House seat candidate Christian Sia defended his controversial remarks about single mothers, invoking his right to freedom of speech after facing backlash and a show-cause order from the Commission on Elections (Comelec).

In the show-cause order dated 4 April, the Comelec stated that Sia’s comments regarding the struggles of solo mothers may constitute a violation of Section 3 of Resolution No. 11116, which governs proper conduct during the election period.

“While the language and tone were indeed conversational, using everyday banter one might expect from ordinary people, my statements were not made to discriminate against, exclude, restrict, demean, or harass female solo parents,” Sia wrote in his formal reply.

He further argued that his remarks were not intended to violate any rights, insisting they fall under his right to freedom of speech.

“My campaign events are my way of conversing with my constituents. While the words may sound brash, my speech, in its entirety, falls within my freedom of speech,” he added.

Following the issuance of the initial order, Sia publicly apologized, acknowledging that his remarks were inappropriate. He initially attempted to shift blame to the uploader of the video for allegedly removing context, although the full segment was shown in the circulating footage.

Meanwhile, the Comelec has issued a second show-cause order against Sia over alleged misogynistic remarks directed at his own female staff during another campaign sortie. He has yet to respond to this latest directive.

The new order, issued through the Comelec’s Task Force SAFE (Safeguarding Against Fear and Exclusion in Elections), directs Sia to explain why he should not face a complaint for an election offense or a petition for disqualification from the 2025 midterm elections.

“In view of the foregoing, you are hereby ordered to show cause in writing within a non-extendible period of three days from receipt hereof and to explain why a complaint for election offense and/or a petition for disqualification should not be filed against you,” the order read.