Sunteți pe pagina 1din 23

1.

VETERANS FEDERATION PARTY versus COMELEC Petitioner - VETERANS FEDERATION PARTY Respondent - COMELEC

G.R. No. 136781

October 6, 2000

Facts: COMELEC proclaimed 14 party list representatives from 13 parties which obtained at least 2% of the total number of votes cast as member of the House of Rep. Upon petition by other party-list organization, it proclaimed another 38 additional party representatives although they received less than 2% of the votes on the ground that under the Constitution it is mandatory that at least 20% of the members of House of Representatives must come from the party list representatives. Issue: Whether or not Section 5(2), Article VI of the Constitution is mandatory where at least 20% of the members of the House of Representatives must come from the said party list system or representatives. Held: NO. It merely provides a ceiling for party list seats in the House of Representatives. 2. BORJA versus COMELEC G.R. No. 133495 September 3, 1998

Petitioner - BENJAMIN U. BORJA, JR. vs. Respondents - COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and JOSE T. CAPCO, JR.

Facts: Private respondent Jose T. Carpo, Jr. was elected vice-mayor of Pateros on January 18, 1988 for a term ending June 30, 1992. On September 2, 1989, he became mayor, by operation of law, upon the death of the incumbent, Cesar Borja. For the next two succeeding elections in 1992 and 1995, he was again re-elected as Mayor. On March 27, 1998, private respondent Carpo filed a certificate of candidacy for mayor of Pateros relative to the May 11, 1998 elections. Petitioner Benjamin U. Borja, Jr. sought Carpos disqualification on the theory that the latter would have already served as mayor for three consecutive terms by June 30, 1998 and would therefore be ineligible to serve for another term after that. COMELEC ruled in favor of petitioner and declared private respondent Carpo saying that In both the Constitution and the Local Government Code, the three-term limitation refers to the term of office for which the local official was elected. It made no reference to succession to an office to which he was not elected. Carpo won the election case against Borja. Hence, this petition. Issue: Whether or not a person who served in a position by operation of law could be considered as having served the term for the purpose of the three-term limit under the Constitution. Held: NO. The court held that when Carpo occupied the post of the Mayor upon the incumbents death and served for remainder of the term, he cannot be construed as having served a full term as contemplated under the three term limit. 3. ADORMEO versus COMELEC (G.R. No. 147927) Facts:

Respondent Talaga was elected Mayor of Lucena City in 1992, re-elected in 1995, but lost to Tagarao in 1998 elections. Tagarao was recalled and in the May 12, 2000 recall elections, Talaga won and served the unexpired term of Tagarao until June 30, 2001. Talaga was candidate for Mayor in the May 14, 2001 elections, and a petition for cancellation of his certificate of candidacy was filed on the ground that he has served as Mayor for three consecutive terms. Issue: Whether or not Talaga has served as Mayor of Lucena City for three consecutive terms. Held: NO. In the case at bar, Talaga did not serve for 3 consecutive terms. For nearly 2 years, he was a private citizen. The continuity of his mayorship was disrupted by his defeat in the 1998 elections. 4. VALLES versus COMELEC (337 SCRA 543) Facts: This is a petition for certiorari under Rule 65, pursuant to Section 2, Rule 64 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, assailing Resolutions dated July 17, 1998 and January 15, 1999, respectively, of the Commission on Elections in SPA No. 98-336, dismissing the petition for disqualification filed by the herein petitioner, Cirilo R. Valles, against private respondent Rosalind Ybasco Lopez on citizenship grounds, in May 1998 elections for governor of Davao Oriental. Respondent was born on May 16, 1934 in Australia to a Filipino father and an Australian mother, who ran for governor of Davao Oriental. In 1998, she applied for an Alien Certificate of Registration (ACR) and Immigrant Certificate of Residence (ICR) and was issued an Australian passport. Issues: 1. Whether or not respondent is a Filipino. 2. Whether or not, if proven that she is a Filipino, did she, in anyway renounced her citizenship by applying for ACR and ICR and being issued an Australian passport. Held: YES. Respondent is a Filipino since her father is a Filipino. In 1934, the controlling laws of the Philippines were the Philippine Bill of July 1, 1902 and the Philippine Autonomy Act of August 29, 1916 (Jones Law). Under both organic acts, all inhabitants of the Philippines who were Spanish subjects on April 11, 1899 and resided therein, including their children, are considered Philippine citizens. Respondents father was therefore a Filipino, and consequently, her. As for issue number two, respondent did not lose her citizenship. Renunciation of citizenship must be express. Applying for ACR, ICR, and Australian passport are not enough to renounce citizenship. They are merely acts of assertion of her Australian citizenship before she effectively renounced the same. Holding of an Australian passport and an alien certificate of registration does not constitute an effective renunciation of citizenship and does not militate against her claim of Filipino citizenship. At most, she has dual citizenship.

5. QUINTO versus COMELEC (G.R. No. 189698) Facts: Petitioners Eleazar P. Quinto and Gerino A. Tolentino, Jr. filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition against the COMELEC for issuing a resolution declaring appointive officials who filed their certificate of candidacy as ipso facto resigned from their government offices because at such time they are not yet treated by the law as

candidates. They should be considered resigned from their respective offices only at the start of the campaign period when they are, by law, already considered candidates. In this defense, the COMELEC avers that it only copied the provision from Sec. 13 of R.A. 9369. Issue: Whether or not the said COMELEC resolution was valid. Held: NO. In the Farias case, the petitioners challenged Sec. 14 of RA. 9006 repealing Sec. 66 of the Omnibus Election Code (OEC) for giving undue benefit to elective officials in comparison with appointive officials. 6. LONZANIDA versus COMELEC G.R. No. 135150 July 28, 1999

ROMEO LONZANIDA, petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE COMMISSION ON ELECTION and EUFEMIO MULI, respondents.

