Rev. Elly Chavez Pamatong v.

COMELEC
GR No. 161872 , April 13, 2004
Tinga, J.
Facts:
Petitioner Rev. Elly Velez Pamatong filed his Certificate of Candidacy for
President, but respondent COMELEC refused to give due course to the same;
however, said decision was not unanimous.
He moved for reconsideration but it was also denied. Respondent under the
aegis of Omnibus resolution No. 6604, declared petitioner, and 35 others, a
nuisance candidate who could not wage a nationwide campaign and/or is not
nominated by a political party or is not supported by a registered political party
with a national constituency.
Hence, he filed a petition for writ of certiorari, seeking to reverse the resolutions
which were allegedly rendered in violation of his right to equal access to
opportunities for public service under sec. 26, Article II, Constitution.
Issue:

Whether or not petitioner is a nuisance candidate.

Held:

The question of whether a candidate is a nuisance candidate or not is both legal

and factual. The basis of the factual determination is not before the court. Thus,
the remand of the case for reception of further evidence is in order.

There is no constitutional right in Section 26, Article II to run for or hold public
office, which in this case, the presidency, what is recognized is merely a privilege
subject to limitations imposed by law. The provisions under Art. II are generally
considered not self-executing, it does not contain any judicially enforceable right
but merely specifies a guideline for legislative or executive action.

Some valid limitations on the privilege to seek elective office are found in the
provisions of the Omnibus Election Code on Nuisance Candidates and
COMELEC Resolution No. 6452, outlining the instances wherein the COMELEC
may motu proprio refuse to give due course to or cancel a certificate of
candidacy. As long as the limitations apply to everybody equally without
discrimination, the equal access clause is not violated.