MANILA — The Supreme Court (SC) en banc has ruled that using a nickname similar to another candidate’s in a previous election does not automatically make a candidate a nuisance or prove intent to confuse voters.

In a decision made public Monday, the SC said the Commission on Elections (Comelec) abused its discretion when it declared Charles “DB” Savellano a nuisance candidate and canceled his certificate of candidacy.

Savellano, who ran for Ilocos Sur’s 1st District representative in last year’s elections, was challenged by rival Ronald Singson, who argued that Savellano’s nickname “DB” was similar to Singson’s previous opponent, Deogracias Victor “DV” Savellano, and could confuse voters.

The court said that while “deliberately using a nickname to confuse voters… shows a lack of genuine intent to run for public office… having similar nicknames, by itself, is not enough to prove an intent to confuse voters.”

The SC also noted that merely claiming a candidate lacks genuine intent to run, such as not launching a campaign, is insufficient to declare them a nuisance without substantial evidence.

The court sided with Savellano, emphasizing that he had not yet launched a campaign or engaged with voters, in line with Comelec rules stating that the campaign period for the 2025 midterm elections begins only on March 28, 2025.

The case against Savellano was filed in 2024. (PNA)