Você está na página 1de 9

MOYA VS DEL FIERRO 69 PHIL 199 (1939) May 14, 2001 elections.

He also claims that the


Resolutions are not yet final and executory because
In this petition for review by certiorari of the they are the subjects of certiorari proceedings before
judgment of the CA declaring del Fierro as the this Court. Hence, all his votes shall be counted and
candidate-elect mayor of Paracale, Camarines Norte none shall be considered stray.
with a majority vote over Moya. He contended that
the CA committed errors in admitting and counting in The SC dismissed the petition stating that being the
favor of del Fierro several ballots. second placer does n not automatically make him the
duly elected representative as it would violate the
The SC dismissed the petition because in result even will of the electorate. The case also becomes moot
if the ballots contested are counted in favor of Moya, and academic since the 12th congress already
del Fierro still wins by one vote. adjourned and a new representative was duly
elected.
The SC avers that in republicanism, the citizens have
the voice in the government and whenever called VILLAVICENCIO VS LUKBAN 39 PHIL778 (1919)
upon to act in justifiable cases to give it efficacy and
not to stifle. This is the fundamental reason for the In this petition for habeas corpus, the mayor of
rule that ballots should be read and appreciated if Manila along with other respondents was ordered to
not with utmost, with reasonable liberality. bring to court the 170 female inmates whom they
forcibly sent to Davao as workers.
OCAMPO VS HRET, JUNE 15, 2004
The mayor was found in contempt for his failure to
This is a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the comply with the court’s order.
1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, filed by
petitioner Pablo V. Ocampo. He alleged that the It is noted in this case that even inmates have rights
House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET), which are to protected by the state.
herein public respondent, committed grave abuse of
discretion in issuing in HRET Case No. 01-024, Pablo MAQUERRA VS BORRA 15 SCRA 7 (1965)
Ocampo vs. Mario "Mark Jimenez" Crespo, the (a)
Resolution2 dated March 27, 2003 holding that In this petition, Maquera seek that the RA 4421
"protestant" (herein petitioner) cannot be proclaimed requiring all candidates for national, provincial city
the duly elected Representative of the 6th District of and municipal offices to post a surety bond
Manila since being a second placer, he "cannot be equivalent to salary or emoluments to which he is a
proclaimed the first among the remaining qualified candidate.
candidates"; and (b) Resolution3 dated June 2, 2003
The Court granted the petition as it is inconsistent
denying his motion for reconsideration.
with the nature and essence of the Republican
In the 2001 election, Jimenez won by 768 votes system ordained in our Constitution and the principle
against Ocampo but was disqualified after almost 22 of social justice underlying the same for said political
months. Ocampo the candidate who garnered the system is premised upon the tent that sovereignty
second most number of votes seeks to be declared resides in the people and all government authority
as the winner in the election. emanates from them and this in turn implies
necessarily that the right to vote and to be voted for
Petitioner contends that the HRET committed grave shall not be dependent upon the wealth of the
abuse of discretion when it ruled that "it is individual concerned, whereas social justice
unnecessary to rule on the recount and presupposes equal opportunity for all, rich and poor
revision of ballots in the protested and alike and that accordingly no person shall by reason
counter-protested precincts." He maintains that it of poverty, be denied the chance to be elected to
is the ministerial duty of the HRET to implement the public office.
provisions of Section 6, R.A. No. 6646 specifically
providing that "any candidate who has been LACSON VS POSADAS 72 SCRA 168 (1976)
declared by final judgment to be disqualified
Respondent Municipal Judge Ramon Posadas, of
shall not be voted for, and the votes cast for
Talisay Negros Occidental, is charged in a verified
him shall not be counted."
complaint by Salvador Lacson, Jr. with (a) ignorance
In his comment, private respondent counters that of the law, (b) partiality, and (c) violation of the
what the law requires is that the Election Code of 1971 which provides that:
disqualification by final judgment takes place
Any person who has been refused registration or
before the election. Here, the HRET Resolutions
whose name has been stricken out from the
disqualifying him as Representative of the 6th
permanent list of voters may at any time except
District of Manila were rendered long after the
sixty (60) days before a regular election or twenty-

