IN RE: SEVERAL REQUESTS FOR EXTENSION TO FILE STATEMENT OF CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES BY CANDIDATES, POLITICAL PARTIES, AND PARTYLISTS ORGANIZATIONS IN RELATION TO THE 2016 NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS
I am in agreement with the June 16, 2016 memo prepared by Campaign Finance Office (CFO) Commissioner-in-charge Christian Robert S. Lim and therefore vote to dissent from the majority decision of the Commission En Banc in so far as it grants an extension to all candidates and political parties to file their statements of contributions and expenditures (SOCE) until 30 June 2016.
Section 14 of Republic Act (RA) No. 7166 provides for a mandatory period of 30 days after Election Day within which candidates and parties must file their SOCEs. Despite precedents in 2010 and 2013 when the Commission extended the deadline for filling of SOCEs, the difference for the 2016 elections is that the CFO conducted extensive consultations in various cities of the country with political parties and candidates to advise them of the non-extendible deadline.
However nothing in (RA) No. 7166 expressly states that the late filling of a SOCE is fatal, i.e., being considered as not filed at all. The intent of the law and rules on campaign finance are for the Commission to gain access to all records of candidates and parties with regard to their expenditures and source of funds, and for the Commission to not accept late SOCEs would go contrary to this intent. After all, campaign finance’s eventual objective is compliance. Hence, I believe that the statement in Rule 10, Section 2 of Resolution No. 9991 (s. 2015), otherwise known as the Omnibus Rules on Campaign Finance stating that “submission beyond this period shall not be accepted” was outside the authority of the Commission’s rule making powers. In other words, the Commission is not legally empowered not to accept SOCEs that were filed out of time.
To my mind, the proper interpretation should be similar to how the Bureau of Internal Revenue treats the late filing of tax returns, i.e., accept said returns even if filed outside of the prescribed period, but with the imposition of corresponding penalties and surcharges. That way, the intent and purpose of the law are both met, since the Commission is given access to the financial records of candidates’ and political parties’, but their non-compliance with our rules in the form of late filing is still punished.
Rule 10, Section 11 of the Omnibus Rules on Campaign Finance provides for a uniform gradation of administrative penalties in the form of fines for failure to file SOCEs on time (depending on the position and party involved), but these penalties are only for failure to file SOCEs. The Commission must promulgate a separate set of penalties for candidates and parties that filed their SOCEs beyond the deadline set by law, as was done with regard to the late filing of SOCEs during the 2013 National and Local Elections.
| CANDIDATES | LATE PENALTY |
|---|---|
| Senators | P16,000.00 |
| Provincial Governors & Vice Governors, ARMM Regional Governor & Vice Governor | P9,500.00 |
| Members of the House of Representatives, representing the legislative districts | P8,000.00 |
| Members of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, Members of the ARMM Regional Assembly | P8,000.00 |
| City Mayors & Vice Mayors | P8,000.00 |
| Members of the Sangguniang Panlungsod | P6,500.00 |
| Municipal Mayors & Vice Mayors | P5,000.00 |
| Members of the Sangguniang Bayan | P5,000.00 |
| POLITICAL PARTIES & PARTY-LIST ORGANIZATIONS | LATE PENALTY |
|---|---|
| Party-List Organizations | P16,000.00 |
| National Political Parties | P16,000.00 |
| Regioanl & Provincial Political Parties | P9,500.00 |
| Local Political Parties | P8,000.00 |
In addition, I agree with the statement of the majority that a strict interpretation of the relevant provisions on the matter, i.e., Section 14 of RA 7166 and Rule 10, Section 2 of the Omnibus Rules on Campaign Finance, may result in an absurd and unintended situation where numerous offices in the national and local governments are left vacant due to late filing of the winning candidates’ political party’s SOCEs. Preliminary estimates show that the incoming Vice President, five Senators, 115 Congressmen, and 40 Governors nominated by the Liberal Party will be affected. This assessment does not include positions to be occupied by winning candidates nominated by other political parties that have yet to submit their SOCEs, such as Aksyon Demokratiko and the Pwersa ng Masang Pilipino. What do we do in such a case? Will we need to call special elections? Who will bear the cost of such elections? Meanwhile, will our political institutions be able to function?
We also face an inequitable situation where winning candidates belonging to political parties who filed their individual SOCEs on time, but are to be disallowed from assuming their positions because their party filed its SOCE beyond the deadline. Stated otherwise, why should a winning candidate who followed the rules be blamed for his or her political party treasurer’s non-filing of its SOCE on time?
Not allowing so many officials from assuming the offices they were validly elected by their constituents would deal a severe blow to the will of the people, which the Commission rightly cannot countenance. Indeed, jurisprudence is replete with instances where the Supreme Court rejected the literal interpretation of laws when the same will result in absurd and unintended consequences.
Our laws and regulations on campaign finance are an important aspect of the Commission’s drive towards greater transparency and accountability in our electoral system. In this light, all candidates and parties are hereby enjoined to observe them judiciously and seriously. The Commission must also devote further study into the implications of its interpretation of the present state of the law, and if warranted, prescribed and endorse to Congress the necessary amendments so that campaign finance enforcement may be improved.
SIGNED:
- BAUTISTA, J. ANDRES D., Chairman