Pamatong v. COMELECG.R. No. 161872, April 13, 200!"NGA,
Petitioner Rev. Elly Velez Pamatong fled his
Certifcate o Candidacy
or President onDecember 17, 2!. Res"ondent #$%E&E# ho'ever declared "etitions and !( others asn)isance candidates 'ho co)ld not 'age a nation'ide cam"aign and*or are not nominatedby a "olitical "arty or are not s)""orted by a registered "olitical "arty 'ith a nationalconstit)ency.Pamatong fled a Petition +or rit o #ertiorari 'ith the -)"reme #o)rt claiming that the#$%E&E# violated his right to e/)al access to o""ort)nities or ")blic service )nder -ection20, rticle o the 1347 #onstit)tion.
hether or not there is a constit)tional right to r)n or hold ")blic o5ce.
6o. hat is recognized in -ection 20, rticle o the #onstit)tion is merely a "rivilege s)bectto limitations im"osed by la'.
“Sec. 26. The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities or public service, and prohibit political dynasties as may be defned by la.!
8he e/)al access "rovision is a s)bs)med "art o rticle o the #onstit)tion, entitledDeclaration o Princi"les and -tate Policies. t neither besto's s)ch a right nor elevates the"rivilege to the level o an enorceable right. 8he "rovision is not intended to com"el the-tate to enact "ositive meas)res that 'o)ld accommodate as many "eo"le as "ossible into")blic o5ce. 8he "rovision does not contain any )dicially enorceable constit)tional right b)tmerely s"ecifes a g)ideline or legislative or e9ec)tive action. t is di5c)lt to inter"ret thecla)se as o"erative in the absence o legislation since its e:ective means and reach are not"ro"erly defned. 8hereore, disregard o the "rovision does not give rise to any ca)se o action beore the co)rts. 8he rationale behind the "rohibition against n)isance candidates and dis/)alifcation o candidates is that the -tate has com"elling interest to ens)re that its electoral e9ercises arerational, obective and orderly. n regards to that, the -tate m)st ta;e "racticalconsiderations beca)se the greater the n)mber o candidates the more logistical con)sionand increase allocation o reso)rces or election "re"aration. dding n)isance candidates'o)ld im"air the electoral "rocess. 8he "rivilege o e/)al access to o""ort)nities to ")blic o5ce may be s)bected to limitations.$ne o these "artic)lar limitations is the -ection 03 o the $mnib)s Election #ode "rovisionon 6)isance #andidates<. =o'ever since the "etitioner did not challenge the constit)tionalityor validity o the "rovision it is, in this case, "res)med valid. #learly, thereore, "etitioner>s reliance on the e/)al access cla)se in -ection 20, rticle o the #onstit)tion is mis"laced. 8he -# remanded to the #$%E&E# or the rece"tion o )rtherevidence, to determine the /)estion on 'hether "etitioner is a n)isance candidate ascontem"lated in -ection 03 o the $mnib)s Election #ode.
Omni'() El*+tion Co*
"uisance Candidates. #
8he #ommission may,
or )"on a verifed "etition o aninterested "arty, re)se to give d)e co)rse or cancel a certifcate o candidacy i it is sho'n that said certifcate has