1
five (25) days before a special election, apply to the our holding last month in Usman v. Comelec. 4 The
proper court for an order directing the election other principal question raised is whether the
registration board or the board of inspectors as the recognition of such prerogative on the part of
case may be, to include or reinstate his name in the respondent Commission would contravene the
permanent list of voters, attaching to his application constitutional provision that it cannot pass on the
for inclusion the certificate of the Electron right to vote. The appropriate answer as will be made
registration board or the board of inspectors clear is likewise adverse to petitioner. Hence,
regarding his case and proof of service of a copy of respondent Commission must be sustained.
his application and of the notice of hearing thereof
upon a member of the said board (Emphasis WHEREFORE, the petition is dismissed and the
supplied.) resolution of the Commission on Elections dated May
14, 1971 is affirmed.
In the light of the statutory purpose, the seriousness
of respondent's failure to comply with the ROMUALDEZ VS RTC 226 SCRA 406 (1993)
requirements of Section 136 of the electoral law
becomes evident. His good faith or lack of malice is The petition of Romualdez is granted and reversed
of no avail, considering that in crimes which are mala the decision of the CA cancelling his name from the
prohibita the act alone irrespective of its motives, list of qualified voters of Malbog, Tolosa, Leyte.
constitutes the offense. It appears, however, that on
In election cases, the Court treats domicile and
April 8, 1974, the President of the Philippines
residence as synonymous terms, thus: "(t)he term
promulgated Presidential Decree No. 433, which
"residence" as used in the election law is
grants general amnesty under certain conditions to
synonymous with "domicile", which imports not only
public school teachers, other government officials
an intention to reside in a fixed place but also
and employees, members of the armed forces of the
personal presence in that place, coupled with
Philippines and other persons for violation of election
conduct indicative of such intention." 19 "Domicile"
laws and other related statutes in connection with
denotes a fixed permanent residence to which when
the elections of 1965, 1967, 1969, 1971, and the
absent for business or pleasure, or for like reasons,
election of delegates to the Constitutional
one intends to return.
Convention.
LIDASAN VS COMELEC 21 SCRA 497 (1967)
WHEREFORE, respondent is hereby admonished that
he should exercise greater care in the observance of In this petition, Lidasan seek to nullify RA 4790
the provisions of existing laws in the discharge of his creating the municipality of the Dianaton, Lanao del
judicial duty, and warned that any subsequent Sur. The official were elected in 1967. However 12
misconduct shall be dealt with more severely. barrios were in Cotabato and no in Lanao del Sur.
Comelec adopted a resolution that Dianaton shall be
PUNGUTAN VS ABUBAKAR 43 SCRA 1 (1972)
composed of the areas enumerated in RA 4790. The
The resolution of respondent Comelec 1 now assailed office of the president recommended to the Comelec
in this petition for review, was undoubtedly that the statute be suspended pending correcting
motivated by the objective of insuring free, orderly legislation. Comelec issued another resolution that
and honest elections in the discharge of its only a declaration of its unconstitutionality could stop
constitutional function to enforce and administer the implementation of the law. Lidasan argued that it
electoral laws. 2 It excluded from the canvass for the is unconstitutional for violating the one bill on subject
election of delegates for the lone district of the rule.
province of Sulu the returns from 107 precincts of
The SC upheld the contentions of Lidasan, as no bill
Siasi, 56 precincts of Tapul, 67 precincts of Parang
may be enacted into law should include more than
and 60 precincts of Luuk for being spurious or
one subject. Congress must refrain from
manufactured and therefore no returns at all. Unless
conglomeration of different subjects. The title of the
set aside then, petitioner Abdulgafar Pungutan, who
bill must be couched in such a language sufficient to
otherwise would have been entitled to the last
notify the public of the import of the single subject. A
remaining seat for delegates to the Constitutional
change in the boundaries fo 2 provinces may be
Convention, there being no question as to the
made without necessarily creating a new
election of the other two delegates, 3 would lose out
municipality.
to respondent Benjamin Abubakar. Petitioner would
thus dispute the power of respondent Commission to The principle that only the unconstitutional portion of
exclude such returns as a result of oral testimony as a statute should be invalidated and the constitutional
well as the examination of the fingerprints and part must remain does not apply here. The
signatures of those who allegedly voted as the basis explanatory note of the bill which this statute
for the holding that no election in fact did take place. originated expressed that the envisioned
This contention is, however, unavailing, in the light of

