Napaaga nga ba?: A critique of Penera vs. Comelec (599 SCRA 609 ) re: premature campaigning
Date of Publication
Bachelor of Science in Legal Management
Ramon V. Del Rosario College of Business
Arvin A. Jo
Defense Panel Chair
Antonio A. Ligon
Defense Panel Member
Larry P. Ignacio
Augusto R. Bundang
Hilario S. Caraan
This research tackles the case of Penera vs. Comelec (599 SCRA 609), specifically the ruling made by the Supreme Court because this enabled premature campaigning to become rampant throughout the whole country. The problem now lies on the constitutional provisions of equal protection, the right to equal access to opportunities for public service and the right to freedom of expression. These three constitutional provisions, together with the actual case of PeÃ±era shall be correlated to see whether there has been violations committed against our beloved Philippine Constitution. The methods used in gathering data and in the discussion involved the utilization of comparative analysis methods, quantitative analysis methods, and interviews. Throughout the whole completion of the paper, it was concluded that the equal protection clause and the right to equal access to opportunities for public service was violated. The ruling also broadened freedom of expression. It was recommended that a bill be passed to further smoothen the grey areas we have in our election laws specifically on premature campaigning.
Archives, The Learning Commons, 12F, Henry Sy Sr. Hall
166 leaves ; 29 cm.
Political campaigns--Law and legislation-- Philippines; Election law--Philippines
Santos, J. (2015). Napaaga nga ba?: A critique of Penera vs. Comelec (599 SCRA 609 ) re: premature campaigning. Retrieved from https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/etd_bachelors/2793