Facts: Petitioner Romeo Lonzanida duly elected and served two consecutive terms as municipal mayor ofSan Antonio, Zambales prior to the May 8 1995 elections where he ran for the mayoralty position ofSan Antonio, Zambales and was again proclaimed the winner. He then assumed office and discharged said duties therof. His proclamation in the year 1995 was however contested by his then opponent Juan Alvez who later on filed an election protest. In the year 1997, the RTC of Zambales declared a failure of elections. After a revision and re-appreciation of the contested ballot, COMELEC declared Alvarez the duly elected mayor of San Antonio, Zambales and ordered petitioner to vacate the post. On the 11th of May in the year 1998 elections again, Lonzanida ran for mayor wherein his contender Eufemio Muli filed a petition to disqualify the former from running for mayor of San Antonio in the 1998 elections on the ground that he had served three consecutive terms in the same post. Lonzanidas assumption of office by virtue of his proclamation in May 1995, although he was later unseated before the expiration of the term, should be counted as service for one full term in computing the three term limit under the Constitution and the Local Government Code. Issue: Whether or not tit may be considered that the petitioner had served three consecutive terms, granting that he did not finish his term in 1995. Held: NO. By reason of his involuntary relinquishment of office, petitioner did not fully serve the 1995 to 1998 mayoral term and became a private citizen. 7. AZNAR versus COMELEC G.R. No. 83820 May 25, 1990

JOSE B. AZNAR (as Provincial Chairman of PDP Laban in Cebu), petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and EMILIO MARIO RENNER OSMEA, respondents. Facts:

Emilio Lito Osmea filed his certificate of candidacy with the COMELEC for the position of Provincial Governor of Cebu in the 18 January 1988 elections. Petitioner, Jose B. Aznar, filed with the COMELEC a petition for the disqualification of Osmea on the ground that he is not a Filipino citizen since he is a citizen of the United States. COMELEC en banc decided to suspend the proclamation. Osmea maintained that he is a Filipino citizen, alleging that (1) he is the legitimate child of Dr. Emilio D. Osmea, a Filipino and son of the late President Sergio Osmea, Sr., (2) that he is a holder of a valid and subsisting Philippine Passport, (3) that he was continuously residing in the Philippines since birth and has not gone out of the country for more than six months, and (4) that he has been a registered voter in the Philippines since 1965. Issue: Whether or not respondent is no longer a Filipino citizen by acquiring dual-citizenship. Held: YES. Osmena is still a Filipino. The court held that Aznars contention was not meritorious. 8. RIVERA III versus COMELEC G.R. No. 167591 May 9, 2007 ATTY. VENANCIO Q. RIVERA III and ATTY. NORMANDICK DE GUZMAN, Petitioners, vs. COMELEC and MARINO "BOKING" MORALES, Respondents. Facts: A petition for cancellation of the COC of Marino Morales as mayoralty candidate in Mabalacat, Pampanga for the May 2004 mayoralty was filed on the ground that he had already served three consecutive terms in the office that he seeks to run for. However, Morales argues that this is not so because although he really served in 1995 1998 in his first term and 2004 2007 for his third term, he was merely a caretaker or de facto mayor in the year 1998 2001 for his said to be second term that is because his election was declared void by the RTC due to an election protest. COMELEC ruled that Morales already served his third term and after an MR was filed, declared it final and executory on May 14, 2004. Issue: Whether or not Morales had already served his three consecutive terms and if so, who should take his position. Held: Since his disqualification became final and executory after the elections, the candidate having the second highest number of votes cannot assume the position. Hence, it is the petitioner, the elected Vice Mayor Anthony Dee who should be declared as the mayor. 9. AQUILINO Q. PIMENTEL, JR. versus JOINT COMMITTEE OF CONGRESS TO CANVASS THE VOTES FOR PRESIDENT & VICE PRESIDENT IN THE MAY 10 2004 ELECTIONS Facts: By a petition for prohibition, Senator Aquilino Q. Pimentel, Jr. seeks a judgment declaring null and void the continued existence of the Joint Committee of Congress to determine the authenticity and due execution of the certificates of canvass and preliminarily canvass the votes cast for Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates in the May 10 2004 elections following the adjournment of Congress on June 11 2004. The petition corollarily prays for the issuance of a writ of prohibition directing the Joint Committee to cease and desist from conducting any further proceedings pursuant to the Rules of the Joint Public Session of Congress on Canvassing.

Issue: Whether or not legislative procedure, precedent or practice as borne out by the rules of both Houses of Congress supports Pimentels arguments against the existence and proceedings of the Joint Committee of Congress after the adjournment of Congress. Held: NO. Pimentels claim that his arguments are buttressed by legislative procedure, precedent or practice as borne out by the rules of both Houses of Congress is directly contradicted by Section 42 of Rule XIV of the Rules adopted by the Senate, of which he is an incumbent member. 10. GAUDENCIO RAYO vs. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF BULACAN G.R. No. L-55273-83 December 19, 1981 Petitioner - GAUDENCIO RAYO Respondents - COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF BULACAN, BRANCH V, STA. MARIA, and NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION FACTS: At the height of the infamous typhoon "Kading", the respondent opened simultaneously all the three floodgates of the Angat Dam which resulted in a sudden, precipitate and simultaneous opening of said floodgates several towns in Bulacan were inundated. The petitioners filed for damages against the respondent corporation. Petitioners opposed the prayer of the respondents forn dismissal of the case and contended that the respondent corporation is merely performing a propriety functions and that under its own organic act, it can sue and be sued in court. ISSUE: W/N the respondent performs governmental functions with respect to the management and operation of the Angat Dam. W/N the power of the respondent to sue and be sued under its organic charter includes the power to be sued for tort. HELD: The government has organized a private corporation, put money in it and has allowed it to sue and be sued in any court under its charter. As a government owned and controlled corporation, it has a personality of its own, distinct and separate from that of the government. Moreover, the charter provision that it can sue and be sued in any court. 11. Macalintal v. COMELEC G.R. No. 191618 November 23, 2010

ATTY. ROMULO B. MACALINTAL, Petitioner, vs. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL, Respondent.

Facts: Romulo Macalintal assails theconstitutionality of RA 9189, entitledThe Overseas Absentee Voting Actof 2003.The provision assailed is Section 5,which allows the registration of voters who are immigrants or permanent residents in other countries by their mere act of executing an affidavit expressingtheir intention to return to thePhilippines. Issues: W/N Section 5 of RA 9189 violatesthe residency requirement in Section1 of Article V of the Constitution. What does qualified citizens of thePhilippines abroad as it appears inRA 9189 mean?

Ruling: NO. Contrary to petitioners claimthat Section 5 circumvents theConstitution, Congress enacted the law prescribing a system of overseasabsentee voting in compliance withthe constitutional mandate. 12. MITRA versus COMELEC G.R. No. 191938 July 2, 2010

ABRAHAM KAHLIL B. MITRA, Petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ANTONIO V. GONZALES, and ORLANDO R. BALBON, JR., Respondents.

