MANILA – Whether or not a candidate has sufficient financial resources to mount a credible campaign should not be a basis to declare him or her as nuisance, the Supreme Court said in a ruling published Monday.
In granting a petition, the SC said the Commission on Elections (Comelec) “cannot conflate financial capacity requirement with the bona fide intention to run for public office.”
It added that the imposition of having financial capacity to hit the campaign trail “is a property qualification that is prohibited under the Constitution and is likewise not a valid ground to characterize a candidate as a nuisance candidate”.
The ruling, penned by Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, resolved the petition filed by a certain Juan Juan Olila Ollesca, who was declared a nuisance candidate by the Comelec when he ran for president in the 2022 national and local elections.
According to the SC, in determining a candidate’s bona fide intention to run, the Comelec may consider other factors such as political party nomination and public recognition.
It, however, pointed out that the absence of a political party nomination, limited public recognition, or insufficient campaign funds “cannot, on their own, serve as definitive proof of a lack of intent.”
In Ollesca’s case, the SC said the poll body “relied on a general and sweeping allegation of petitioner’s financial incapacity to mount a decent and viable campaign which is a prohibited property requirement.”
The high court said a nuisance candidate is one whose candidacy was lodged merely to create confusion or whose candidacy mocks or causes disrepute to the election process, hence, there is patently no intention to run for office.” (PNA)