AKBAYAN-Youth vs Commission on Election

Political Law Election Laws Right of Suffrage Extension of Voters Registration

On January 25, 2001, AKBAYAN-Youth, together with other youth movements sought the extension of
the registration of voters for the May 2001 elections. The voters registration has already ended on
December 27, 2000. AKBAYAN-Youth asks that persons aged 18-21 be allowed a special 2-day
registration. The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) denied the petition. AKBAYAN-Youth the sued
COMELEC for alleged grave abuse of discretion for denying the petition. AKBAYAN-Youth alleged that
there are about 4 million youth who were not able to register and are now disenfranchised. COMELEC
invoked Section 8 of Republic Act 8189 which provides that no registration shall be conducted 120 days
before the regular election. AKBAYAN-Youth however counters that under Section 28 of Republic Act
8436, the COMELEC in the exercise of its residual and stand-by powers, can reset the periods of pre-
election acts including voters registration if the original period is not observed.

ISSUE: Whether or not the COMELEC exercised grave abuse of discretion when it denied the extension
of the voters registration.

HELD: No. The COMELEC was well within its right to do so pursuant to the clear provisions of Section
8, RA 8189 which provides that no voters registration shall be conducted within 120 days before the
regular election. The right of suffrage is not absolute. It is regulated by measures like voters registration
which is not a mere statutory requirement. The State, in the exercise of its inherent police power, may
then enact laws to safeguard and regulate the act of voters registration for the ultimate purpose of
conducting honest, orderly and peaceful election, to the incidental yet generally important end, that even
pre-election activities could be performed by the duly constituted authorities in a realistic and orderly
manner one which is not indifferent and so far removed from the pressing order of the day and the
prevalent circumstances of the times. RA 8189 prevails over RA 8436 in that RA 8189s provision is
explicit as to the prohibition. Suffice it to say that it is a pre-election act that cannot be reset.

Further, even if what is asked is a mere two-day special registration, COMELEC has shown in its
pleadings that if it is allowed, it will substantially create a setback in the other pre-election matters
because the additional voters from the special two day registration will have to be screened, entered into
the book of voters, have to be inspected again, verified, sealed, then entered into the computerized voters
list; and then they will have to reprint the voters information sheet for the update and distribute it by that
time, the May 14, 2001 elections would have been overshot because of the lengthy processes after the
special registration. In short, it will cost more inconvenience than good. Further still, the allegation that
youth voters are disenfranchised is not sufficient. Nowhere in AKBAYAN-Youths pleading was attached
any actual complaint from an individual youth voter about any inconvenience arising from the fact that
the voters registration has ended on December 27, 2001. Also, AKBAYAN-Youth et al admitted in their
pleading that they are asking an extension because they failed to register on time for some reasons, which
is not appealing to the court. The law aids the vigilant and not those who slumber on their rights.

Page 1 of 2
Kabataan Party-list vs. COMELEC Case DIgest (G.R. No. 189868, December 15, 2009)
FACTS:

In the instant case, the petitioners, Kabataan Party-List, seeks to extend the voters registration for the May
10, 2010 national and local elections from October 31, 2009, as fixed by COMELEC Resolution No. 8514,
to January 9, 2010 which is the day before the 120-day prohibitive period starting on January 10, 2010.

The petitioners anchor its ground on the provision of Section 8 of R.A. 8189 which reads: "The personal
filing of application of registration of voters shall be conducted daily in the office of the Election Officer
during regular office hours. No registration shall, however, be conducted during the period starting one
hundred twenty (120) days before a regular election and ninety (90) days before a special election."

On the other hand, COMELEC maintains that the Constitution and the Omnibus Election Code confer upon
it the power to promulgate rules and regulations in order to ensure free, orderly and honest elections; that
Section 29 of R.A. 6646 and Section 28 of R.A. 8436 authorize it to fix other dates for pre-election acts
which include voters registration; and that the October 31, 2009 deadline was impelled by operational and
pragmatic considerations, citing Akbayan-Youth v. COMELEC.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the COMELEC has the authority to fix the voter's registration beyond the prohibitive period
set forth by R.A. 8189.

RULING:

The Court ruled in favor of the petitioners.

It held that the right of every Filipino to choose its leaders and participate to the fullest extent in every
national or local election is so zealously guarded by Article V of the 1987 Constitution.

The Court explained that Section 8 of R.A. 8189 decrees that voters be allowed to register daily during
office hours, except during the period starting 120 days before a regular election and 90 days before a
special election. The Court is bound to respect the determination of Congress that the 120 day or 90 day
period, as the case may be, was enough to make the necessary preparations with respect to the coming
elections and COMELEC's rule making power should be exercised in accordance with the prevailing law.

R.A. 6646 and R.A. 8436 is not in conflict with the mandate of continuing voter's registration under R.A.
8189. R.A. 6646 and R.A. 8436 both grant COMELEC the power to fix other period for pre-election
activities only if the same cannot be reasonable held within the period provided by law. However, this grant
of power, is for the purpose of enabling the people to exercise the right of suffrage -- the common underlying
policy under R.A. 8189, R.A. 6646 and R.A. 8436.

In the case at bar, the Court did not find any ground to hold that continuing voter's registration cannot be
reasonably held within the period provided by R.A. 8189.

With regard to the Court's ruling in Akbayan-Youth v. COMELEC, The court explained that if the
petitioners had only filed their petition, and sought extension, before the 120 day prohibitive period, the
prayer would have been granted pursuant to the mandate of R.A. 8189.

As a result, the petition was granted and the COMELEC resolution fixing voters registration for the May
10, 2010 national and local elections on October 31, 2009 was declared null and void.

Page 2 of 2