2
municipality would be self-sufficient. This of course misconduct and of such characters.
includes the 21 barangays and not the 9 barangays
that would be left if the valid portion would be If there be a failure to observe the mandates of the
allowed to continue. Factors affecting the Election Code, the aggrieved parties should no be left
independence of a municipality include population, remediless. Under the law as it stands, it is precisely
territory and income. an election protest that fitly serves that purpose.

TAULE VS SANTOS 200 SCRA 512 (1991) GALLARDO VS TABAMO 218 SCRA 253 (1993)

In this petition for certiorari, Taule seeks the reversal In this petition for certiorari and prohibition under
of the resolution of Santos nullifying the election of Rule 65 of the Revised Rules of Court, Gallardo and
the officers of the FABC in Catanduanes which was others seek to prohibit, restrain and enjoin public
held even with the absence of 5 of its members. respondent Tabamo, Presiding Judge of RTC-Mabajao,
Camiguin from continuing with the proceedings in a
He contended that Santos as the Secretary of Local petition for injunction, prohibition and mandamus
Government has no jurisdiction over the said election with a prayer for a writ of preliminary injunction and
thus committed grave abuse of authority and the restraining order filed as a taxpayer’s suit. In the said
respondent governor has no legal personality to file case herein private respondent seek to prohibit and
an election protest. restrain herein petitioners from pursuing with certain
public works projects as it violates the 45-day ban
The SC held that the issues raised were without merit imposed by the OEC although it started prior the ban
since the Secretary has the rule making power under they do not fully comply with the requirements.
the Administrative Code and the Governor has the
legal capacity since the elected president of FABC They contended that the case principally involves an
becomes a member of the assembly. alleged violation of the OEC thus the jurisdiction is
exclusively vested in the Comelec.
However, the appointment made by the Secretary
was not in accordance with the law since the The petition was granted based on the principal issue
appointee did not meet the minimum qualification to and that is the jurisdiction of the Comelec over the
be the president of the FABC. He acted in excess of matters being raised by herein private respondent
his jurisdiction as it is more than what the which are primarily the alleged violation of the
Constitution grants him. The SC granted the provisions of the OEC.
supplemental petition and ordered for the conduction
of a new election in accordance with the rules and MONTEJO VS COMELEC 242 SCRA 415
regulations.

BADELLES VS CABILI 27 SCRA 113 (February


27, 1969) LIDASAN V COMELEC

This is an appeal of the order of the lower court FACTS: 18 June 1966: President signed HB 1247 into
dismissing the election protest filed against the duly law—RA 4790. It created the Municipality of
proclaimed mayor of Iligan City, Camilo P. Cabili. The Dianaton, Province of Lanao del Sur. The officials
appellant seeks the reversal of the order dated were elected in 1967. However, 12 barrios were in
March 23, 1968 dismissing his election protest for his Cotabato and not in Lanao del Sur. COMELEC
failure to allege a cause of action to justify and to try adopted a resolution that Dianaton shall be
the same. composed of the areas enumerated in RA 4790. The
Office of the President recommended to the
The lower court concluded that mere irregularities or COMELEC that the statute be suspended pending
misconduct on the part of election officers which do correcting legislation. COMELEC issued another
not tend to affect the result of the elections are not resolution that only an declaration of
grounds for contest or for proper matters of inquiry. unconstitutionality could it stop implementing the
According to the lower court, there was no allegation law. Lidasan argued that it is unconstitutional for
in the petition that those who failed to vote are for violating the one bill one subject rule.
herein petitioner Badelles and those illegal voters are
for the responded Cabili. ISSUE: WON RA 4790 is unconstitutional for violating
the one-bill one-subject rule. YES.
SC reversed the said order and remanded the two
cases to the lower court for proceeding and trial in RATIO:
accordance with the opinion and the law. Its
No bill may be enacted into law should include more
dismissal according to them would amount to judicial
than one subject. Congress must refrain from
abnegations of a sworn duty to inquire into and pass
conglomeration of different subjects. The title of a bill
upon in a appropriate proceeding, allegations of

