2021, Ollesca filed his Certificate of Candidacy as an independent candidate. On October 21, 2021, the COMELEC Law Department initiated a petition to declare him a nuisance candidate, asserting that he was unknown nationally and lacked the financial capacity to sustain a viable campaign. The COMELEC requested for his Certificate of Candidacy to be denied due course or cancelled. The COMELEC Second Division issued a Resolution on December 13, 2021, ruling in favor of the nuisance petition against Ollesca, and subsequently denied his Motion for Reconsideration on January 3, 2022.
Rulings by the Commission on Elections
The COMELEC found Ollesca to be a nuisance candidate, citing his lack of political party affiliation, limited recognition outside his locality, and insufficient financial resources to conduct a nationwide campaign. The ruling concluded that these factors indicated a lack of bona fide intention to run for President, considering that his candidacy purportedly mocked the electoral process.
Ollesca's Arguments
In his arguments, Ollesca maintained that the assertions made by the COMELEC were unfounded and primarily speculative. He contended that the Commission erred in imposing a financial capacity qualification that is inconsistent with constitutional safeguards against property qualifications in elections. Ollesca claimed to have sufficient financial backing and support from various groups, demonstrating his genuine intention to run for office.
Legal Framework and Analysis
The case revolves around Section 69 of the Omnibus Election Code, which defines nuisance candidates as those whose candidacy does not reflect a bona fide intention to run for office. The Court highlighted that possessing financial resources alone is not determinative of a candidate's genuine intent. The precedent cases, particularly Marquez v. COMELEC, reiterate that the absence of financial capacity should not disqualify a candidate from participating in elections, as such a requirement constitutes an impermissible property qualification.
MOOTNESS and Academic Issues Raised
The COMELEC argued that the petition should be deemed moot, given that the elections had occurred and the official candidates' list was published. However, despite acknowledging the mootness, the Court decided to address the issues presented due to their recurring nature and the potential for similar disputes arising in future electoral cycles.
Findings on Grave Abuse of Discretion
The Court ruled that the COMELEC acted wi
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 258449)
Case Background and Procedural History
- Petitioner Juan Juan Olila Ollesca filed his Certificate of Candidacy for President of the Philippines for the May 9, 2022 elections as an independent candidate and declared himself an entrepreneur.
- The COMELEC Law Department filed a petition to declare Ollesca a nuisance candidate on the grounds of lack of financial capacity for a nationwide campaign, virtual unknown status nationally, and lack of bona fide intention to run, motu proprio.
- The COMELEC Second Division granted the nuisance petition in a December 13, 2021 Resolution, cancelling Ollesca’s Certificate of Candidacy.
- Ollesca filed a Motion for Reconsideration on December 20, 2021, which was denied by the COMELEC En Banc on January 3, 2022 for being filed beyond the five-day reglementary period and lack of timely payment of filing fees.
- Ollesca filed a Petition for Certiorari before the Supreme Court assailing COMELEC's resolution and order.
Issues Presented
- Whether petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration was timely filed within the five-day period from promulgation of the COMELEC decision.
- Whether the COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion in declaring petitioner a nuisance candidate.
Concept of Nuisance Candidate and Bona Fide Intention to Run
- A nuisance candidate is one whose candidacy was lodged merely to create confusion, mock, or cause disrepute to the election process, typified by lack of bona fide intention to run for office.
- Bona fide intention is the pivotal criterion under Section 69 of the Omnibus Election Code.
- Financial capacity to wage a nationwide campaign, political party membership, nationwide renown, and probability of success do not automatically determine bona fide intention.
COMELEC's Grounds for Declaring Ollesca a Nuisance Candidate
- Lack of financial capacity to launch and sustain a nationwide campaign.
- Being virtually unknown nationally except possibly in his local community.
- No proof of a political party machinery or organized campaign network.
- Allegedly filed Certificate of Candidacy to mock or put the election process in disrepute.
Petitioner’s Arguments Against Nuisance Candidate Declaration
- COMELEC Law Department failed to provide factual basis to prove lack of bona fide intention.
- Alleged imposition of financial capacity as a property qualification is unconstitutional under Maquera v. Borra and Marquez v. COMELEC jurisprudence.
- Submitted proofs of financial capacity and pledges of support from various groups.