GMA NETWORK, INC.

, Petitioner,

vs.

COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.

G.R. No. 205357               September 2, 2014

 FACTS:

            The five (5) petitions before the Court put in issue the alleged unconstitutionality
of Section 9 (a) of COMELEC Resolution No. 9615 limiting the broadcast and radio
advertisements of candidates and political parties for national election positions to an
aggregate total of one hundred twenty (120) minutes and one hundred eighty (180)
minutes, respectively. They contend that such restrictive regulation
on allowable broadcast time violates freedom of the press, impairs the people’s right to
suffrage as well as their right to information relative to the exercise of their right to
choose who to elect during the forth coming elections

                Section 9 (a) provides for an “aggregate total” airtime instead of the previous
“per station” airtime for political campaigns or advertisements, and also required prior
COMELEC approval for candidates’ television and radio guestings and appearances.

ISSUE:

                Whether or not Section 9 (a) of COMELEC Resolution No. 9615 on airtime
limits violates freedom of expression, of speech and of the press.

HELD:

                YES. The Court held that the assailed rule on “aggregate-based” airtime limits
is unreasonable and arbitrary as it unduly restricts and constrains the ability
of candidates and political parties to reach out and communicate with the people. Here,
the adverted reason for imposing the “aggregate-based” airtime limits – leveling the
playing field – does not constitute a compelling state interest which would justify such a
substantial restriction on the freedom of candidates and political parties to
communicate their ideas, philosophies, platforms and programs of government. And,
this is specially so in the absence of a clear-cut basis for the imposition of such a
prohibitive measure.

                It is also particularly unreasonable and whimsical to adopt the aggregate-based

time limits on broadcast time when we consider that the Philippines is not only
composed of so many islands. There are also a lot of languages and dialects spoken
among the citizens across the country. Accordingly, for a national candidate to really
reach out to as many of the electorates as possible, then it might also be necessary that
he conveys his message through his advertisements in languages and dialects that the
people may more readily understand and relate to. To add all of these airtimes in
different dialects would greatly hamper the ability of such candidate to express himself
– a form of suppression of his political speech.