3
must be couched in such a language sufficient to P.E.T. CASE No. 002. March 29, 2005
notify the public of the import of the single subject. A RONALD ALLAN POE a.k.a. FERNANDO POE, JR.
change in the boundaries of 2 provinces may be VS. GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO
made without necessarily creating a new
municipality. Facts: In the 2004 election, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo
(GMA) was proclaimed the duly elected President of
The principle that only the unconstitutional portion of the Philippines. The second-placer in the elections,
a statute should be invalidated and the constitutional Fernando Poe, Jr. (FPJ), filed an election protest
part must remain does not apply here. The before the Electoral Tribunal. When the Protestant
explanatory note of the bill from which this statute died in the course of his medical treatment, his
originated expressed that the envisioned widow, Mrs. Jesusa Sonora Poe a.k.a. Susan Roces
municipality would be self-sufficient. This of course filed a motion to intervene as a substitute for
includes the 21 barangays, and not the 9 barangays deceased protestant FPJ. She claims that there is an
that would be left if the valid portion would be urgent need for her to continue and substitute for her
allowed to continue. Factors affecting the late husband to ascertain the true and genuine will of
independence of a municipality include population, the electorate in the interest of the Filipino people.
territory, and income. The Protestee, GMA asserts that the widow of a
deceased candidate is not the proper party to
JAVIER vs. COMELEC ( 144 SCRA 194 ) replace the deceased protestant since a public office
is personal and not a property that passes on to the
Facts: The petitioner and the private respondent heirs. Protestee also contends that under the Rules
were candidates in Antique for the Batasang of the Presidential Electoral Tribunal, only the
Pambansa in the May 1984 elections. The former registered candidates who obtained the 2nd and 3rd
appeared to enjoy more popular support but the highest votes for the presidency may contest the
latter had the advantage of being the nominee of the election of the president.
KBL with all its perquisites of power. On the eve of
the elections, the bitter contest between the two Issue: May the widow substitute/intervene for the
came to a head when several followers of the protestant who died during the pendency of the
petitioner were ambushed and killed, allegedly by latter’s protest case?
the latter’s men. Seven suspects, including
respondent Pacificador, are now facing trial for these Held: Only the registered candidate for President or
murders. Conceivably, it intimidated voters against for Vice-President of the Philippines who received the
supporting the Opposition candidate or into second or third highest number of votes may contest
supporting the candidate of the ruling party. It was the election of the President or the Vice-President, as
in this atmosphere that the voting was held, and the the case may be, by filing a verified petition with the
post-election developments were to run true to Clerk of the Presidential Electoral Tribunal within
form. Owing to what he claimed were attempts to thirty (30) days after the proclamation of the winner.
railroad the private respondent’s proclamation, the An election protest is not purely personal and
petitioner went to the Comelec to question the exclusive to the protestant or to the protestee,
canvass of the election returns. His complaints were hence, substitution and intervention is allowed but
dismissed and the private respondent was only by a real party in interest. Note that Mrs. FPJ
proclaime;;;;;d winner by the Second Division of the herself denies any claim to the office of President but
said body. The petitioner thereupon came to this rather stresses that it is with the “paramount public
Court, arguing that the proclamation was void interest” in mind that she desires “to pursue the
because made only by a division and not by the process” commenced by her late husband. However,
Comelec en banc as required by the Constitution. nobility of intention is not the point of reference in
determining whether a person may intervene in an
Issue: Whether or not the Second Division of the election protest. In such intervention, the interest
Comelec authorized to promulgate its decision of July which allows a person to intervene in a suit must be
23, 1984, proclaiming the private respondent the in the matter of litigation and of such direct and
winner in the election. immediate character that the intervenor will either
gain or lose by the effect of the judgment. In this
Held: Article XII-C, Section 3, of the 1973 protest, Mrs. FPJ will not immediately and directly
Constitution provides that: benefit from the outcome should it be determined
that the declared president did not truly get the
“The COMELEC may sit en banc or in three divisions.
highest number of votes.
All election cases may be heard and decided by
divisions except contests involving members of the Tan v COMELEC
Batasang Pambansa, which shall be heard and
decided en banc.” FACTS: BP 885 was passed or “An Act Creating the
Province of Negros del Norte.” The petitioners in this

