FOR several weeks now, there has been an undue increase in the public activities and appearances of certain people, obviously candidates for certain positions in the coming midterm elections, as reported in various media, along with the appearance of tarpaulins and posters of all kinds featuring their names and pictures.
They are candidates for one position or another in the government, although they are not saying so. They seek to get their photos and names in the media as often as possible. When the time for voting comes on May 13, 2019, many voters will remember their names and, if for no other reason, will vote for them.
There used to be a law against such posters and publicity – Section 80 of the Omnibus Election Code of 1985 – barring “any person, whether or not a voter or candidate, to engage in an election campaign or partisan political activity, except during the campaign period.” The aim was to restrain rich candidates with considerable campaign funds from overpowering their competitors who are not as well-funded.
Republic Act 9639 , the Automated Election System Law, enacted in 2007 for the nation’s automated elections, however, provided that “a candidate is liable for election offenses upon the start of the campaign period.” Thus the Supreme Court, ruling in an election case in 2009, cleared a mayor accused of premature campaigning in 2007.
For the midterm elections this coming May, the campaign period for senatorial and party-list candidates with a national constituency, the campaign period begins February 1, 2019. For all other candidates – for governor, mayor, congressman, etc., with a much smaller constituency – the campaign period begins May 30, 2019.
Because of this court decision, we are beginning to see so many tarpaulins and posters of candidates today, as well as their photos and stories in media. The media coverage could be legitimate as many officials go about their work in the government. Not so legitimate is the attention given to an ex- or non-official spouting opinions or proposing great-sounding programs.
The Senate Committee on Electoral Reforms is pushing for a bill that would restore the prohibition on premature campaigning by defining a candidate as one who has filed a certificate of candidacy during the period set by the Commission on Elections. He or she is a candidate upon the filing of certificate, not only when the campaign period begins.
This will help level the playing field for all candidates, rich and not-so-rich. It will also correct the present exclusion of the premature campaigning from the regulations on campaign finance and the limitations on election expenditures.
run:yes’> are critical in crafting reform initiatives. “Sadly this process of deliberation has been undermined and hijacked by the recent move of Congress to push for Charter change,” the Jesuit educators said.
What is needed is a wide and more consultative discussion, a genuine and participatory national dialogue on constitutional reform, the educators said. Drafting of a new Constitution could take time and cannot be bound by a constricting timetable as the term of President Duterte, they added.
The hope that such a wider and participatory discussion will be held now lies with the Senate which has already declared it will not participate in a Constituent Assembly voting as one, rather than as two separate bodies – the House and the Senate. Speaker Arroyo herself has said she is for separate voting but there seem to be powerful voices in the House which could overrule her as they did in coming up with House Resolution No. 15 proposing a new Constitution when this was supposed to be left to the next Congress.
