Absentee Voters Bill of Rights passed

The above prayer excerpt is a fitting parallel of the persistent will of the long-time neglected sons and daughters of the Roman Catholic country of the Philippines, the Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs), pitted against their country’s constitutional fathers, the long-standing illegal and corrupt congressmen, senators, and government election officials, and the OFWs’ fight to be heard with their constitutional right to vote!

We started our vigilance in getting this Absentee Voter’s Bill of Rights passed quickly and unanimously last September 21, 2002, at the thirty-year calendar anniversary of Martial Law, and we are pleased to announce, albeit much later than never, that ten (10) months after our efforts started, the persistent endeavor has finally reached its end result – the passage of the OFWs' constitutional voting mandate, sixteen (16) years later! The conscience we have presented in our editorials has helped raise the level of awareness of this issue's long standing atrocities, and enjoined others in making the OFWs voting plight a reality. Together, the democratic will of an abused people prevailed over the historical tyranny and deprivation of a few self-serving government officials.

The Philippine Supreme Court’s majority ruling on July 11, 2003 upheld the constitutionality of the recently passed Absentee Voter’s Bill of Rights by the country’s Congress and Senate bodies, striking down the stupid lawsuit challenging its legal precedence.

Below is copy of a news article describing the details of the Philippine Supreme Court’s landmark majority ruling upholding the legality of Overseas Filipino Workers' Absentee Voter Bill of Rights.

We would like to take this opportunity to congratulate all the OFWs and their supporters in making this historical moment come to fruition. All of you can finally say that you now can make a difference in voicing your opinions, in hopes of building a better future for your country and people.

Let there be no doubt in your minds that this legal responsibility comes at a high price, and do not forget all those that have dissented in allowing you your constitutional right to vote. 2004 is not too far away, so make sure that those dissenters will never again be allowed to practice the privilege of serving their constituents, instead of their selfish interests. Make your vote count!

Overseas Voting Act upheld

Supreme Court decides residency issue, rules provision constitutional

07/11/2003

By Rey G. Panaligan

The (Philippine) Supreme Court upheld yesterday the constitutionality of the provision in the Overseas Voting Act of 2003 that allows Filipino immigrants and permanent residents in other countries to register and vote in the 2004 elections, provided they execute an affidavit that they would return to the Philippines within three years from the approval of their registration.

Justice MARTINEZ

In a full court decision written by Justice Ma. Alicia Austria Martinez, the High Court ruled that Section 5 (d) of Republic Act No. 9189, allowing Filipino immigrants and permanent residents in other countries to register and vote, does not violate Section 1, Article V of the Constitution.

Section 1, Article V, of the Constitution provides that the voter must be residing in the Philippines at least one year and in the place where he proposes to vote for at least six months immediately preceding an election.

The High Court said that RA 9189 was passed pursuant to the mandate of Congress to provide for a system of voting by qualified Filipinos abroad under Section 2, Article V of the Constitution and its constitutes an exception to the residency requirement.

It said that RA 9189 was a clear outcome of the discussion of the members of the 1986 Constitutional Commission that was intended to enfranchise as much as possible all Filipino citizens abroad who have not abandoned their domicile of origin.

"The execution of the affidavit itself is not the enabling or enfranchising act. The affidavit required in Section 5 (d) is not only proof of the intention of the immigrant or permanent resident to go back and resume residency in the Philippines, but more significantly, it serves as an explicit expression that he had not in fact abandoned his domicile of origin," it pointed out.

It said that "Section 5 (d) does not only require the affiant to promise to resume actual physical permanent residence not later than three years from approval of his/her registration but also a declaration that he/she has not applied for citizenship in another country."

The decision was concurred in by Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr., Senior Justice Josue Belosillo, and Justices Jose Vitug, Artemio Panganiban, Antonio Carpio, Renato Corona, Conchita Carpio Morales, and Adolfo Azcuna.

Justices Reynaldo Puno, Consuelo Ynares Santiago, Angelina Sandoval Gutierrez, and Romeo Callejo Sr. dissented on the ground that Section 5 (d) of RA 1989 violates the residency requirement in the Constitution. Justice Leonardo Quisumbing was on official leave of absence. Newly appointed Justice Dante Tinga did not participate in the case.

The constitutionality of the provision under Section 5(d) of RA 9189 was challenged before the Supreme Court by lawyer Romulo Macalintal. He claimed that allowing Filipino immigrants and permanent residents abroad to register and vote violates the residency requirements of the Constitution.

Macalintal also questioned the constitutionality of the provision in RA 9189 that allows Congress to review the rules and regulations promulgated by the Commission on Elections in relation to the Overseas Voting Act of 2003 and the power granted by the law to the poll body to proclaim the winning presidential and vice-presidential candidates.

The Supreme Court, in a 13-0 vote (with Quisumbing on leave and Tinga not participating), ruled that it is unconstitutional for Congress to review the rules and regulations adopted by the Comelec, as it would restrict the power of the poll body to promulgate rules and regulations and encroach on its exclusive authority to enforce and administer all election laws.

In the same 13-0 vote, the High Court also ruled that the Comelec has no authority to canvass the votes and proclaim winners in the presidential and vice-presidential elections since the power belongs exclusively to Congress.

Justice Puno's dissenting opinion as far as it relates to the unconstitutionality of the two provisions in RA 9189 was adopted as part of the majority opinion in the case filed by Macalintal. All the justices, except Quisumbing and Tinga, concurred.

Elaborating on the essence of absentee voting, the High Court said that a Filipino abroad must be given the opportunity to express that he has not actually abandoned his domicile by executing an affidavit since his having become an immigrant or permanent resident of his host country "does not necessarily imply and abandonment of his intention to return to his domicile of origin."

It said that RA 9189 provides for a deterrent to non-compliance on the part of the Filipino immigrant or permanent resident abroad.

In cases where an absentee voter reneges on his undertaking, the penalty of perpetual disenfranchisement is provided for under Section 5. With the penalty, the absentee voter would lose his right to suffrage permanently and his name removed from the national registry of Overseas Absentee Voters.

July 11th, 2003 - a date that will live in Philippine history!
	One man...	One vote!
	CONGRATULATIONS!