4
case wanted to stop COMELEC from conducting a vs.
plebiscite. The petitioners were residents of Negros
Occidental. The BP provided that the plebiscite was COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS (sitting as the National
to be conducted 120 days from the approval of the Board of Canvassers), Respondent.
Act and that the President was to appoint the first
officials. By: Tere Arana

The petitioners argued that the law was


unconstitutional and contrary to statute. The
Constitution states that no province, city,
The Case
municipality, or barrio may be created, divided,
merged, abolished, or its boundaries substantially
altered, except in accordance with the criteria
established in the Local Government Code, subject to
approval by a majority of votes cast in a plebiscite. Petitioner in G.R. No. 179271 — Barangay
The LGC set as a standard that a province must have Association for National Advancement and
at least 3,500 square kilometers as its territory. The Transparency (BANAT) — in a petition for certiorari
Solicitor General argued that BP 885 enjoys a and mandamus, assails the Resolution promulgated
on 3 August 2007 by the Commission on Elections
presumption of legality and that the question is moot
(COMELEC) in NBC No. 07-041 (PL). The COMELEC’s
since the province of Negros del Norte had already
resolution in NBC No. 07-041 (PL) approved the
been proclaimed.
recommendation of Atty. Alioden D. Dalaig, Head of
the National Board of Canvassers (NBC) Legal Group,
ISSUE: WON Negros del Norte was validly created.
to deny the petition of BANAT for being moot.
NO.
BANAT filed before the COMELEC En Banc, acting as
RATIO: Two political units would be affected in case NBC, a Petition to Proclaim the Full Number of Party-
List Representatives Provided by the Constitution
of a division of a province—the parent and the
proposed province. The Constitution commands that
“affected units” be considered in a plebiscite. The Petitioners in G.R. No. 179295 — Bayan Muna,
Court noted that the case of Paredes v Executive Abono, and Advocacy for Teacher Empowerment
Through Action, Cooperation and Harmony Towards
Secretary, which involved the creation of a new
Educational Reforms (A Teacher) — in a petition for
municipality where the parent unit was not involved,
certiorari with mandamus and prohibition, assails
could not be considered as a precedent. That case
NBC Resolution No. 07-60 promulgated on 9 July
involved a barangay while this case involves a 2007. NBC No. 07-60 made a partial proclamation of
province. Almost half of the sugar plantations would parties, organizations and coalitions that obtained at
be dismembered form the parent province and some least two percent of the total votes cast under the
of its most important cities. Party-List System. The COMELEC announced that,
upon completion of the canvass of the party-list
The SC also considered the new province as lacking results, it would determine the total number of seats
in the territory requirement since the land mass of of each winning party, organization, or coalition in
the new territory was only 2,856 square kilometers. accordance with Veterans Federation Party v.
The Court rejected the suggestion of the Solicitor COMELEC (Veterans).
General that even the area of the EEZ should be
considered in determining the territorial requirement.

Facts:

On 27 June 2002, BANAT filed a Petition to


Proclaim the Full Number of Party-List
Representatives Provided by the Constitution,
docketed as NBC No. 07-041 (PL) before the NBC.
BANAT filed its petition because “the Chairman and
the Members of the COMELEC have recently been
quoted in the national papers that the COMELEC is
G.R. No. 179271 duty bound to and shall implement the Veterans
ruling, that is, would apply the Panganiban formula in
BARANGAY ASSOCIATION FOR NATIONAL allocating party-list seats.” There were no
ADVANCEMENT AND TRANSPARENCY (BANAT), intervenors in BANAT’s petition before the NBC.
Petitioner, BANAT filed a memorandum on 19 July 2007.

