G.R. No. L-32560-61 October 22, 1970
ESMERALDO M. GATCHALIAN, petitioner on his behalf and on behalf of all others similarly situated, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, respondent.

FACTS

Petitioner Esmeraldo M. Gatchalian was a candidate for delegate to the Constitutional Convention for the first district of Rizal. The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) promulgated Resolution No. RR-707 on August 13, 1970, ruling that donations of billboards to the COMELEC by foreigners or companies/corporations owned or controlled partially or wholly by foreigners were not covered by the prohibition in Section 56 of the Revised Election Code. Subsequently, on September 17, 1970, COMELEC promulgated Resolution No. RR-731, ruling that the ban in Section 56 did not cover a projected campaign for funds and contributions by the Advertising Council of the Philippines and others similarly situated, and that donations for such campaign could be received from foreigners or foreign-owned/controlled entities. Petitioner filed a petition with COMELEC impugning the validity of these resolutions as violative of Section 56. COMELEC denied the petition on September 21, 1970, reasoning that contributions by foreigners to finance COMELEC billboards were not made in aid of any particular candidate and allocation of space was by lottery. Petitioner appealed to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

The primary issues were: 1) Whether the term “any elections” in Section 56 of the Revised Election Code includes the election of delegates to the Constitutional Convention; 2) Whether the term “foreigner” in Section 56 includes both natural and juridical persons or organized groups; and 3) Whether the term “any candidate” in Section 56 comprehends “some candidates” or “all candidates.”

RULING

The Supreme Court granted the petition and declared COMELEC Resolutions Nos. RR-707 and RR-731 illegal and null and void.
1. The term “any elections” in Section 56 includes the election of delegates to the Constitutional Convention. This is supported by Section 8 of Republic Act No. 6132 , which expressly enumerates prohibited acts in addition to those in the Revised Election Code, and by jurisprudence holding that such term applies to all elections held in the state, including those established thereafter by law.
2. The term “foreigner” in Section 56 includes both natural and juridical persons or organized groups, with or without legal personality. Section 39 of the Revised Election Code defines “person” broadly to include individuals, partnerships, committees, associations, corporations, and any other organization or group of persons. The danger of desecrating the sanctity of the ballot is greater from artificial persons due to their superior financial resources and combined influence. The Court rejected COMELEC’s position that the donors were the advertising firms and not the alien contributors, noting that the resolutions themselves referred to donations by foreigners or foreign-owned companies.
3. The term “any candidate” comprehends “some candidates” or “all candidates.” The Court held that the term should be construed to mean some or all candidates, as supported by legal principles of statutory construction.
The Court emphasized that the COMELEC billboards, by providing space for candidates’ names and photographs, constituted aid to candidates. It also rejected the notion that the government needed to solicit foreign donations for election expenses, stating that such a mendicant attitude was contrary to national integrity and dignity.