SC: Election weapon ban covers mainly firearms, not knives, unless near precincts

The Philippine Supreme Court issued a clarification on the election-period prohibition on carrying weapons.

The Court clarified that the prohibition primarily applies to firearms and similar regulated weapons. It does not extend to bladed instruments, such as kitchen knives, unless they are carried inside or within 100 meters of a voting precinct.

In a Resolution penned by Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul Inting, the SC Third Division granted a motion for reconsideration reversing a previous conviction for a violation of Section 261(p) of the Omnibus Election Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 7166.

In this specific case, an individual was found carrying a knife during the 2018 election period but there was no evidence that the incident occurred within the prohibited vicinity of a polling place, according to a news release from the Office of the Spokesperson of the SC.

The individual involved was initially arrested for carrying a kitchen knife outside his residence without authorization from the Commission on Elections.

While both the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals found him guilty of carrying a deadly weapon during the election period—a ruling the Supreme Court initially upheld—the Supreme Court has now acquitted him upon reconsideration.

The acquittal was based on the determination that the prosecution failed to prove all necessary elements of the offense.

In Buella v. People, the Court clarified that bladed weapons are not covered by the provisions banning firearms outside of residences or places of business during the election period.

However, the Court distinguished that Section 261(p) of the Omnibus Election Code (OEC) addresses a separate offense: carrying deadly weapons, such as knives, is prohibited only within voting precincts or within a 100-meter radius during specific election hours.

In summary, while firearms are broadly prohibited in public during the election period, the restriction on knives applies specifically to areas in or near polling precincts under the law.

Applying this clarification, the SC found that while possession of the knife during the election period was established, prosecutors failed to prove that it occurred inside or near a voting precinct, or within the legally prescribed time frame.

With these missing elements, the Court ruled that the accused’s guilt was not sufficiently proven.

-Paraluman News