The Daily Tribune <<< Without Fear or Favor >>>

»HEADLINES

»NATION

Unreasonable ban

EDITORIAL
Click to enlarge

11/19/2009

Political campaigns must all come to a stop and resume after Dec. 1, 2009. This means that all those infomercials aired by the politicians are banned, as all other political campaigns must end and be revived only by February of 2010 till some two days before the May polls.

This is by virtue of the Supreme Court (SC) ruling disqualifying a mayoralty candidate for “premature campaigning,” or campaigning just before she filed her certificate of candidacy (CoC). This case occurred prior to the enforcement of the amended automation law, which close vote ruling may not necessary apply to today’s political campaign ban. But the poll body says it is standing by the SC ruling.

It is of course the Commission on Elections (Comelec) to blame for this long campaign ban, even if it refuses to admit its fault.

In the first place, the automation law states that political campaigns are given 120 days for national positions. It was usual, in the past, for the deadline filing of CoCs to be 90 days, now 120 days before the campaign election period for national candidates.

But it was the Comelec that screwed all of this up, by insisting on the CoC filing deadline to be scheduled on Dec. 1, or some two months before the formal campaign period.

The poll body claimed that the deadline had to be advanced since it has to be given time to go through the list of candidates who will be included in the ballot which has to be printed earlier, as automated, not manual, polls are to be held nationwide. But take note: While Comelec advances such deadlines, Smartmatic machine deliveries have been delayed.

But because of this move by the Comelec, after filing their CoCs, aspirants now officially become candidates and are therefore not allowed to campaign until two months from now.

Also, because of the SC ruling, there is also now that question of what constitutes premature campaigning and its ban. Infomercials, posters and the like are out. That’s clear. But it really is going too far when even media interviews and reports on candidates, especially the national candidates, are banned, since the SC and the Comelec say this could be a form to promote the candidacy of whoever.

Then too, there is a clear infringement on the freedom of the press, and of speech, since even non-candidates e.g., media and demonstrators for or against legitimate issues, whether to promote or destroy one’s candidacy, also fall under this category of a ban on premature campaigning. Worse, the electorate are denied the opportunity, because of this silly ban, to form any intelligent opinion on these candidates as these candidates, in essence, are being protected from being made to answer legitimate issues.

Those national candidates who have to face valid issues don’t have to give their side. Neither can such issues be raised even by legitimate groups seeking redress of grievances.

But here’s the thing: Gloria Arroyo is believed to be running for a congressional seat in May. Assuming that she will be filing her CoC on Dec. 1, 2009, will her visits and her giving away of freebies, such as health cards, a school house here and there in Pampanga’s second district, be considered premature campaigning by the high court and the Comelec?

What about all those government ads that always have her picture in it, as well as all those Arroyo plugs seen on TV? What about her appearances as keynote speaker, or her media coverage of the claimed presidential activities? What about her weekly president’s TV show? Will all these be deemed by the Comelec and the high court as premature campaigning?

Or will all this again be a repeat of 2004, where nothing that she did — in clear violation of the campaign rules — was deemed a violation, including her having breached the number of ads and frequency aired on radio and TV?

The law can’t only apply to others, and not to her.

Frankly, it is the Comelec that screwed it all up, and made worse by that unreasonable ruling of the high court on disqualifying a mayoralty candidate for premature campaigning.

| More