1/4/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly Respondent overlooked that the prohibition on partisan political activities in In Re: Gonzales specifically pertains to elections conducted in the Philippines. Likewise, this Court's justification in In Re: Gonzales operates within the premise and context of an election period within the Philippines. Respondent cannot simply rely on that justification in arguing for the validity of the assailed provisions in this case. The application of the prohibition is different for overseas elections. Respondent cannot use the perceived electoral violence in the Philippines as a justification for a prohibition applied abroad. Thus, I cannot agree with respondent's insistence that "the prohibition on partisan political activities during the 30-day overseas voting period . . . is no different from the election-day prohibition on partisan political activities"[117] within the Philippines. It is clear that respondent failed to discharge its burden of proof. It has not shown why prohibiting partisan political activities abroad is necessary to maintain public order during the election period. It is uncertain what clear and present dangers the prohibition aims to dispel within the different countries abroad. Hence, the presumption of the regulations' invalidity stands. Absent any clear and present danger, the people's exercise of free speech cannot be restrained by the government. Without any discernable reason to broadly impose the prohibition on political activities abroad, this Court is impelled to favor and uphold the exercise of free expression. The Overseas Absentee Voting Act's noble intent to encourage Filipinos abroad to exercise their right of suffrage[118] will fail to materialize if we leave our people voiceless and powerless. A meaningful democratic participation through the exercise of the right of suffrage demands that citizens have the right to know what they ought to know, and to express what they know to make informed choices and influence others to do the same. ACCORDINGLY, I vote that the Petition be GRANTED. Section 36.8 of the Overseas Absentee Voting Act of 2013 and Section 74(II)(8) of Commission on Elections Resolution No. 10035 are declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL. [1] Republic Act No. 9189 (2003), as amended by Republic Act No. 10590 (2013), sec. 36.8 provides: SECTION 36. Prohibited Acts. - In addition to the prohibited acts provided by law, it shall be unlawful: .... 36.8. For any person to engage in partisan political activity abroad during the thirty (30)-day overseas voting period[.] [2] General Instructions for the Special Board of Election Inspectors and Special Ballot https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/65669 43/60