Shahira Karla R.
Belandres
Constitutional Law II
Blo Umpar Adiong vs. Commission on Elections
G.R. No. 103956 March 31, 1992
This a petition by a senatorial candidate named Blo Umpar Adiong detrmining whether or not
the Commossion on Elections (COMELEC) may prohibit the posting of decals and stickers on mobile
places, public or private, and limit their location or publication to the authorized posting areas that it
fixes.
Facts:
COMELEC promulgated Resolution No. 2347 on January 13, 1992 stating such provisions on the
following sections:
Sec. 15. Lawful Election Propaganda
The following are lawful election propaganda:
(a) Pamphlets, leaflets, cards, decals, stikcers, handwritten or printed letters, or other written or printed
materials not more than eight and one half (8 ½) inches and width of fourteen (14) inches in length.
Provided that decals and stickers may be posted only in any of the authorized posting areas provided in
paragraph f of Section 21.
Section 21 (f). Prohibited forms of election propaganda.
It is unlawful:
(f) to draw, paint, inscribe, post, display or publicly exhibit any election propaganda in any place,
whether public or private, mobile or stationary, except in the COMELEC common posted areas and/or
billboards, at the campaign headquarters of the candidate or political party, organization or coalition, or
at the candidate’s own residential house or one of his residential houses, if he has more than one:
Provided, that such posters or election propaganda shall not exceed two (2) feet by three (3) feet in size.
Petitioner Adiong, being a senatorial candidate in May 1992 elections, assailed COMELEC’s
resolution as it prohibits posting of decals and stickers in mobile places like cars and other moving
vehicles for it violates Section 82 of the Omnibus Election Code which provides lawful election
propaganda including the same materials mentioned in Section 15; and Section 11 (a) of Republic Act
No. 6646, which provides prohibited forms of election propaganda, stating that it shall be unlawful to
draw, paint, inscribe, write, post, display or publicly exhibit any election propaganda in any place,
whether private, or public, except in the common posters areas and/or billboards at the candidate’s
own residence, or at the campaign headquarters of the candidate or political party. He believes that
posting of decals and stickers on cars and other moving vehicles would be his last medium in
campaigning and he, being a neophyte in the field of politics, would indeed suffer grave and
irreplaceable injury with the said prohibition.
Issue:
Whether or not COMELEC’s prohibition is unconstitutional.
Held:
Yes. The COMELEC’s prohibition on posting decals and stickers on mobile places whether public
or private except in designated areas provided for by the COMELEC itself is null and void on the
following constitutional grounds:
1) The prohibition unduly infringes on the citizen’s fundamental right of free speech enshrined in the
Constitution (Section 4, Article III). There is no public interest substantial enough to warrant the kind of
restriction involved in this case.
2) The questioned prohibition premised on the statute and as couched in the resolution is void for
overbreadth.
3) The constitutional objective to give a rich candidate and a poor candidate equal opportunity to inform
the electorate as regards their candidates (Article II, Section 26 and Article XIII Section 1 of Constitution)
is not impaired by posting decals and stickers on cars and other private vehicles.
Summarily, the prohibition on posting decals of and stickers on mobile places wheter public or
private except in the authorized areas designated by the COMELEC becomes censorship which cannot be
justified by the Constituition.
Lastly, petition is granted and COMELEC Resolution No. 2347 Section 15 providing decals and
stickers may be posted only in any of the authorized posting areas provided in paragraph f of Section 21
is declared null and void.
