Manila: The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled that a candidate’s low vote count in past elections does not automatically make him or her a nuisance candidate in future elections. In a decision made public on Wednesday, the SC En Banc annulled the Commission on Elections’ (Comelec) resolutions cancelling the certificate of candidacy (COC) of Subair Guinthum Mustapha in the 2025 senatorial elections. Mustapha filed his COC under the Workers and Peasants Party (WPP).
According to Philippines News Agency, the Comelec Law Department moved to declare him a nuisance candidate, citing that Mustapha only received 5,387 votes-just 2.01 percent of the total votes for the Lanao del Sur representative seat in the 2022 elections. Mustapha argued that he is a qualified and serious candidate for senator, highlighting his academic credentials, leadership roles, dedication to labor advocacy, and governance platform, among others.
The poll body’s 2nd Division, however, declared him a nuisance candidate, concluding that he had no serious intentions to run a nationwide campaign. The Comelec En Banc upheld this ruling, prompting Mustapha to bring the case to the SC. While the case was pending, the SC issued a temporary restraining order stopping the Comelec from declaring him a nuisance candidate. This allowed Mustapha to participate in the elections, but he was not among the winning candidates.
Although the May 2025 election results rendered Mustapha’s petition moot, the SC still decided the case because the issue could arise again in future elections. The SC ultimately reversed the Comelec resolution. Under the Omnibus Election Code, the Comelec may cancel a COC if it was filed to mock the election process, cause confusion among voters, or without serious intent to run.
The SC ruled that there is no direct link between the candidates’ seriousness to run for office and their vote count in previous elections. ‘A candidate may be very serious in running for office and employs all possible legal means to obtain enough votes to win, but despite his or her seriousness and efforts, he or she may still lose. Conversely, a candidate may not have bona fide intent to run for public office but, because of sheer popularity, political machinery, or for a plethora of possible reasons, he or she manages to win an election,’ the SC decision said.
The SC warned that if the Comelec could declare someone a nuisance candidate simply because of low votes in past elections or perceived inability to win, it would be exercising a power reserved for voters on election day. ‘In a democratic institution such as ours, it is the people who are vested with the sole authority to decide whether a candidate wins or not, and such decision is to be passed upon only during the day of election. The Comelec, therefore, should not deprive the people of a legitimate choice by declaring candidates as nuisance candidates simply because it perceives that said candidates have low chances of winning, as purportedly shown by their previous dismal votes.’
In Mustapha’s case, the SC found that his low votes in the 2022 elections do not prove he lacked seriousness to run for senator in 2025. The SC noted he submitted evidence to show his genuine intent, such as his membership in WPP, a recognized and accredited national political party with various policies on labor and other social justice causes.
Mustapha also presented his program of government, articulating his individual platforms, such as uplifting marginalized sectors and promoting peace and development in Mindanao. While the SC recognized the Comelec’s efforts to weed out nuisance candidates, it reminded the poll body to exercise caution and avoid using grounds already ruled as invalid by the Court, such as lack of financial capacity to mount a national campaign or perceived unpopularity.
The SC also encouraged the Comelec to adopt or propose measures that will help candidates overcome perceived disadvantages. It said that strengthening the right to candidacy will give all candidates a real opportunity to prove their promise and provide voters with greater freedom and better information when choosing their representatives.
