Security firms should seek Comelec nod for gun ban exemption —SC

The Supreme Court has affirmed the authority of the Commission on Elections to require private security agencies to seek permission of the poll body in order to be exempted from the gun ban in an election period.

The high court backed Section 2(e), Rule III of Resolution 10015 which provides for the documentary requirements for exemption for the May 2016 elections as it denied the petition filed by the Philippine Association of Detective and Protective Agency Operators (PADPAO) Region 7 Chapter, Inc.

"All told, the Court holds that the Comelec did not gravely abuse its discretion or exceed its jurisdiction in including PSSPs [private security service providers] and PSAs [private security agencies] within the ambit of those persons required to secure written authority from the poll body to bear, carry, and transport firearms and other dangerous weapons outside their place of residence, work, or within public places during the election period," the SC said in its October 3 decision.

It rejected PADPAO's argument that the Comelec does not have the authority, during an election period, to impose upon PSAs the requirement of written authority from poll body to bear, carry, and transport firearms and other deadly weapons, as the power to do so belongs exclusively to the Philippine National Police under Republic Act 5487.

According to the SC, the power of the Comelec to promulgate rules and regulations to enforce and implement elections laws is provided under Article IX-A and IX-C of the 1987 Constitution, Batas Pambansa 881 and Republic Act 7166.

"PADPAO's insistence that the power to issue rules and regulations in relation to the operation of PSAs belongs exclusively to the PNP is specious. In RA 5487, it is the PNP that exercises general supervision over the operation of all private detective and watchman security guard agencies," the ruling stated.

"It has the exclusive authority to regulate and to issue the required licenses to operate security and protective agencies. The Comelec does not encroach upon this authority of the PNP to regulate PSAs - as it merely regulates the bearing, carrying, and transporting of firearms and other deadly weapons by PSAs and all other persons, during election period," it added.

Likewise, the SC also refuted PADPAO's contention that the provision violated the constitutional tenets of equal protection of laws and non-impairment of obligations of contracts.

Moreover, it said that the PSAs' contracts with their clients "are not affected in any manner" by the requirement of having to obtain from the Comelec written authority to bear, carry, and transport firearms outside of their residence or place of work and in public places, during election period.

“All that PSAs must do is to secure such authority,” the court said.

The Court noted that historically, Philippine elections "have been marred by violence and unnecessary bloodshed and additional guidelines must be put in place to eliminate, or at least, lessen the threat."

"Whether or not the gun ban has been an effective deterrent is a different matter, which is beyond the Court's domain," the decision reads.

Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa penned the decision. —LBG, GMA News