Facts: When his COC for the position of Governor of Palawan was declared cancelled, Mitra was the incumbent Representative of the Second District of Palawan. On March 26, 2007 (or before the end of Mitras second term as Representative), Puerto PrincesaCity was reclassified as a "highly urbanized city" and thus ceased to be a component city of theProvince of Palawan. The direct legal consequence of this new status was the ineligibility of PuertoPrincesa City residents from voting for candidates for elective provincial officials. Mitra applied for the transfer of his Voters Registration Record from Precinct No. 03720 of Brgy. Sta. Monica, PuertoPrincesa City, to Sitio Maligaya,Brgy. Isaub, Municipality of Aborlan, Province of Palawan. He subsequently filed his COC for the position of Governor of Palawan as a resident of Aborlan. Soon thereafter, respondents Antonio V. Gonzales and Orlando R. Balbon, Jr. (the respondents) filed a petition to deny due course or to cancel Mitras COC. Issue: Whether or not Mitra is qualified to run for Governor of Palawan. Held: YES. Mitra is qualified to rum for the position as Governor of Palawan. The Supreme Court ruled that Mitra did not misrepresent himself and that he met the residency requirement as mandated by the Constitution. 13. SOCRATES versus COMELEC G.R. No. 154512 November 12, 2002

VICTORINO DENNIS M. SOCRATES, Mayor of Puerto Princesa City, petitioner, vs. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, THE PREPARATORY RECALL ASSEMBLY (PRA) of Puerto Princesa City, PRA Interim Chairman Punong Bgy. MARK DAVID HAGEDORN, PRA Interim Secretary Punong Bgy. BENJAMIN JARILLA, PRA Chairman and Presiding Officer Punong Bgy. EARL S. BUENVIAJE and PRA Secretary Punong Bgy. CARLOS ABALLA, JR. respondents. Facts: Edward Hagedorn has already served for three consecutive terms as mayor from 1992 to 2001. He did not run in the immediately following regular elections. One July 2, 2002, the incumbent mayor, Socrates, faced a recall proceeding and was asked to step down from office. On August 23 of the same year, Hagedorn filed his COC for mayor in recall election. A petition for his disqualification was filed by Socrates on the ground that he cannot run for the said post for his 4th consecutive term. Issue: Whether or not Hagedorn was qualified to run for the 2003 recall election.

Held: YES. The court ruled that the rationale behind the three term rule was to prevent consecutiveness in holding office. In the case of Edward Hagedorn, there was a break after the end of his third term and before the recall election. 14. FORNIER versus COMELEC

Petitioner - VICTORINO X. FORNIER vs. Respondents - HON. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and RONALD ALLAN KELLEY POE, ALSO KNOWN AS FERNANDO POE JR.,
Facts: Victorino X. Fornier, petitioner initiated a petition before the COMELEC to disqualify FPJ and to deny due course or to cancel his certificate of candidacy upon the thesis that FPJ made a material misrepresentation in his certificate of candidacy by claiming to be a natural-born Filipino citizen when in truth, according to Fornier, his parents were foreigners; his mother, Bessie Kelley Poe, was an American, and his father, Allan Poe, was a Spanish national, being the son of Lorenzo Pou, a Spanish subject. Issue: Whether or Not FPJ is a natural born Filipino citizen.

Held: It is necessary to take on the matter of whether or not respondent FPJ is a natural-born citizen, which, in turn, depended on whether or not the father of respondent, Allan F. Poe, would have himself been a Filipino citizen and, in the affirmative, whether or not the alleged illegitimacy of respondent prevents him from taking after the Filipino citizenship of his putative father. Any conclusion on the Filipino citizenship of Lorenzo Pou could only be drawn from the presumption that having died in 1954 at 84 years old, Lorenzo would have been born sometime in the year 1870, when the Philippines was under Spanish rule, and that San Carlos, Pangasinan, his place of residence upon his death in 1954, in the absence of any other evidence, could have well been his place of residence before death, such that Lorenzo Pou would have benefited from the "en masse Filipinization" that the Philippine Bill had effected in 1902. That citizenship (of Lorenzo Pou), if acquired, would thereby extend to his son, Allan F. Poe, father of respondent FPJ. 15. Soller v. COMELEC G.R. No. 139853 September 5, 2000

Petitioner - FERDINAND THOMAS M. SOLLER vs. Respondents -COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF PINAMALAYAN, ORIENTAL MINDORO (Branch 42) and ANGEL M. SAULONG

FACTS: Petitioner and private respondent (Saulong) were both candidates formayor of the municipality of Bansud, Oriental Mindoro in the May 11,1998 elections. The petitioner was proclaimed as mayor by themunicipal board of canvassers. Private respondent filed a petition withthe COMELEC to annul the proclamation. Later, private respondentfiled an election protest against petitioner with the RTC. The COMELECdismissed the preproclamation case filed by private respondent, whilethe RTC denied petitioners motion to dismiss. Petitioner moved forreconsideration but said motion was denied.Petitioner then filed with the COMELEC a petition for certioraricontending that respondent RTC acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion in not dismissing privaterespondents election protest. The COMELEC en banc dismissedpetitioners suit. Petitioner now questions this decision of the COMELECen banc. ISSUE:Whether or not the COMELEC has the authority to decide on the case.

HELD: The SC has ruled in previous cases that the COMELEC, sitting en banc,does not have the requisite authority to hear and decide election casesincluding pre-proclamation controversies in the first instance. Thispower pertains to the divisions of the Commission. Any decision by theCommission en banc as regards election cases decided by it in the firstinstance is null and void. In the SCs view, the authority to resolvepetition for certiorari involving incidental issues of election protest, likethe questioned order of the trial court, falls within the division of theCOMELEC and not on the COMELEC en banc.

16.

Nolasco v COMELEC

G.R. Nos. 122250 & 122258 July 21, 1997

Petitioner - EDGARDO C. NOLASCO vs. Respondents - COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, MUNICIPAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS, MEYCAUAYAN, BULACAN, and EDUARDO A. ALARILLA FACTS: A disqualification case was filed against Meycauayan, Bulacan Mayor-elect Florentino Blanco for alleged performing acts which are grounds for disqualification under the Omnibus Election Code giving money to influence, induce or corrupt the voters or public officials performing election functions: for committing acts of terrorism to enhance his candidacy, and for spending an amount for his campaign in excess of what is allowed by the law. The COMELEC First Division required both parties to submit their position papers. The case was decided against Blanco. A reconsideration was moved by Blanco in the COMELEC En Banc. Nolasco, the vice-mayor-elect took part as intervenor, urging that should Blanco be finally disqualified, the mayoralty position be turned over to him. The parties were allowed to file their memoranda. En Banc denied Blanco and Nolascos motions thus this petit ion for certiorari. Issues: 1. WON Blanco was denied due process and equal protection of laws 2. WON the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in proclaiming Alarilla as the duly elected mayor Held: 1. Blanco was not denied due process and equal protection of the laws. He was given all the opportunity to prove that the evidence on his disqualification was not strong. 2. Nolasco, not Alarilla, is adjudged as the Mayor of Meycauayan 17. JUANITO C. PILAR vs. COMELEC G.R. No. 115245 July 11, 1995

JUANITO C. PILAR, petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, respondent. FACTS: This is a petition for certiorari assailing the Resolution of the COMELEC in UND No. 94-040. Petitioner Pilar filed his COC for the position of member of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of the Province of Isabela. 3 days after, petitioner withdrew his certificate of candidacy.

