BY ASANGAN T.MADALE
FIFTEEN (15) influential leaders from the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM) have asked the Supreme Court of the Philippines to nullify certain provisions of the Bangsamoro Electoral Code (BEC),
The said BEC was allegedly issued by the Bangsamoro Transition Authority (BTA) and signed by BARMM Interim Chief Minister Ahod B. Ebrahim, alleging that it was made with grave abuse of discretion due to lack or excess of jurisdiction and for violation of the Constitution and existing national laws,
Based on their Press Release dated June 18 ,2023 furnished to Manila Times stated that the BEC was signed into law on March 8,2023 and will become effective on May 17, 2023, fifteen (15) days after it was published in a local newspaper in Mindanao.
In their 64-page petition, the petitioners plea, through their lawyers led by Election Lawyer Romulo Macalintal with lawyers
Ace Bautista and Christopher Rodriquez, they asked the Supreme Court to issue a temporary restraining order to stop BTA from
implementing the BEC pending the court’s resolution of their petition, the press statement said
The petitioners also alleged that the BEC encroached upon the power and prerogative of the Supreme Court to promulgate
rules and regulation concerning election cases filed with the lower courts. For it is settled that the Supreme court’s “power
promulgate rules regarding pending practice, and procedure before court’s cannot be interfered by a legislative body”, the
petition alleged.(Pars. 179 and 180, Petition). Thus, the BTA cannot and should not be considered to possess any power to
prescribe rules and pleadings, and procedure for election cases before trial courts.(Par 184, Petition).
The petitioners said that the provisions of the BEC encroach upon powers of the COMELEC’s constitutional powers and duties. Thus,the petitioners pointed out that “it is well-settled that COMELEC has broad powers to enforce and administer all laws and regulations relative to the conduct of elections and over all electoral contests relative to the election of regional, provincial, and city officials” citing Sec. 2 of Article IX-C of the Constitution. (See pars, 50, 51 and 52, Petition).
The petitioners also argued that “Articles VI and VII of the BEC are unconstitutional as they seek to govern activities related to local and national elections, in violation of the Bangsamoro Organic Law (BOL) and the Constitution ,when BEC is supposed to govern only the election of members of the Bangsamoro Parliament”, the petitioners claimed. (See par, 69, Petition).
The petitioners also challenged the BEC’s provision that facilitates the grant of use of public funds for election campaign and partisan political activities in direct violation of Section 261 of the Omnibus Election Code which expressly prohibits the use of public funds for any election campaign or partisan political activity. (See Paras 84 and 85 of Petition).
The petitioners also challenged the BEC’s Section 9 and 12 of Article IV of the for being “inconsistent with the principles of republicanism enshrined in the Constitution and implemented in the BOL insofar as said provisions impose a four percent (4%) threshold before a political party representative may qualify for a seat in Parliament. (Par. 123 Petition). Such provisions “also create a barrier that will not only limit the choice of the people but also hamper the development of a free and open party system, contrary to Sec 6, Article IX-C of the Constitution and Section 9, Article VII of the BOL”., Par. 125 Petition).
In conclusion, the petitioners cited Article V111 of the BEC defining and penalizing election offenses were also raised by the petitioners as another encroachment upon the powers of the COMELEC since matters pertaining to election offenses are within the powers of the COMELEC.(Par. 155, Petition). Even the BOL does not confer upon the Bangsamoro Parliament to impose or define such penalties, otherwise, “it may happen that an act is lawful outside of the BARMM may made criminally punishable in the BARMM, conversely, an unlawful act in Cebu or Manila may be considered innocent in the BARMM”.(Par. 163, Petition. For any inquiry, may
Contact the Secretariat through Atty Ace Bautista with Mobile phone No. +639177054626. ###
