Somewhere in this issue is a list of presumed acts of vote-buying and vote-selling as provided under COMELEC Resolution No. 11104 which expanded the powers and functions of the Committee on Kontra Bigay and integrated guidelines against abuse of state resources during the May 12, 2025 elections.
Promulgated on Jan. 28, 2025, the measure addresses the misuse of government property, funds and manpower by government officials for partisan political activity and their undue use of official powers to gain electoral advantage in their favor or their political parties or relatives who are candidates for elective office.
COMELEC said that most affected by the abuse of government resources are highly vulnerable groups who are forced to surrender their right to suffrage in exchange for access to government services and subsidies.
It stressed that the amended guidelines would ensure that governance should always be non-partisan and should never be instrumentalized for political purposes.
Among the conducts which the resolution presume to be constituting Abuse of State Resources (ASR) is the storage or transport of campaign materials in government vehicles; storage of food and beverages for supporters of a candidate, as well as campaign paraphernalia, in barangay halls, covered courts or any government facility or property.
Display of campaign materials in the same government facilities or properties, including motor vehicles bearing government or red license plates; distribution of assistance and social welfare benefits such as TUPAD, AICS, AKAP and 4Ps with displayed campaign materials in the presence of the candidates and their family members or relatives;
Use of government-funded media platforms that consistently feature the face, image, appearance, logo, signature or other images of any public official; use of such platforms to live stream campaign activities of the incumbent, his political party or candidates;
Use of government-funded programs, projects and activities as a platform to display images or promote the candidacy of any public official; sudden and unjustified revocation or denial of existing scholarships and other government grants to qualified beneficiaries during the campaign period; and the sudden influx or hiring of Job Order and Contract of Service workers and their campaigning for or against a candidate during official working hours.
The presumed conduct of ASR can be disputed or rebutted by the candidate, the alleged violator or his counsel.
For example, many barangay halls and plazas have been designated as common poster areas by the COMELEC, thus, the display of campaign materials in such areas can no longer be considered ASR.
On the other hand, government media platforms or official pages of local government units naturally and consistently feature the image of the incumbent officials, the images and stories featured in the platforms constituting their official activities in the regular exercise of their duties as public officials.
As to the sudden hiring of JOs and COS employees by LGUs, all or most incumbent administrations provide higher budgets for personnel during an election year, the more, the better.
But having them join the campaign during working hours could be risky, especially if the incumbent’s opponent is so desperate as to bank on the disqualification of the public official as the only way to victory.
Considering the difficulty of law enforcement agencies monitoring suspicious activities 24/7 and the fact that many barangay and municipal officials are in one way or another identified with a candidate or candidates, it is likely that persons suspected of vote-buying, vote-selling or ASR would be apprehended during routine or surprise checkpoints.
In the past, such checkpoints led to the arrest of persons carrying boxes of cash, with the cash publicly reported a much smaller amount than what was actually confiscated and the persons usually allowed to escape.
The COMELEC would probably have a better chance of catching candidates or their financiers in suspicious transactions of vote-buying and vote-selling if the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas and banks report unusual cash flows between accounts, digital banking and digital wallets, including large cash withdrawals of more than P500,000 during the election period.
But, as election lawyers stress, any accusation or allegation of violation of the election laws, rules or regulations is rebuttable.
Compared to their moneyed and more powerful rivals, candidates with less resources are naturally at the losing end, should they or their supporters be caught in the act of vote-buying.
Such is the fact of life during electoral campaigns not only in Catanduanes but all over the Philippines.