The COMELEC imposed upon petitioner the fine of P10,000.00 for failure to file his statement of contributions and expenditures pursuant to COMELEC Resolution No. 2348, in turn implementing R.A. No. 7166 which provides that: Statement of Contributions and Expenditures: Effect of Failure to File Statement. Every candidate and treasurer of the political party shall, within thirty (30) days after the day of the election, file in duplicate with the offices of the Commission the full, true and itemized statement of all contributions and expenditures in connection with the election. Petitioner argues that he cannot be held liable for failure to file a statement of contributions and expenditures because he was a "non-candidate," having withdrawn his certificates of candidacy three days after its filing. Petitioner posits that "it is . . . clear from the law that candidate must have entered the political contest, and should have either won or lost" COMELEC denied the motion for reconsideration of petitioner and deemed final its first decision. Petitioner went to the COMELEC En Banc (UND No. 94-040), which denied the petition. Hence, this petition for certiorari. ISSUE: Did Petitioner's withdrawal of his candidacy extinguish his liability for the administrative fine. HELD: The petition is DISMISSED. Section 14 of R.A. No. 7166 states that "every candidate" has the obligation to file his statement of contributions and expenditures. Well-recognized is the rule that where the law does not distinguish, courts should not distinguish. 18. Phil. Press Institute, Inc. vs. Comelec G.R. No. L-119694 May 22, 1995

Petitioner - PHILIPPINE PRESS INSTITUTE, INC., for and in behalf of 139 members, represented by its President, Amado P. Macasaet and its Executive Director Ermin F. Garcia, Jr. vs. Respondent - COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

Facts: In this Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition with prayer for the issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order, PPI, a non-stock, non-profit organization of newspaper and magazine publishers, asks us to declare Comelec Resolution No. 2772 unconstitutional and void on the ground that it violates the prohibition imposed by the Constitution upon the government, and any of its agencies, against the taking of private property for public use without just compensation. On the other hand, The Office of the Solicitor General filed its Comment on behalf of respondent Comelec alleging that Comelec Resolution No. 2772 does not impose upon the publishers any obligation to provide free print space in the newspapers as it does not provide any criminal or administrative sanction for non-compliance with that Resolution. Issue: Whether or not Resolution No. 2772 issued by respondent Commission on Elections is valid. Held:

WHEREFORE, for all the foregoing, the Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition is GRANTED in part and Section 2 of Resolution No. 2772 in its present form and the related letter-directives dated 22 March 1995 are hereby SET ASIDE as null and void, and the Temporary Restraining Order is hereby MADE PERMANENT. The Petition is DISMISSED in part, to the extent it relates to Section 8 of Resolution No. 2772. No pronouncement as to costs. 29. Penera vs. Commission on Elections, et al. G.R. No. 181613 25 November 2009

Petitioner - ROSALINDA A. PENERA vs. Respondents - COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and EDGAR T. ANDANAR Facts: On 11 September 2009, the Supreme Court affirmed the COMELECs decision to disqualify petitioner Rosalinda Penera (Penera) as mayoralty candidate in Sta. Monica, Surigao del Norte, for engaging in election campaign outside the campaign period, in violation of Section 80 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 881 (the Omnibus Election Code). Penera moved for reconsideration, arguing that she was not yet a candidate at the time of the supposed premature campaigning, since under Section 15 of Republic Act No. 8436 (the law authorizing the COMELEC to use an automated election system for the process of voting, counting of votes, and canvassing/consolidating the results of the national and local elections), as amended by Republic Act No. 9369, one is not officially a candidate until the start of the campaign period. Issue: Whether or not Peneras disqualification for engaging in premature campaigning should be reconsidered. Holding: Granting Peneras motion for reconsideration, the Supreme Court En Banc held that Penera did not engage in premature campaigning and should, thus, not be disqualified as a mayoralty candidate. 30. TONY L. BENWAREN vs COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and EDWIN CRISOLOGO G.R. No. 169393 April 7, 2006

Petitioner - TONY L. BENWAREN vs. Respondents - COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and EDWIN CRISOLOGO Facts: Petitioner Tony L. Benwaren and private respondent Edwin Crisologo were candidates for the position of Municipal Mayor of the Municipality of Tineg, Abra in the May 2004 elections. The New MBC proclaimed private respondent Crisologo as the duly elected mayor of Tineg, Abra based on the results of the remaining uncontested election returns.

10

Due to the unfavorable result, Benwaren filed a Petition to Annul Proclamation or to Suspend the Effects Thereof and Petition to Declare Illegal [the] Proceedings of the New Board of Canvassers of Tineg, Abra. Petitioner filed a a petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court. Issues: 1. Whether or not COMELEC gravely abused its discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when it affirmed the ruling of the New MBC that the integrity of the ballot box for Precinct No. 16A, Barangay Lanec, Tineg, Abra, and its contents had been violated. 2. Whether or not COMELEC gravely abused its discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when it illegally proclaimed private respondent Crisologo based on incomplete canvass of votes. 3. Whether or not COMELEC en banc Resolution dated August 31, 2005 was illegally promulgated since former Commissioners Virgilio O. Garcillano and Manuel A. Barcelona, Jr. were no longer members of the COMELEC at the time of promulgation. Ruling: 1. No, there was no abuse of discretion on the part of Comelec. 2. No, there was no abuse of discretion on the part of Comelec. 3. No, there was no abuse of discretion on the part of Comelec. . 31. Trinidad vs Commission on Elections and Sunga G.R. No. 135716 September 23, 1999

Petitioner - FERDINAND TRINIDAD vs. Respondents - COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and MANUEL C. SUNGA This is a petition for certiorari questioning the Resolution of the Commission on Elections disqualifying petitioner as a mayoralty candidate in the May 1995 elections. Likewise, it seeks the review of a subsequent resolution annulling petitioners proclamation as elected mayor in the May 1998 elections. Facts: Petitioner Trinidad won the May 1995 elections. Private respondent Sunga filed a disqualification case against petitioner and asking the COMELEC to proclaim him as the duly elected mayor. COMELEC promulgated it decision on June 22, 1998, disqualifying Trinidad. Petitioner filed a Motion For Reconsideration claiming that he was deprived of due process. Petitioner was again proclaimed winner in the May 1998 elections. On October 13, 1998 COMELEC denied petitioners MR as well as annull ing his proclamation as elected mayor. Thus this petition for certiorari. Issues:

