The election period, covering January 12 to June 11, 2025, has started, and with it the implementation of the gun ban and heightened security measures.
Aside from the carrying of firearms, other prohibitions include the use of bodyguards, alteration of voting precincts, transfer of civil servants, organizing strike forces, and the suspension of local government officials.
Last Sunday, the Catanduanes Police Provincial Office headed by Provincial Director PCol. Edward D. Quijano, together with representatives from the Commission on Elections (COMELEC), Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) and the Philippine Army, started establishing checkpoints throughout the province.
It asked citizens to cooperate fully with the gun ban and other security measures, familiarize themselves with checkpoint procedures, and report any suspicious activities to law enforcement as it helps ensure a fair and peaceful election on May 12, 2025.
*****
Last week, the Supreme Court reiterated earlier rulings that the lack of campaign funds for a nationwide campaign does not automatically mean a candidate should be considered a nuisance candidate.
The en banc resolution, promulgated July 30, 2024 but released only last Jan. 13, 2025, set aside COMELEC resolutions cancelling the Certificate of Candidacy of businessman Juan Ollesca in the 2022 presidential elections.
The Commission claimed that Ollesca was not well known and lacked the resources for a nationwide campaign to gain recognition among voters.
In granting Ollesca’s petition, the SC said that to declare someone a nuisance candidate, the COMELEC must show evidence to prove that the person does not genuinely or seriously intend to run for public office.
Requiring candidates to have the financial means to run a campaign would unfairly add a property requirement that the Constitution prohibits, the High Court emphasized as it pointed out that a candidate cannot be disqualified simply because they are poor.
“It can look at factors such as a candidate’s inability to organize a campaign due to not being nominated by a political party, or the lack of a past record of public service,” it said, adding however that such do not alone determine whether a candidate has a genuine intention to run for public office.
While a mere expression of a candidate’s desire to become an elected official does not suffice, the Court stated, it only required a candidate to show “a significant modicum of support before his or her name is printed on the ballot.”
The ruling mostly affects those aiming for national positions as almost anyone is allowed to run for office in the provinces and towns.
*****
In another decision, the High Court reiterated that disciplining children, even if it results in physical injuries, does not automatically amount to child abuse, as it must be proven that there was clear intent to harm a child’s dignity.
The SC’s Second Division upheld the conviction of a father for child abuse after subjecting his 12-year-old daughter and 10-year-old son to violent and excessive discipline: beating his children, including kicking his daughter, pulling her hair, striking her with a wooden rod with a nail, hitting them with a dustpan, and cursing at them repeatedly.
The SC emphasized that while parents have the right to discipline their children, such measures must not be violent, excessive, or disproportionate to their misbehavior.
It noted that without this specific intent to debase, degrade or demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of the child as a human, the offender cannot be held liable for child abuse but can be charged with other crimes under the Revised Penal Code.
*****
ASKING GOD. A guy said to God, “God, is it true that to you a billion years is like a second?”
God said yes.
The guy said, “God, is it true that to you a billion dollars is like a penny?”
God said yes.
The guy said, “God, can I have a penny?”
God said, “Sure, just a second.”