Election offenses’ guidelines
Offering and/or receiving money in exchange for votes is a criminal and punishable act, and while it may have short-term benefits, it would be disastrous in the long run if voters make their choice of candidate on that basis
Published in Daily Tribune on October 28, 2021
by: Vanessa Arrha A De Leon
As the election nears, nothing is more important than making sure that Filipinos exercise their right to vote in accordance with their values and conscience. The choice of a leader is sacred and determines not just the future of the country but also the future of its citizens. It will determine the dreams of every Filipino: Whether they will need to go abroad for a better future or whether there will be opportunities here so they may stay and work here.
Voter education is more important than ever and an important aspect of which, aside from making voters aware of the true qualifications and achievements of a candidate, is informing voters about election offenses. Yes, there are actions relating to elections that may seem harmless but are actually criminal and punishable under the Philippine laws.
Sec. 261 of the Omnibus Election Code (OEC) provides a list of election offenses. It is non-exclusive because Sec. 262 provides that actions in violation of the other selected provisions of the OEC are also deemed election offenses.
Sec. 261 is a long provision but to give an overview, it punishes acts that unduly and unfairly influence a person in the exercise of his right to vote, during his registration as a voter, during the campaign period, or on the day of the election.
Recently, an issue arose when a number of presidentiables expressed their position on vote-selling. Some of them answered that voters may accept the money but they should still vote for who they believe is the best candidate. While such advice may be practical given the times, it is still short-sighted, and more importantly, following it would expose the voter to criminal liability under the OEC.
According to Sec. 261(a), any person who: (1) gives, offers, or promises money or anything of value; (2) gives or promises any office or employment, franchise or grant, public or private; or (3) makes or offers to make an expenditure, directly or indirectly, or cause expenditure to be made to any person, association, corporation, entity or community, for purposes of inducing them to vote for or against any candidate or withhold his vote in the election, or to vote for or against any aspirant for a nomination, shall be guilty of vote-buying.
On the other hand, any person, association, corporation, group, or community who solicits or receives, directly or indirectly, any expenditure or promise of any office or employment, public or private, for any of the foregoing considerations shall be guilty of vote-selling.
Offering and/or receiving money in exchange for votes is a criminal and punishable act, and while it may have short-term benefits, it would be disastrous in the long run if voters make their choice of candidate on that basis.
Other acts prohibited by Sec. 261 include those which are specifically applicable to public officials or employees such as appointment of new employees, creation of new position promotion or giving salary increases during the period provided under the law; giving increases in salary or remuneration to any government official or employee; transfer of officers and employees in the civil service, wearing of uniforms and bearing arms for law enforcement officers, the making of any public works during the prohibited period, and rightfully, the use of public funds to fund the election or campaign.
Note that election offenses are punishable by imprisonment of not less than one year but not more than six years. Further, any person convicted of an election offense is not allowed to avail of the benefit under the probation law. Note also that the OEC is a special law and election offenses under it are considered mala prohibita. It means that the offenses are criminalized by virtue of law and that the defenses of good faith and ignorance are not a defense. The mere commission of the prohibited act is sufficient for conviction once the commission is proved in court.
Given the current situation in our country, Sec. 261 is a very relevant provision — one that can be used to guard our precious right to vote in accordance with our principles, as well as prosecute those who seek to erode the same.
