This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2014-09-02 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| With regard to the attack that the total aggregate airtime limit constitutes prior restraint or undue abridgement of the freedom of speech and expression, the COMELEC counters that "the Resolutions enjoy constitutional and congressional imprimatur. It is the Constitution itself that imposes the restriction on the freedoms of speech and expression, during election period, to promote an important and significant governmental interest, which is to equalize, as far as practicable, the situation of rich and poor candidates by preventing the former from enjoying the undue advantage offered by huge campaign 'war chests.'"[19] | |||||
|
2005-06-08 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| In essence, procedural due process "refers to the method or manner by which the law is enforced."[17] | |||||
|
2004-11-17 |
PANGANIBAN, J. |
||||
| On the other hand, quasi-legislative power is exercised by administrative agencies through the promulgation of rules and regulations within the confines of the granting statute and the doctrine of non-delegation of certain powers flowing from the separation of the great branches of the government.[63] Prior notice to and hearing of every affected party, as elements of due process, are not required since there is no determination of past events or facts that have to be established or ascertained. As a general rule, prior notice and hearing are not essential to the validity of rules or regulations promulgated to govern future conduct.[64] | |||||