Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
TOYS
vs.
PONENTE: Peralta
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
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:
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.
Amendments Freedoms
LEAVE A REPLY
Comment
Name * Email *
Website
POST COMMENT
PREVIOUS NEXT
Like Page
POPULAR POSTS
This work by Law Tech World is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License.
Privacy Policy