Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Magdalo vs. Comelec PDF
Magdalo vs. Comelec PDF
ISSUE:
HELD:
That the Oakwood incident was widely known and extensively covered
by the media made it a proper subject of judicial notice. Thus, the COMELEC
did not commit grave abuse of discretion when it treated these facts as public
knowledge, and took cognizance thereof without requiring the introduction and
u s t l a w l a w r e v i e w, v o l l v i i , n o . 1 , n o v e m b e r 2 0 1 2
122 recent jurisprudence
The COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion in finding that
MAGDALO uses violence or unlawful means to achieve its goals. Under Article
IX-C, Section 2(5) of the 1987 Constitution, parties, organizations and coalitions
that “seek to achieve their goals through violence or unlawful means” shall be
denied registration. This disqualification is reiterated in Section 61 of B.P. 881,
which provides that “no political party which seeks to achieve its goal through
violence shall be entitled to accreditation.”
In the present case, the Oakwood incident was one that was attended with
violence. As publicly announced by the leaders of MAGDALO during the siege,
their objectives were to express their dissatisfaction with the administration of
former President Arroyo and to divulge the alleged corruption in the military and
the supposed sale of arms to enemies of the state. Ultimately, they wanted the
President, her cabinet members, and the top officials of the AFP and the PNP
to resign. To achieve these goals, MAGDALO opted to seize a hotel occupied
by civilians, march in the premises in full battle gear with ammunitions, and plant
explosives in the building. These brash methods by which MAGDALO opted
to ventilate the grievances of its members and withdraw its support from the
government constituted clear acts of violence. The COMELEC did not, therefore,
commit grave abuse of discretion when it treated the Oakwood standoff as a
manifestation of the predilection of MAGDALO for resorting to violence or
threats thereof in order to achieve its objectives.
The finding that MAGDALO seeks to achieve its goals through violence
or unlawful means did not operate as a prejudgment of Criminal Case No. 03-
2784. The power vested by Article IX-C, Section 2(5) of the Constitution and
Section 61 of BP 881 in the COMELEC to register political parties and ascertain
the eligibility of groups to participate in the elections is purely administrative in
character. In exercising this authority, the COMELEC only has to assess whether
the party or organization seeking registration or accreditation pursues its goals by
employing acts considered as violent or unlawful, and not necessarily criminal in
nature.
u s t l a w l a w r e v i e w, v o l l v i i , n o . 1 , n o v e m b e r 2 0 1 2
p ol i t ic a l l aw 123
as a political party is not a right but only a privilege given to groups who have
qualified and met the requirements provided by law.
A reassignment from one provincial office to another provincial office within the same
region is not considered as a “reassignment outside geographical location.”
ISSUE:
u s t l a w l a w r e v i e w, v o l l v i i , n o . 1 , n o v e m b e r 2 0 1 2