Upholding Integrity in the Electoral Process

The Commission on Elections (Comelec) is serving notice that no one should make a mockery of the country’s electoral process.

Its recent decisions—invalidating candidacies of two winning candidates and a party-list group and upholding the candidacy of another—serve as a stern reminder that the Comelec is determined to carry out its mandate without fear or favor. These also serve as a painful reminder that violating the law through deception or legal loopholes does not pay.

This is why the Comelec deserves commendation for finally taking a bold and uncompromising stance. By disqualifying these individuals and groups, the Comelec has demonstrated what many Filipinos have long hoped to see: that the law applies to all, regardless of status, influence, or political connections. It is a rare yet necessary assertion of integrity in a political landscape too often marred by impunity and manipulation.

While some may view these rulings as purely technical or procedural victories, they are actually moral statements that send a strong message to the public. They affirm that public service must be built on honesty, transparency, and genuine qualification—not on fraud, deceit, or backroom deals. When candidates lie about their residency, qualifications, or affiliations, they are not simply breaking the law, as some would like to view it. They are actually making a mockery of the voters, dishonoring the democratic process, and weakening the institutions that hold our society together.

While these actions are praiseworthy, they are not enough. If anything, they expose a deeper flaw in the system that urgently needs an overhaul. Why were these candidates allowed to run in the first place? Why did it take so long before action was taken?

It is here that the Comelec must reflect and respond with equal courage. The rules governing candidates’ qualifications must be strengthened. The process of screening candidates must be more rigorous, more transparent, and more proactive. It should not fall on watchdogs, opponents, or civil society to do what the institution itself is empowered and mandated to perform.

Unqualified candidates should never be allowed to run and their names printed on the ballot in the first place. To do so only wastes public resources, confuses voters, and undermines the credibility of the electoral system. When the law is not enforced early and thoroughly, it becomes a tool for abuse rather than protection.

We call on the Comelec not just to punish violators, but to prevent violations from ever reaching the polling precinct. That means clearer rules, better vetting mechanisms, and a deep institutional resolve to protect the sanctity of elections at all costs.

The disqualifications we now witness should not be the exception. They become the norm when the law is bent. So, let this be a turning point. No longer can we tolerate mockery in the name of public service. No longer should the law be a weapon of the powerful.

For the candidates who think the law is flexible, who believe that public office is theirs by entitlement rather than merit, they must remember not to underestimate the long arms of the law. It may be slow, but it moves with precision. And when it does, it exacts its price—without mercy.

The Comelec, meanwhile, should always bear in mind that it is the guardian of our vote. It must be ever-watchful and unflinching. Above all, it must be just. In the country’s electoral process, the Comelec is the vanguard of decency and democracy. Therefore, it must be more discerning and circumspect. In the end, upholding the law is not just the Comelec’s job. It is our nation’s last line of defense.