Roque, Raymond R.

06-78143

Akbayan-Youth, et. al. vs. Comelec

Facts:
Akbayan-Youth seek to direct the Commission on Elections (COMELEC)
to conduct a special registration before the 14 May 2001 General Elections,
of new voters ages 18 to 21. According to petitioners, around four million
youth failed to register on or before the 27 December 2000 deadline set by
the COMELEC under RA 8189. Acting on the clamor of the students and civic
leaders, Senator Raul Roco, Chairman of the Committee on Electoral
Reforms, Suffrage, and People’s Participation, through a Letter dated 25
January 2001, invited the COMELEC to a public hearing for the purpose of
discussing the extension of the registration of voters to accommodate those
who were not able to register before the COMELEC deadline. Subsequent to a
public hearing and on 29 January 2001, Commissioners Tancangco and
Lantion submitted Memorandum 2001-027 on the Report on the Request for
a Two-day Additional Registration of New Voters Only. On 8 February 2001,
the COMELEC issued Resolution 3584, which denied the request to conduct a
two-day additional registration of new voters on February 17-18, 2001.
Aggrieved by the denial, petitioners AKBAYAN-Youth, SCAP, UCSC, MASP,
KOMPIL II (YOUTH) et al. filed before this Court the instant Petition for
Certiorari and Mandamus, which seeks to set aside and nullify respondent
COMELEC’s Resolution and/or to declare Section 8 of RA 8189
unconstitutional insofar as said provision effectively causes the
disenfranchisement of petitioners and others similarly situated. Likewise,
petitioners pray for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing COMELEC
to conduct a special registration of new voters and to admit for registration
petitioners and other similarly situated young Filipinos to qualify them to
vote in the 14 May 2001 General Elections.

Issue:
Whether the COMELEC may be directed, through mandamus, to hold a
registration of new voters for the 14 May 2001 General Elections on 17-18
February 2001

Held:
No. In a representative democracy, the right of suffrage, although
accorded a prime niche in the hierarchy of rights embodied in the
fundamental law, ought to be exercised within the proper bounds and
framework of the Constitution and must properly yield to pertinent laws
skillfully enacted by the Legislature, which statutes for all intents and
purposes, are crafted to effectively insulate such so cherished right from
ravishment and preserve the democratic institutions our people have, for so
long, guarded against the spoils of opportunism, debauchery and abuse. The
right of suffrage is not at all absolute. The exercise of the right of suffrage,
as in the enjoyment of all other rights, is subject to existing substantive and
procedural requirements embodied in our Constitution, statute books and
other repositories of law. As to the procedural limitation, the right of a citizen
to vote is necessarily conditioned upon certain procedural requirements he
must undergo: among others, the process of registration. Since Section 8 of
RA 8189 explicitly provides that no registration shall be conducted during the
period starting 120 days before a regular election, the assailed COMELEC
Resolution should be upheld. Truly, it is an accepted doctrine in
administrative law that the determination of administrative agency as to the
operation, implementation and application of a law would be accorded great
weight considering that these specialized government bodies are, by their
nature and functions, in the best position to know what they can possibly do
or not do, under prevailing circumstances.