Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 102 views

    Adiong Vs Comelec

    Uploaded by

    Mark Joseph Delima
    cases consti

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Adiong Vs Comelec

    Uploaded by

    Mark Joseph Delima
    102 views2 pages
    cases consti

    Original Title

    Adiong vs Comelec

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    cases consti

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    102 views2 pages

    Adiong Vs Comelec

    Uploaded by

    Mark Joseph Delima
    cases consti

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    ADIONG VS COMELEC, 207 SCRA 713

    Facts:
    Petitioner Blo Umpar Adiong, a senatorial candidate in the May 11,
    1992 elections assaileda COMELEC's Resolution arguing that it prohibited the
    posting of decals and stickers in "mobile" places like cars and other moving
    vehicles.
    According to him such prohibition is violative of Section 82 of the
    Omnibus Election Code and Section 11(a) of Republic Act No. 6646. In
    addition, the petitioner believes that with the ban on radio, television and
    print political advertisements, he, being a neophyte in the field of politics
    stands to suffer grave and irreparable injury with this prohibition. The posting
    of decals and stickers on cars and other moving vehicles would be his last
    medium to inform the electorate that he is a senatorial candidate in the May
    11, 1992 elections.
    Finally, the petitioner states that as of February 22, 1992 (the date of
    the petition) he has not received any notice from any of the Election
    Registrars in the entire country as to the location of the supposed "Comelec
    Poster Areas."
    Issue:
    Whether or not the COMELEC may prohibit the posting of decals and
    stickers on "mobile" places, public or private, and limit their location or
    publication to the authorized posting areas that it fixes.
    Held:
    The prohibition on posting of decals and stickers on mobile places
    whether public or private except in authorized areas designated by the
    COMELEC becomes censorship which cannot be justified by the Constitution.
    Hence, the posting of decals and stickers on cars, calesas, tricycles,
    pedicabs and other moving vehicles needs the consent of the owner of the
    vehicle. Hence, the preference of the citizen becomes crucial in this kind of
    election propaganda not the financial resources of the candidate.
    Whether the candidate is rich and, therefore, can afford to dole out
    more decals and stickers or poor and without the means to spread out the
    same number of decals and stickers is not as important as the right of the
    owner to freely express his choice and exercise his right of free speech. The

    owner can even prepare his own decals or stickers for posting on his
    personal property. To strike down this right and enjoin it is impermissible
    encroachment of his liberties.

    You might also like