6 Abs V Comelec

ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corp v.
COMELEC
January 28, 2000
EXIT POLLS
FACTS:
COMELEC issued a Resolution approving the issuance of a restraining order to stop ABS CBN or any
other groups, its agents or representatives from conducting exit surveys. The Resolution was issued by
the Comelec allegedly upon "information from a reliable source that ABS-CBN (Lopez Group) has prepared a
project, with PR groups, to conduct radio-TV coverage of the elections and to make an exit survey of the vote
during the elections for national officials particularly for President and Vice President, results of which shall
be broadcasted immediately.” The electoral body believed that such project might conflict with the official
Comelec count, as well as the unofficial quick count of the National Movement for Free Elections (Namfrel). It
also noted that it had not authorized or deputized ABS-CBN to undertake the exit survey.
Two days before the elections on May 11, 1998, the Court issued the Temporary Restraining Order
prayed for by petitioner ABS-CBN. The Comelec was directed to cease and desist, until further orders, from
implementing the assailed Resolution or the restraining order issued pursuant thereto, if any. In fact, the exit
polls were actually conducted and reported by media without any difficulty or problem.
ISSUE: W/N the Comelec, in the exercise of its powers, can absolutely ban exit polls
ABS-CBN: The holding of exit polls and the nationwide reporting of their results are valid exercises of
the freedoms of speech and of the press
COMELEC:
1)The issuance thereof was "pursuant to its constitutional and statutory powers to promote a clean, honest,
orderly and credible May 11, 1998 elections"; and "to protect, preserve and maintain the secrecy and sanctity
of the ballot."
2)It contends that "the conduct of exit surveys might unduly confuse and influence the voters," and that the
surveys were designed "to condition the minds of people and cause confusion as to who are the winners and
the losers in the election," which in turn may result in "violence and anarchy."
3)"exit surveys indirectly violate the constitutional principle to preserve the sanctity of the ballots," as the
"voters are lured to reveal the contents of ballots," in violation of Section 2, Article V of the Constitution and
relevant provisions of the Omnibus Election Code. It submits that the constitutionally protected freedoms
invoked by petitioner "are not immune to regulation by the State in the legitimate exercise of its police
power," such as in the present case.
4) "[p]ress freedom may be curtailed if the exercise thereof creates a clear and present danger to the
community or it has a dangerous tendency." It then contends that "an exit poll has the tendency to sow
confusion considering the randomness of selecting interviewees, which further make[s] the exit poll highly
unreliable. The probability that the results of such exit poll may not be in harmony with the official count
made by the Comelec x x x is ever present. In other words, the exit poll has a clear and present danger of
destroying the credibility and integrity of the electoral process."
SUPREME COURT: The COMELEC Resolution on exit polls ban is nullified and set aside.
1) Clear and present danger of destroying the integrity of electoral processes

NOT
Speculative and Untenable. First, by the very nature of a survey, the interviewees or participants are
selected at random, so that the results will as much as possible be representative or reflective of the general
sentiment or view of the community or group polled. Second, the survey result is not meant to replace or be at
par with the official Comelec count. It consists merely of the opinion of the polling group as to who the
electorate in general has probably voted for, based on the limited data gathered from polled individuals.
Finally, not at stake here are the credibility and the integrity of the elections, which are exercises that are
separate and independent from the exit polls. The holding and the reporting of the results of exit polls cannot
undermine those of the elections, since the former is only part of the latter. If at all, the outcome of one can
only be indicative of the other.
2) Overbroad
The Comelec's concern with the possible noncommunicative effect of exit polls -- disorder and
confusion in the voting centers -- does not justify a total ban on them. Undoubtedly, the assailed Comelec
Resolution is too broad, since its application is without qualification as to whether the polling is disruptive or
not.[44] Concededly, the Omnibus Election Code prohibits disruptive behavior around the voting
centers.[45] There is no showing, however, that exit polls or the means to interview voters cause chaos in
voting centers. Neither has any evidence been presented proving that the presence of exit poll reporters near
an election precinct tends to create disorder or confuse the voters. Moreover, the prohibition incidentally
prevents the collection of exit poll data and their use for any purpose. The valuable information and ideas that
could be derived from them, based on the voters' answers to the survey questions will forever remain
unknown and unexplored. Unless the ban is restrained, candidates, researchers, social scientists and the
electorate in general would be deprived of studies on the impact of current events and of election-day and
other factors on voters' choices.
3) Violation of Ban Secrecy
The contention of public respondent that exit polls indirectly transgress the sanctity and the secrecy
of the ballot is off-tangent to the real issue. Petitioner does not seek access to the ballots cast by the voters.
The ballot system of voting is not at issue here.
The reason behind the principle of ballot secrecy is to avoid vote buying through voter identification.
Thus, voters are prohibited from exhibiting the contents of their official ballots to other persons, from making
copies thereof, or from putting distinguishing marks thereon so as to be identified. Also proscribed is finding
out the contents of the ballots cast by particular voters or disclosing those of disabled or illiterate voters who
have been assisted. Clearly, what is forbidden is the association of voters with their respective votes, for the
purpose of assuring that the votes have been cast in accordance with the instructions of a third party. This
result cannot, however, be achieved merely through the voters' verbal and confidential disclosure to a
pollster of whom they have voted for.
In exit polls, the contents of the official ballot are not actually exposed. Furthermore, the revelation of
whom an elector has voted for is not compulsory, but voluntary. Voters may also choose not to reveal their
identities. Indeed, narrowly tailored countermeasures may be prescribed by the Comelec, so as to minimize
or suppress incidental problems in the conduct of exit polls, without transgressing the fundamental rights of
our people.##
An exit poll is a species of electoral survey conducted by qualified individuals or groups of individuals for the purpose of determining the
probable result of an election by confidentially asking randomly selected voters whom they have voted for, immediately after they have officially cast
their ballots. The results of the survey are announced to the public, usually through the mass media, to give an advance overview of how, in the opinion
of the polling individuals or organizations, the electorate voted. In our electoral history, exit polls had not been resorted to until the recent May 11, 1998
elections.

6 Abs V Comelec

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

6 Abs V Comelec

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

6 Abs V Comelec

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corp v.

1) Clear and present danger of destroying the integrity of electoral processes

3) Violation of Ban Secrecy

You might also like