11

1. WON petitioner was deprived of due process in the proceedings before the COMELEC insofar as his disqualification under the May 8, 1995 and May 8, 1998 elections were concerned. 2. WON petitioners proclamation as Mayor under the May 11, 1998 elections may be cancelled on account of the disqualification case filed against him during the May 8, 1995 elections. 3. WON private respondent, as the candidate receiving the second highest number of votes, may be proclaimed as Mayor in the event of petitioners disqualification. HELD 1. NO. Petitioner was able to file an Answer with Counter Petition and Motion to Dismiss. He was also able to submit his counter-affidavit and sworn statements of forty-eight witnesses. 2. NO. Petitioner cannot be disqualified from his reelection term of office. 3. NO. As earlier decided by the Supreme Court, the candidate who obtains the second highest number of votes may not be proclaimed winner in case the winning candidate is disqualified. 32. Tolentino and Mojica vs Commission on Elections, Recto and Honasan G.R. No. 148334 January 21, 2004

Petitioners - ARTURO M. TOLENTINO and ARTURO C. MOJICA vs. Respondents - COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, SENATOR RALPH G. RECTO and SENATOR GREGORIO B. HONASAN This is a petition for prohibition to set aside Resolution No. NBC 01-005 dated 5 June 2001 (Resolution No. 01005) and Resolution No. NBC 01-006 dated 20 July 2001 (Resolution No. 01-006) of respondent Commission on Elections (COMELEC). Resolution No. 01-005 proclaimed the 13 candidates elected as Senators in the 14 May 2001 elections while Resolution No. 01-006 declared official and final the ranking of the 13 Senators proclaimed in Resolution No. 01-005. Facts: The Senate on February 8, 2001 passed Resolution No. 84, calling on COMELEC to fill the vacancy through a special election to be held simultaneously with the regular elections on May 14, 2001. COMELEC proclaimed 13 candidates as the elected Senators, with the first 12 Senators to serve the unexpired term of 6 years and the 13th Senator to serve the full term of 3 years of Senator Teofisto Guingona, Jr. Gregorio Honasan ranked 13th. Issue: WON the Special Election held on May 14, 2001 should be nullified: (1) for failure to give notice by the body empowered to and (2) for not following the procedure of filling up the vacancy pursuant to R.A. 6645. HELD:

12

(1) Where the law does not fix the time and place for holding a special election but empowers some authority to fix the time and place after the happening of a condition precedent, the statutory provision on the giving of notice is considered mandatory, and failure to do so will render the election a nullity. (2) There is no basis in the petitioners claim that the manner by whic h the COMELEC conducted the special Senatorial election on May 14, 2001 is a nullity because the COMELEC failed to document separately the candidates and to canvass separately the votes cast for the special election. 33. Taule vs Santos G.R. No. 90336 August 12, 1991

Petitioner - RUPERTO TAULE vs. Respondents -SECRETARY LUIS T. SANTOS and GOVERNOR LEANDRO VERCELES This is a petition for certiorari seeking the reversal of the resolutions of respondent Secretary dated August 4, 1989 and September 5, 1989 for being null and void. Facts: An election for the officers of the Federation of Associations of Barangay Council (FABC) was held on June 18, 1989 despite the absence of other members of the said council. Including Petitioner was elected as the president. Respondent Verceles sent a letter of protest to respondent Santos, seeking its nullification in view of several flagrant irregularities in the manner it was conducted. Issues: 1. WON the respondent Santos has jurisdiction to entertain an election protest involving the election of the officers of the FABC. 2. WON the respondent Verceles has the legal personality to file an election protest. Held: 1. No. The Secretary of Local Government has no jurisdiction to entertain any protest involving the election of officers of the FABC. 2. Yes. The Governor has the personality to file the protest. Under Section 205 of the Local Government Code, the membership of the sangguniang panlalawigan consists of the governor, the vice-governor, elective members of the said sanggunian, etc. He acted as the presiding officer of the sangguniang G.R. No. 119976 September 18, 1995

34. Romualdez-Marcos vs Commission on Elections

Petitioner - IMELDA ROMUALDEZ-MARCOS vs. Respondents - COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and CIRILO ROY MONTEJO Facts: Petitioner Imelda Romualdez-Marcos filed her Certificate of Candidacy for the position of Representative of the First District of Leyte. Private respondent Cirilo Roy Montejo, a candidate for the same position, filed a petition for cancellation and disqualification with the COMELEC alleging that petitioner did not meet the constitutional

13

requirement for residency. Private respondent contended that petitioner lacked the Constitutions one -year residency requirement for candidates for the House of Representatives. Issue: Whether or not petitioner has satisfied the residency requirement as mandated by Art. VI, Sec. 6 of the Constitution Held: Yes. For election purposes, residence is used synonymously with domicile. The Court upheld the qualification of petitioner, despite her own declaration in her certificate of candidacy that she had resided in the district for only 7 months. 35. Gador vs Commission on Elections G.R. No. L-52365 January 22, 1980

Petitioner - AMADO F. GADOR vs. Respondent - COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, HON. LEONARDO PEREZ This petition for mandamus with a prayer for a writ of preliminary injunction was filed on January 21, 1980 at 4:47pm asking the Supreme Court to immediately order the respondent COMELEC to include the name his name in the list of candidates for Mayor of the City of Ozamiz. Facts: The petition alleges that the petitioner is a candidate for the Office of Mayor of the City of Ozamiz as Independent this coming January 30, 1980 local election. He filed his certificate of candidacy with the Election Registrar of Ozamis City on January 7, 1980 because of the news in the Bulletin Today. The said news stated that the respondent COMELEC issued a resolution for the extension of time for filing COC. However, the President denied said resolution. Therefore, respondent COMELEC informed the petitioner that his name might not be included in the list of candidates for mayor because of the said incident. Thus, this petition. ISSUE: WON the certificate of candidacy of the petitioner which was filed on January 7, 1980 is valid. Held: NO. A certificate of candidacy filed beyond reglementary period is void. 36. Quinto vs Commission on Elections G.R. No. 189698 February 22, 2010

Petitioners - ELEAZAR P. QUINTO and GERINO A. TOLENTINO, JR. vs. Respondent - COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS This is a petition for certiorari and prohibition against the COMELEC for issuing a resolution declaring appointive officials who filed their certificate of candidacy as ipso facto resigned from their positions. Facts:

