PLAI

← 2026 · Political & Public International Law

Mayor Jose Guinto is the incumbent Mayor of the City of Binibini, a first-class city with a total of 300,000 registered voters. He ran for…

2026 Bar Exam · Political & Public International Law · Question 14 · Essay

The question

Mayor Jose Guinto is the incumbent Mayor of the City of Binibini, a first-class city with a total of 300,000 registered voters. He ran for re-election in the May 2025 elections against his rival Lorenzo Pilak (Pilak). Under Section 13 of Republic Act No. 7166, in relation to the Omnibus Election Code (OEC), the allowable campaign expenditure for a candidate for city mayor is PHP 3.00 per voter for a candidate with a political party, or PHP 5.00 per voter for an independent candidate. Mayor Guinto ran under Partido ng Bano (PNB) making his allowable spending limit PHP 3.00 x 300,000 = PHP 900,000.00. During the campaign period, the following expenditures were made in connection with Mayor Guinto’s re- election campaign: Item 1. Mayor Guinto’s campaign team directly purchased television advertising slots on three local and national television networks, spending a total of PHP 850,000.00, documented by advertising contracts and broadcast logs signed by Mayor Guinto’s authorized representative. Item 2. Mahirap Business Club (MBC), a private business organization composed of Binibini’s prominent businessmen, independently produced and aired a television advertisement praising Mayor Guinto’s infrastructure projects and urging viewers to re-elect him. MBC spent PHP 2 million on the advertisement which aired for several months. MBC’s president stated in a sworn affidavit that MBC produced the advertisement independently, without any request from or coordination with Mayor Guinto’s campaign team, purely as an exercise of the organization’s freedom of expression in support of a candidate they believed in. Item 3. PNB spent PHP 1.5 million on campaign materials prominently bearing Mayor Guinto’s name, photograph, and the words “IBOTO SI MAYOR GUINTO.” The PNB provincial chairman certified that these materials were produced and distributed by the party independently, without request from Mayor Guinto’s personal campaign team. If all three items are counted toward Mayor Guinto’s campaign spending, the total is PHP 4.35 million. However, if only Item 1 (Mayor Guinto’s direct campaign spending) is counted, the total is PHP 850,000.00. Mayor Guinto won the election against Pilak and was proclaimed the winning candidate and took his oath of office as City Mayor of Binibini. Dismayed, Pilak filed a Petition for Disqualification against Mayor Guinto before the COMELEC under Section 68(c) of the OEC for campaign overspending. In his defense, Mayor Guinto argues that the MBC advertisement and the PNB campaign materials should not be counted toward his campaign spending limit because they were made by independent third parties without any request from or coordination with his campaign team, and represented the exercise of their own constitutional right to free expression in favor of a candidate of their choice. He further avers that the law only penalizes the candidate’s spending, not that of independent supporters. He claims that he cannot be held liable for third-party spending that he did not authorize, request, or know about. Is Mayor Guinto correct? Explain.

Held

No, Mayor Guinto is not correct; under Section 103 of the Omnibus Election Code and the ruling in Ejercito v. Commission On Elections, expenditures made by any person with the knowledge and consent of the candidate or treasurer shall be considered as expenditures of such candidate, and the total campaign spending includes such expenditures (Section 103, Omnibus Election Code; Ejercito v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 212398).

Explanation

The law limits the total campaign expenditures of a candidate to a fixed amount per registered voter in the constituency. This limit includes not only the expenses directly incurred by the candidate but also those made by any person with the candidate's knowledge and consent. Section 103 of the Omnibus Election Code prohibits any person other than the candidate, the treasurer, or a person authorized in writing by them from making expenditures in support of the candidate. If expenditures are authorized or accepted by the candidate or treasurer, those expenses are considered part of the candidate's campaign spending. The Supreme Court in Ejercito v. COMELEC clarified that expenditures made by contributors or supporters with the candidate's knowledge and consent are included in the candidate's spending limit. This rule ensures that candidates cannot circumvent spending limits by having third parties spend on their behalf without accountability. However, independent expenditures made without the candidate's knowledge, consent, or authorization are not counted against the candidate's spending limit, as these represent the free expression of private individuals or groups.

Application to the facts

Mayor Guinto's direct campaign spending of PHP 850,000 is within his allowable limit of PHP 900,000. The Mahirap Business Club (MBC) spent PHP 2 million on an advertisement praising Mayor Guinto, and the Partido ng Bano (PNB) spent PHP 1.5 million on campaign materials. Mayor Guinto claims these were independent expenditures without his knowledge or coordination. If MBC and PNB truly acted independently, without any request, authorization, or coordination with Mayor Guinto or his campaign, their spending would not be counted against his campaign expenditure limit. This aligns with the principle that independent expenditures by private groups exercising their freedom of expression are not imputable to the candidate. However, if there is evidence that Mayor Guinto or his campaign authorized, consented to, or coordinated with MBC or PNB regarding these expenditures, then these amounts must be included in his total campaign spending. The Ejercito case emphasizes that expenditures made with the candidate's knowledge and consent are considered part of the candidate's expenses. The question of whether Mayor Guinto had knowledge or gave consent to MBC and PNB's expenditures is crucial. If he did, his total spending of PHP 4.35 million exceeds the allowable limit, making him liable for overspending under Section 68(c) of the Omnibus Election Code. If he did not, only his direct spending of PHP 850,000 counts, which is within the limit.

  • citation lookup failed (unknown instrument: 'OEC for campaign overspending'); used search
This is general legal information, not legal advice.