G.R. No. 258805 , October 10, 2023
St. Anthony College of Roxas City, Inc., represented by Sister Geraldine J. Denoga, D.C., Dr. Pilita De Jesus Liceralde, and Dr. Anton Mari Hao Lim, Petitioners, vs. Commission on Elections, represented by the Acting Chairperson Commissioner Socorro B. Inting, and COMELEC Director James Arthur B. Jimenez in his official capacity as Spokesperson of the COMELEC and as Director IV of the COMELEC Department for Education and Information [EID], Respondents.

FACTS

Petitioners are owners or co-owners of tarpaulins, posters, murals, and other materials expressing support for presidential candidate Maria Leonor Gerona Robredo, displayed on their private properties. These materials were allegedly “forcefully dismantled, removed, destroyed, defaced, and/or confiscated” by COMELEC personnel pursuant to “Oplan Baklas” and COMELEC Resolution No. 10730. The COMELEC actions were based on alleged violations of size limits and posting regulations for election propaganda. Specific incidents include: 1) On February 9, 2022, Dr. Lim’s “oversized” Robredo tarpaulins on his private property in Zamboanga City were removed; 2) On February 14, 2022, the COMELEC directed St. Anthony College to remove “oversized” Robredo tarpaulins from its building, and one was taken down the same day; 3) On February 16, 2022, personnel from the PNP, BFP, and COMELEC removed “oversized” Robredo materials from a volunteer center in Santiago, Isabela owned by Dr. Liceralde’s family. Petitioners sent demand letters to the COMELEC to cease and desist, which went unanswered. They filed a Petition for Certiorari, Prohibition, and Mandamus, arguing the COMELEC’s actions violated their constitutional rights to speech, expression, and property. The Court issued a temporary restraining order on March 8, 2022.

ISSUE

Whether the COMELEC has the authority to regulate the size and placement of election paraphernalia owned and displayed by private individuals on their private properties.

RULING

No. The COMELEC’s authority to regulate election propaganda under Section 9(1) of the Omnibus Election Code and COMELEC Resolution No. 10730 is limited to election propaganda spent by candidates and political parties. It does not extend to privately-owned materials expressing support for a candidate that are displayed on private property with the owner’s consent. The size and posting restrictions in COMELEC Resolution No. 10730, specifically Sections 6(c), 20, 21(o), 24, and 26, apply only to candidates and political parties, not to private citizens. The COMELEC’s “Oplan Baklas,” in forcibly removing such private materials, constituted a violation of the petitioners’ fundamental rights to freedom of expression and property without due process of law. The Court declared the COMELEC’s actions unconstitutional and permanently enjoined the COMELEC from regulating or removing privately-owned election paraphernalia displayed on private property with the owner’s consent.