14

The (COMELEC) issued Resolution No. 8678 the Guidelines on the Filing of (CoC) and Nomination of Official Candidates of Registered Political Parties in Connection with the May 10, 2010 National and Local Elections. Sec. 4 of Resolution No. 8678 provides that Any person holding a public appointive office or position x x x shall be considered ipso facto resigned from his office upon the filing of his certificate of candidacy (automatic resignation) however it exempts those elected officials saying that Any p erson holding an elective office or position shall not be considered resigned upon the filing of his certificate of candidacy for the same or any other elective office or position. Petitioners were appointive officers of the government who were planning to run in the 2010 elections sought the nullification of Sec. 4(a) on the ground, among others, that it is discriminatory and violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution. Issue: WON COMELEC resolution is constitutional. Held: No. Sec. 4(a) of the COMELEC Resolution is null and void for being violative of the equal protection clause and for being overbroad. Sec. 13(par. 3) of R.A. 9369 & Sec. 66 of the Omnibus Election Code were also declared as UNCONSTITUTIONAL. 37. Salcedo II vs Commission on Elections G.R. No. 135886 August 16, 1999

Petitioner - VICTORINO SALCEDO II vs. Respondents - COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and ERMELITA CACAO SALCEDO This is a petition for certiorari seeking to reverse the earlier Resolution issued by its Second Division on August 12, 1998. Facts: Salcedo married Celiz, marriage contract issued by the Municipal Civil Registrar of Ajuy, Iloilo. Without his first marriage having been dissolved, Salcedo married private respondent Cacao in a civil ceremony. Two days later, Ermelita Cacao contracted another marriage with a certain Jesus Aguirre, marriage certificate filed with the Office of the Civil Registrar. Petitioner Victorino Salcedo II and private respondent Cacao Salcedo both ran for the position of mayor of the municipality of Sara, Iloilo in the May 11, 1998 election. Issue: Whether or not the use by respondent of the surname Salcedo in her certificate of candidacy constitutes material misrepresentation under Section 78 in relation to Section 74 of the Omnibus Election Code. Held: Private respondent did not commit any material misrepresentation by the use of the surname Salcedo in her certificate of candidacy.

15

38. Dumpit-Michelena vs Boado

G.R. Nos. 163619-20

November 17, 2005

Petitioner - IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR DISQUALIFICATION OF TESS DUMPIT-MICHELENA, TESS DUMPITMICHELENA vs. Respondents - CARLOS BOADO, FERNANDO CALONGE, SALVADOR CARRERA, BENITO CARRERA, DOMINGO CARRERA, and ROGELIO DE VERA This is a petition assailing COMELEC resolution disqualifying Dumpit in the May 2004 election. Facts: Dumpit-Michelena was a candidate for the position of mayor in the municipality of Agoo, La Union during the May 10, 2004 Synchronized National and Local Elections. Boado sought Dumpit-Michelenas disqualification and the denial or cancellation of her COC on the ground of material misrepresentation under Sections 74 and 78of Batas Pambansa Blg. 881. Issues: WON Dumpit-Michelena satisfied the residency requirement under the Local Government Code of 1991. Held: Dumpit-Michelena failed to prove that she has complied with the residency requirement. The concept of residence in determining a candidates qualification is already a settled matter. For election purposes, residence is used synonymously with domicile. 39. Baaga, Jr. vs Commission on Elections G.R. No. 134696 July 31, 2000

Petitioner - TOMAS T. BANAGA, JR. vs. Respondents - COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and FLORENCIO M. BERNABE, JR. This special civil action for certiorari seeks to annul the en banc resolution of public respondent Commission on Elections promulgated on June 29, 1998, in a COMELEC special action case, SPA No. 98-383. Facts: Petitioner Banaga, Jr. and respondent Bernabe, Jr. were both candidates for vice-mayor of the City of Paraaque in the May 1998 election. In said election, the city board of canvassers proclaimed respondent Bernabe, Jr., as the winner for having garnered 71,977 votes over petitioner Banaga, Jr.s 68,970 votes. Dissatisfied with the result, petitioner filed with the COMELEC on May 1998, a Petition to Declare Failure of Elections and/or For Annulment of Elections, alleging that said election was replete with election offenses, such as vote buying and flying voters. He also alleged that numerous Election Returns pertaining to the position of Vice-Mayor in the City of Paraaque appear to be altered, falsified or fabricated. Issues: WON petition to declare a failure of elections and/or for annulment of election is considered as an election protest.

16

WON respondent COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion in dismissing petitioners petition, in the light of petitioners foregoing contentions. Held: No. Mr. Banaga, Jr.s petition docketed as SPA-98-383 before the COMELEC was a special action under the 1993 COMELEC Rules of Procedure. No. Respondent COMELEC committed no grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the petition to declare failure of elections and/or for annulment of elections for being groundless. 40. Mercado vs Manzano G.R. No. 135083 May 26, 1999

Petitioner - ERNESTO S. MERCADO vs. Respondents - EDUARDO BARRIOS MANZANO and the COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

Facts: Petitioner Ernesto Mercado and Private respondent Eduardo Manzano are candidates for the position of ViceMayor of Makati City in the May, 1998 elections. Private respondent was the winner of the said election but the proclamation was suspended due to the petition of Ernesto Mamaril regarding the citizenship of private respondent. Mamaril alleged that the private respondent is not a citizen of the Philippines but of the United States. COMELEC granted the petition and disqualified the private respondent for being a dual citizen, pursuant to the Local Government code that provides that persons who possess dual citizenship are disqualified from running any public position. Private respondent filed a motion for reconsideration which remained pending until after election. Petitioner sought to intervene in the case for disqualification. COMELEC reversed the decision and declared private respondent qualified to run for the position. Pursuant to the ruling of the COMELEC, the board of canvassers proclaimed private respondent as vice mayor. This petition sought the reversal of the resolution of the COMELEC and to declare the private respondent disqualified to hold the office of the vice mayor of Makati. Issue: Whether or Not private respondent is qualified to hold office as Vice-Mayor. Held: Dual citizenship is different from dual allegiance. Private respondents oath of allegiance to the Philippine, when considered with the fact that he has spent his youth and adulthood, received his education, practiced his profession as an artist, and taken part in past elections in this country, leaves no doubt of his election of Philippine citizenship. 41. RONALD ALLAN POE a.k.a. FERNANDO POE, JR. VS. GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO P.E.T. CASE No. 002. March 29, 2005 Facts: In the 2004 election, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo (GMA) was proclaimed the duly elected President of the Philippines. The second-placer in the elections, Fernando Poe, Jr. (FPJ), filed an election protest before the Electoral Tribunal. When the Protestant died in the course of his medical treatment, his widow, Mrs. Jesusa Sonora Poe a.k.a. Susan Roces filed a motion to intervene as a substitute for deceased protestant FPJ. She claims that there is an urgent need for her to continue and substitute for her late husband to ascertain the true

