WON: Ejercito Disqualification

Just recently, the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Commission on Elections (Comelec), on disqualifying Laguna Governor Emilio Ramon “ER” Ejercito, after he (ER) was found guilty of election overspending last 2013 for the gubernatorial race. However, according to the Governor's lawyer, they were deprived of due process, as the original petition filed before the Comelec was only for criminal proceedings in violation of election laws, and that his client has complied with the spending limit as under the Omnibus Election Code. So was the Governor deprived of his right to due process? Was the disqualification by the Comelec, a proper action based from our laws?

Governor Ejercito argues that the petition filed by his rival Edgar San Luis was only for a criminal proceeding for violation of the election laws, however, even though the petition was not filed by a third-party, the Comelec has the power to investigate and promulgate rules stated in the Constitution and the Election Code, to determine any candidates violating the law relating to elections.

For the alleged overspending, according to Comelec, the campaign spending limit is P4.5 million or P3 for each of the 1.5 million voters in Laguna. However, on the evidence that the Comelec were able to gather, Governor Ejercito spent P6 million pesos in television advertisement alone, and amounts to P23.56 million in total expenditure. On the Governor's (Ejercito) defense, he only spent P4.1 million on a sworn statement he submitted to Comelec, and that the evidence that they (Comelec) presented was not from the report that he submitted. However, the Comelec claims that the records that they gathered was from their investigation. Moreover, the Governor was given 5 days to answer, when the the disqualification case was filed against him.

Comelec has basis on their disqualification case, under Section 68, of the Omnibus Election Code^[1], where a candidate may be disqualified for overspending as allowed by the code. Also, Comelec has followed the procedure, and has given time for the Governor (Ejercito) to defend himself, however, it was not convincing enough, that even when appealed to the Supreme Court, a unanimous decision was held affirming the Comelec - only shows that the evidence is of great weight. It may be unfair for Governor Ejercito, if there was indeed a forgery, however, it cannot be argued that he has no knowledge over the advertising contracts. In addition, the Governor should have learned from this, and for other politicians as well. As what E.R. Ejercito have said from his recent speech, "Antayin po ang pagbabalik ng agila!".


[1] Sec. 68. Disqualifications. - Any candidate who, in an action or protest in which he is a party is declared by final decision of a competent court guilty of, or found by the Commission of having:

given money or other material consideration to influence, induce or corrupt the voters or public officials performing electoral functions;

committed acts of terrorism to enhance his candidacy;

spent in his election campaign an amount in excess of that allowed by this Code;

solicited, received or made any contribution prohibited under Sections 89, 95, 96, 97 and 104; or

violated any of Sections 80, 83, 85, 86 and 261, paragraphs d, e, k, v, and cc, subparagraph 6, shall be disqualified from continuing as a candidate, or if he has been elected, from holding the office. Any person who is a permanent resident of or an immigrant to a foreign country shall not be qualified to run for any elective office under this Code, unless said person has waived his status as permanent resident or immigrant of a foreign country in accordance with the residence requirement provided for in the election laws.