Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • ArticleVISection26 - de GuzmanvsCOMELEC Digest

    Uploaded by

    Mary Denn
    47 views1 page
    Section 44 of the Voter's Registration Act mandated that election officers could not hold office in a particular municipality for more than 4 years. The Commission on Elections reassigned petitioners to other stations pursuant to this provision. The petitioners argued the provision was unconstitutional. However, the court ruled that Section 44 did not violate the equal protection clause and was intended to ensure impartiality of election officials and integrity of the voter registration process. The court found the provision was relevant to the subject of the law, which was registration of voters.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    ArticleVISection26_De GuzmanvsCOMELEC Digest.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Section 44 of the Voter's Registration Act mandated that election officers could not hold office in a particular municipality for more than 4 years. The Commission on Elections reassigned petitioners to other stations pursuant to this provision. The petitioners argued the provision was unconstitutional. However, the court ruled that Section 44 did not violate the equal protection clause and was intended to ensure impartiality of election officials and integrity of the voter registration process. The court found the provision was relevant to the subject of the law, which was registration of voters.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    47 views1 page

    ArticleVISection26 - de GuzmanvsCOMELEC Digest

    Uploaded by

    Mary Denn
    Section 44 of the Voter's Registration Act mandated that election officers could not hold office in a particular municipality for more than 4 years. The Commission on Elections reassigned petitioners to other stations pursuant to this provision. The petitioners argued the provision was unconstitutional. However, the court ruled that Section 44 did not violate the equal protection clause and was intended to ensure impartiality of election officials and integrity of the voter registration process. The court found the provision was relevant to the subject of the law, which was registration of voters.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Prepared by: Obligado

    AGRIPINO A. DE GUZMAN | VS. | COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS ISSUES:

    PETITIONER: Agripino A. De Guzman 1. Whether or Not section 44 of RA 8189 is unconstitutional.


    RESPONDENTS: Commission on Elections
    RULING:
    SUMMARY: Section 44 of the Voter’s Registration Act provided that no election
    officer shall hold office in a particular municipality or city for more than 4 years. No, RA 8189 Sec 44 is not unconstitutional. It has not violated the equal protection
    In accordance with it, the Comelec reassigned petitioners, who were election clause. It is intended to ensure the impartiality of election officials by preventing them
    officers to other stations. Petitioners argued that the provision was not expressed from developing familiarity with the people of their place of assignment. Large-scale
    in the title of the law, which is “An Act Providing for a General Registration of anomalies in the registration of voters cannot be carried out without the complicity of
    Voters, adopting a System of Continuing Registration, Prescribing the Procedures election officers, who are the highest representatives of Comelec in a city or
    Thereof and Authorizing the Appropriation of Fund Thereof”. The contention is municipality.
    untenable. Section 44 is relevant to the subject matter of registration as it seeks to
    ensure the integrity of the registration process by providing a guideline for the
    Comelec to follow in the reassignment of election officers.

    DOCTRINE: A provision that states that “no election officer shall hold office for
    more than four years” is relevant to the title “An Act Providing for a General
    Registration of voters, Adopting a System of Continuing Registration, Prescribing
    Procedures Thereof and Authorizing the Appropriation of Funds Therefor” as it
    seeks to ensure the integrity of the registration process by providing guidelines for
    the COMELEC to follow in the reassignment of election officers.

    FACTS:

    1. Comelec reassigned petitioners to other stations pursuant to Section 44 of the


    Voter’s registration act. The act prohibits election officers from holding
    office in a particular city or municipality for more than 4 years. Petitioners
    claim that the act violated the equal protection clause because not all election
    officials were covered by the prohibition.

    2. Petitioners contend that RA 8189 Section 44 is unconstitutional as it violates


    the equal protection clause enshrined in the constitution; that it violates
    constitutional guarantee on security of civil servants; that it undermines the
    constitutional independence of comelec and comelec’s constitutional
    authority; that it contravenes the basic constitutional precept; that it is void
    for its failure to be read on 3 separate readings.

    You might also like