17

and genuine will of the electorate in the interest of the Filipino people. The Protestee, GMA asserts that the widow of a deceased candidate is not the proper party to replace the deceased protestant since a public office is personal and not a property that passes on to the heirs. Protestee also contends that under the Rules of the Presidential Electoral Tribunal, only the registered candidates who obtained the 2nd and 3rd highest votes for the presidency may contest the election of the president. Issue: May the widow substitute/intervene for the protestant who died during the pendency of the latters protest case? Held: Only the registered candidate for President or for Vice-President of the Philippines who received the second or third highest number of votes may contest the election of the President or the Vice-President, as the case may be, by filing a verified petition with the Clerk of the Presidential Electoral Tribunal within thirty (30) days after the proclamation of the winner. An election protest is not purely personal and exclusive to the protestant or to the protestee, hence, substitution and intervention is allowed but only by a real party in interest. Note that Mrs. FPJ herself denies any claim to the office of President but rather stresses that it is with the paramount public interest in mind that she desires to pursue the process commenced by her late husband. However, nobility of intention is not the point of reference in determining whether a person may intervene in an election protest. In such intervention, the interest which allows a person to intervene in a suit must be in the matter of litigation and of such direct and immediate character that the intervenor will either gain or lose by the effect of the judgment. In this protest, Mrs. FPJ will not immediately and directly benefit from the outcome should it be determined that the declared president did not truly get the highest number of votes. 42. TEODULO M. COQUILLA, PETITIONER, VS. THE HONORABLE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND MR. NEIL ALVAREZ, RESPONDENTS.

G.R. No. 151914

July 31, 2002

Petitioner - TEODULO M. COQUILLA vs. Respondents - THE HON. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and MR. NEIL M. ALVAREZ

FACTS: Petitioner Coquilla was born on February 17, 1938 of Filipino parents in Oras, Eastern Samar. In 1965, he joined the US Navy and was naturalized as a US Citizen. On October 15, 1998, petitioner came back to the Philippines and took a residence certificate and applied for repatriation under R.A. No. 8171 to the special committee on naturalization. His application was approved on November 7, 2000, and on November 10, 2000, he took oath as citizen of the Philippines. On November 21, 2000, petitioner applied for registration as a voter of Oras, Eastern Samar and filed his certificate of candidacy stating therein that he had been a resident thereof for 2 years. ISSUE: Whether or not the petitioner had been a resident of Oras, Eastern Samar at least one (1) year before the elections held on May 14, 2001.

18

RULING: The Supreme Court held that the term residence is to be understood not in its common acceptation as referring to dwelling or habitation, but rather to Domicile or legal residence, that is, the place where a party actually or constructively has his permanent home, where he, no matter where he may be found at any given time, eventually intends to return and remain (animus manendi). Petitioner lost his domicile of origin by becoming a US citizen after enlisting in the US Navy in 1965. From then on and until November 10, 2000, when he reacquired Philippine citizenship, petitioner was an alien without any right to reside in the Philippines. Indeed, residence in the United States is a requirement for naturalization as a US citizen. Wherefore, the petition is without merit and DISMISSED.

43. Fetalino vs. COMELEC

G.R. No. 191890

December 04, 2012

EVALYN I. FETALINO and AMADO M. CALDERON, Petitioners, MANUEL A. BARCELONA, JR., Petitioner-Intervenor, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent. This is a petition for Certiorari, Mandamus and Prohibition with Application for Writ of Preliminary Injunction and/or Temporary Restraining Order, 1 seeking to nullify and enjoin the implementation of Commission on Elections (Co melee) Resolution No. 8808 issued on March 30, 2010 Facts: Republic Act (R.A.) No. 1568, as amended,3 extends a five-year lump sum gratuity to the chairman or any member of the Comelec upon retirement, after completion of the term of office; incapacity; death; and resignation after reaching 60 years of age but before expiration of the term of office. The Comelec en banc determined that former Comelec Commissioners Evalyn I. Fetalino4 and Amado M. Calderon5 (petitioners) whose ad interim appointments were not acted upon by the Commission on Appointments (CA) and, who were subsequently, not reappointed are not entitled to the five-year lump sum gratuity because they did not complete in full the seven year term of office. Petitioner intervenor Manuel A. Barcelona, Jr. later joined the petitioners in questioning the assailed resolution. Rulling: We dismiss the petition and deny Barcelonas petition for intervention. The petitioners are not entitled to the lump sum gratuity under Section 1 of R.A. No. 1568, as amended. 44. Quino vs. COMELEC G.R. No. 197466 November 13, 2012

Petitioners - JOEL P. QUINO, MARY ANTONETTE C. DANGOY, JOSEPHINE T. ABING, JOY ANN P. CABATINGAN, TESSA P. CANG, WILFREDO T. CALO, HOMER C. CANEN, JOSE L. CAGANG, ALBERTO CABATINGAN and FRANCISCO T. OLIVERIO vs. Respondents - COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and RITCHIE R. WAGAS This is a petition for certiorari filed under Rule 65 in conjunction with Section 2, Rule 64 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, seeking to annul the Resolution 1 Facts:

19

Results of the canvassing showed that Quio obtained 11,719 votes as against 9,338 votes garnered by Wagas. Quio, along with the rest of the petitioners who were the winning candidates for members of the Sangguniang Bayan, were proclaimed by the MBOC on May 11, 2010. On May 14, 2010, Wagas filed an Election Protestagainst Quio before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Mandaue City. On May 21, 2010, Wagas also filed a petition for annulment of proclamation in the COMELEC, e claimed that after the proclamation, it was discovered that the Audit/Print Logs of the Consolidating Machine of the MBOC did not reflect at least fourteen (14) clustered precincts, and that despite such absence the Consolidating Machine generated, among others,the Certificate of Canvassand Statement of Votes (SOV). Issue: Whether the discrepancy would materially affect the results of the election Ruling: Where the issue has become moot and academic, there is no justiciable controversy, so that a declaration thereon would be of no practical use or value. There is no actual substantial relief to which petitioner would be entitled and which would be negated by the dismissal of the petition. The present petition for certiorari is dismissed on the ground of mootness.. 45. Gravides vs. COMELEC G.R. No. 199433 November 13, 2012

Petitioner - ISABELITA P. GRAVIDES vs. Respondents - COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and PEDRO C. BORJAL

Facts: Borjal thus asserted that there is a need for revision, re-appreciation of ballots, judicial recount and thorough scrutiny of the election returns and minutes of voting in the protested precincts, the results of which will change the election sufficient to overcome the presumptive lead of the declared winner. Gravides filed her Answer with Compulsory Counterclaim 7 denying the allegations of fraud, vote manipulation, misreading/misappreciation of ballots and other irregularities in the counting and tallying of votes, committed either by her or by the Board of Election Tellers (BET)/BBOC. Issue: Whether public respondent committed a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when it issued its resolution dated August 25, 2011 reversing the decision of branch 33, METC Quezon City Judge Alfredo Ampuan, which was issued in accordance with law. Ruling: Premises considered, the petition for certiorari is DISMISSED. The Resolution dated August 25, 2011 of the COMELEC's First Division and Order dated November 23, 2011 of the COMELEC En Bane (EAC [BRGY-SK] NO. 32-

