Akbayan Youth v. Comelec, G.R. No.

147066, March 26, 2001

Political Law Election Laws Right of Suffrage Extension of Voters Registration
Facts
? On January 25, 2001, AKBAYAN-Youth, together with other youth movements sought
the extension of the registration of voters for the May 2001 elections.
The voters registration has already ended on December 27, 2000.
? AKBAYAN-Youth asks that persons aged 18-21 be allowed a special 2-day registra
tion.
? The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) denied the petition.
? AKBAYAN-Youth the sued COMELEC for alleged grave abuse of discretion for denyi
ng the petition, alleged that there are about 4 million youth who were not able
to register and are now disenfranchised.
? COMELEC invoked Section 8 of Republic Act 8189 which provides that no registra
tion shall be conducted 120 days before the regular election;
? AKBAYAN-Youth however counters that under Section 28 of Republic Act 8436, the
COMELEC in the exercise of its residual and stand-by powers, can reset the peri
ods of pre-election acts including voters registration if the original period is
not observed.
ISSUE: Whether or not the COMELEC exercised grave abuse of discretion when it de
nied the extension of the voters registration.
HELD:
No. The COMELEC was well within its right to do so pursuant to the clear provisi
ons of Section 8, RA 8189 which provides that no voters registration shall be co
nducted within 120 days before the regular election.
The right of suffrage is not absolute. It is regulated by measures like voters r
egistration which is not a mere statutory requirement. The State, in the exercis
e of its inherent police power, may then enact laws to safeguard and regulate th
e act of voters registration for the ultimate purpose of conducting honest, order
ly and peaceful election, to the incidental yet generally important end, that ev
en pre-election activities could be performed by the duly constituted authoritie
s in a realistic and orderly manner one which is not indifferent and so far remo
ved from the pressing order of the day and the prevalent circumstances of the ti
mes. RA 8189 prevails over RA 8436 in that RA 8189s provision is explicit as to t
he prohibition. Suffice it to say that it is a pre-election act that cannot be r
eset.
Further, even if what is asked is a mere two-day special registration, COMELEC h
as shown in its pleadings that if it is allowed, it will substantially create a
setback in the other pre-election matters because the additional voters from the
special two day registration will have to be screened, entered into the book of
voters, have to be inspected again, verified, sealed, then entered into the com
puterized voters list; and then they will have to reprint the voters information
sheet for the update and distribute it by that time, the May 14, 2001 elections
would have been overshot because of the lengthy processes after the special regi
stration. In short, it will cost more inconvenience than good. Further still, th
e allegation that youth voters are disenfranchised is not sufficient. Nowhere in
AKBAYAN-Youths pleading was attached any actual complaint from an individual you
th voter about any inconvenience arising from the fact that the voters registrat
ion has ended on December 27, 2001. Also, AKBAYAN-Youth et al admitted in their
pleading that they are asking an extension because they failed to register on ti
me for some reasons, which is not appealing to the court. The law aids the vigil
ant and not those who slumber on their rights.