IT’S not a new idea—the idea of punishing politicians posting campaign materials outside of officially designated places—but the netizens of Zambales apparently have had enough of candidates nailing posters on trees they are fighting back with a negative campaign against these candidates.
We recall that some 12 years ago, the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA), after cleaning up political posters and banners outside of officially designated areas at an enormous expense, demanded that the politicians concerned be made to pay for their excesses. The MMDA got nowhere with its demand.
In Zambales the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, which is mandated to protect trees, among other features of our natural environment, from acts of vandalism, like the nailing of campaign materials on them, is confessing to a lack of manpower to carry out the task.
Now, we have Republic Act 9006, the Fair Elections Act, governing the conduct of elections in this country. The Act describes almost exhaustively the acts that politicians can carry out in pursuit of their ambition. It also stipulates that election offenses are punishable under Section 264 of the Omnibus Election Code.
But something is wrong somewhere. How come no political candidate has ever been made answerable for antisocial activities carried out by him or his supporters in his pursuit of public office? For all intents and purposes, candidates do as they please in carrying out their campaign for votes.
Obviously, there is a need for a clearer enumeration of election offenses and the penalties appropriate to them. The launching by the Zambales netizens of a shame campaign against violators is an act in the right direction, but it is not enough. Punishment of violators must include not just boycotting them, but punishing them with a financial fine and a prison sentence.
It seems only fair also that entreaties for financial restitution by local government units digging out from under tons of political garbage be given due course. Shortages of manpower by agencies mandated to protect public turf must be treated with more than just indifference or nonchalance.
Just think of the positive impact that punishment of violators can exert on our communities and political culture. There will be no more of the physical dirt that converts our cities and municipalities into garbage dumps during election period. Also, candidates will be obliged to articulate their programs of government, if they have any, instead of relying on inanimate, but expensive, materials to do such articulation. To the extent that possible punishment gives rise to increased interaction between candidates and voters, it will strengthen our democracy.
Our call for punishment of violators is not to curb electoral acts, dampen political fervor or narrow the limits of our political freedom. It is only to alert politicians against the antisocial character of some of the practices that have become normal during election time in our communities. Candidates must be made aware that these practices have consequences, on themselves if on nobody else.
Image credits: Jimbo Albano