20

2010), as well as the Entry of Judgment dated November 24, 2011 declaring that the Resolution dated August 25, 2011 had become final and executory as of September 17, 2011, are all AFFIRMED. 46. Dela Cruz vs. COMELEC G.R. No. 192221 November 13, 2012

Petitioner - CASIMIRA S. DELA CRUZ, vs. Respondents - COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and JOHN LLOYD M. PACETE This is a petition for certiorari. Facts: Casimira S. Dela Cruz (petitioner) assails COMELEC Resolution No. 8844 1 considering as stray the votes cast in favor of certain candidates who were either disqualified or whose COCs had been cancelled/denied due course but whose names still appeared in the official ballots or certified lists of candidates for the May 10, 2010 elections. Issue: Resolution No. 8844 violates her constitutional right to equal protection of the laws Ruling: The petition is meritorious. Resolution No. 8844 issued by COMELEC clearly contravened existing law and jurisprudence on the legal effect of declaration of a candidate as a nuisance candidate, especially in the case of nuisance candidates who have the same surnames as those of bona fide candidates. Petitioner Casimira S. Dela Cruz is hereby DECLARED the duly elected Vice-Mayor of the Municipality of Bugasong, Province of Antique in the May 10, 2010 elections. 47. Ceron vs. COMELEC G.R. No. 199084 September 11, 2012

Petitioner - ANTONIA P. CERON vs. Respondents - COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, GRACE P. VALDEZ, EVA T. PAUIG and ARJOLYN T. ANTONIO, in their capacity as MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF ELECTION TELLERS OF CLUSTERED PRECINCTS 0844A and 0844B of BARANGAY 201, PASAY CITY and ROMEO ARCILLA This is a petition for certiorari under Rule 64 of the Rules of Court. Facts: (BBOC) proclaimed Ceron as one of the seven duly elected Barangay Kagawads. Arcilla thereafter filed a petition protesting the election of Ceron with the Metropolitan Trial Court of Pasay City, alleging that there is a discrepancy between the taras and the written words and figures corresponding to the votes obtained by Ceron recorded in the Election Return. Issue:

21

Whether the COMELEC may order the BBOC of Barangay 201, Pasay City to reconvene and make the proper correction in the Election Return of Clustered Precinct Nos. 844A and 844B; Ruling: The petition is unmeritorious. The proclamation of Antonia P. Ceron as the sixth ranked Barangay Kagawads of Barangay 201, Pasay City, respectively, is hereby annulled. 48. Lloren vs. COMELEC G.R. No. 196355 September 18, 2012

Petitioner - BIENVENIDO WILLIAM D. LLOREN vs. Respondents - THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and ROGELIO PUA, JR. Facts: Petitioner and respondent Rogelio Pua, Jr. (Pua) were the candidates for Vice-Mayor of the Municipality of Inopacan, Leyte in the May 10, 2010 Automated National and Local Elections. Pua was proclaimed as the winning candidate. Alleging massive vote-buying, intimidation, defective PCOS machines in all the clustered precincts, election fraud, and other election-related manipulations, petitioner commenced Election Protest Case (EPC) No. H-026 in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) in Hilongos, Leyte. Issue: The issue of whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction . Ruling: The petition is meritorious as to the procedural question, but not as to the substantive question. 49. Jalosjos vs. COMELEC G.R. No. 192474 June 26, 2012

ROMEO M. JALOSJOS, JR., Petitioner, vs. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and DAN ERASMO, SR., Respondents. Facts: In May 2007 Romeo M. Jalosjos, Jr., petitioner in G.R. 192474, ran for Mayor of Tampilisan, Zamboanga del Norte, and won. While serving as Tampilisan Mayor, he bought a residential house and lot in Barangay Veterans Village, Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay and renovated and furnished the same. In September 2008 he began occupying the house. After eight months or on May 6, 2009 Jalosjos applied with the Election Registration Board (ERB) of Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay, for the transfer of his voters registration record to Precinct 0051F of Barangay Veterans Village. Dan Erasmo, Sr., respondent in G.R. 192474, opposed the application. 1 After due proceedings, the ERB approved Jalosjos application and denied Erasmos opposition.2 Undeterred, Erasmo filed a petition to exclude Jalosjos from the list of registered voters.

22

Issue: The threshold issue presented is whether or not the Supreme Court has jurisdiction at this time to pass upon the question of Jalosjos residency qualification for running for the position of Representative of the Second Di strict of Zamboanga Sibugay considering that he has been proclaimed winner in the election and has assumed the discharge of that office. Ruling: the Court holds in G.R. 192474 that the COMELEC En Banc exceeded its jurisdiction in declaring Jalosjos ineligible for the position of representative for the Second District of Zamboanga Sibugay, which he won in the elections, since it had ceased to have jurisdiction over his case. 50. Jalosjos vs. COMELEC G.R. No. 191970 April 24, 2012

ROMMEL APOLINARIO JALOSJOS, Petitioner, vs. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and DAN ERASMO, SR., Facts: Petitioner Rommel Jalosjos was born in Quezon City on October 26, 1973. He migrated to Australia in 1981 when he was eight years old and there acquired Australian citizenship. On November 22, 2008, at age 35, he decided to return to the Philippines and lived with his brother, Romeo, Jr., in Barangay Veterans Village, Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay. Four days upon his return, he took an oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines, resulting in his being issued a Certificate of Reacquisition of Philippine Citizenship by the Bureau of Immigration and renounced his Australian citizenship, executing a sworn renunciation of the samein compliance with Republic Act (R.A.) 9225. Jalosjos acquired a residential property in the same village where he lived and a fishpond in San Isidro, Naga, Zamboanga Sibugay. He applied for registration as a voter in the Municipality of Ipil but respondent Dan Erasmo, Sr., the Barangay Captain of Barangay Veterans Village, opposed the same. Acting on the application, the Election Registration Board approved it and included Jalosjos name in the Commission on Elections (COMELECs) voters list for Precinct 0051F of Barangay Veterans Village , Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay. Undaunted, Erasmo filed before the 1st Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC) of Ipil-Tungawan-R.T. Lim in Ipil a petition for the exclusion of Jalosjos name from the official voters list. Issue: Whether or not the COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in ruling that Jalosjos failed to present ample proof of a bona fide intention to establish his domicile in Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay. Ruling: It is inevitable under these guidelines and the precedents applying them that Jalosjos has met the residency requirement for provincial governor of Zamboanga Sibugay.

23

S-ar putea să vă placă și