Pamatong vs.

COMELEC

FACTS: When the petitioner filed COC, the COMELEC disqualified him even after he filed
motion for reconsideration for the reason that he could not wage a nationwide campaign and/or is
not nominated or supported by a political party with national constituency. He argued that, despite
having proven his qualification and capacity to run he was deprived of his right to “equal access
to opportunities for public service,” citing Article 2, Section 26 of the Constitution, and that the
COMELEC was indirectly amending the Constitution in this manner.

ISSUES: Whether the COMELEC’s refusal violated such right to equal access to opportunities
for public service.

RULING: No. The provisions under Article 2 are generally not-self executing. As such, section
26, along with the other policies in the article, does not convey any judicially enforceable rights.
What is recognized in Section 26, Article II of the Constitution is merely a privilege subject to
limitations imposed by law. It neither bestows such a right nor elevates the privilege to the level
of an enforceable right. There is nothing in the plain language of the provision which suggests
such a thrust or justifies an interpretation of the sort.