5
On 9 July 2007, the COMELEC, sitting as the
NBC, promulgated NBC Resolution No. 07-60. NBC
Resolution No. 07-60 proclaimed 13 parties as 1. No. Section 5(1), Article VI of the Constitution
winners in the party-list elections. Pursuant to NBC states that the “House of Representatives
Resolution No. 07-60, the COMELEC, acting as NBC, shall be composed of not more than two
promulgated NBC Resolution No. 07-72, which hundred and fifty members, unless otherwise
declared the additional seats allocated to the fixed by law.” The House of Representatives
appropriate parties. Thereafter, acting on BANAT’s shall be composed of district representatives
petition, the NBC promulgated NBC Resolution No. and party-list representatives. The
07-88 declaring BANAT’s petition as moot and Constitution allows the legislature to modify
academic. Hence, this petition by BANAT. the number of the members of the House of
Meanwhile, on 9 July 2007, Bayan Muna, Abono, and Representatives.
A Teacher asked the COMELEC, acting as NBC, to
reconsider its decision to use the Veterans formula Section 5(2), Article VI of the Constitution, on
as stated in its NBC Resolution No. 07-60 because the other hand, states the ratio of party-list
the Veterans formula is violative of the Constitution representatives to the total number of
and of Republic Act No. 7941 (R.A. No. 7941). On the representatives. We compute the number of seats
same day, the COMELEC denied reconsideration available to party-list representatives from the
during the proceedings of the NBC. number of legislative districts. On this point, we do
not deviate from the first formula in Veterans, thus:

Issues:
Number of seats Number of seats
available to available to
legislative x .
1. WON the twenty percent allocation for party-list districts 20 = party-list
representatives in Section 5(2), Article VI of the
representatives
Constitution mandatory or merely a ceiling.
.80
2. WON the two percent threshold prescribed in
Section 11(b) of RA 7941constitutional.

3. How shall the party-list representative seats be


allocated?
This formula allows for the corresponding increase in
4. WON the Constitution prohibit the major political the number of seats available for party-list
parties from participating in the party-list elections? representatives whenever a legislative district is
If not, can the major political parties be barred from created by law. Since the 14th Congress of the
participating in the party-list elections. Philippines has 220 district representatives, there are
55 seats available to party-list representatives.

Held/ Ratio
220 x .20 55
WHEREFORE, we PARTIALLY GRANT the =
petition. We SET ASIDE the Resolution of the
COMELEC dated 3 August 2007 in NBC No. 07-041 .80
(PL) as well as the Resolution dated 9 July 2007 in
NBC No. 07-60. We declare unconstitutional the
two percent threshold in the distribution of additional
party-list seats. The allocation of additional seats
After prescribing the ratio of the number of
under the Party-List System shall be in accordance
party-list representatives to the total number of
with the procedure used in Table 3 of this Decision.
representatives, the Constitution left the manner
Major political parties are disallowed from
of allocating the seats available to party-list
participating in party-list elections. This Decision is
representatives to the wisdom of the
immediately executory. No pronouncement as to
legislature.
costs.

6
In computing the additional seats, the
guaranteed seats shall no longer be included
2. Yes, but only insofar as allocation of additional because they have already been allocated, at one
seats is concerned. The two percent threshold makes seat each, to every two-percenter. Thus, the
it mathematically impossible to achieve the remaining available seats for allocation as “additional
maximum number of available party list seats when seats” are the maximum seats reserved under the
the number of available party list seats exceeds 50. Party List System less the guaranteed seats.
The continued operation of the two percent threshold Fractional seats are disregarded in the absence of a
in the distribution of the additional seats frustrates provision in R.A. No. 7941 allowing for a rounding off
the attainment of the permissive ceiling that 20% of of fractional seats.
the members of the House of Representatives shall
consist of party-list representatives.

To illustrate: There are 55 available party-list 4. No. Neither the Constitution nor R.A. No. 7941
seats. Suppose there are 50 million votes cast for prohibits major political parties from participating in
the 100 participants in the party list elections. A the party-list system. On the contrary, the framers
party that has two percent of the votes cast, or one of the Constitution clearly intended the major
million votes, gets a guaranteed seat. Let us further political parties to participate in party-list elections
assume that the first 50 parties all get one million through their sectoral wings. In fact, the members of
votes. Only 50 parties get a seat despite the the Constitutional Commission voted down, 19-22,
availability of 55 seats. Because of the operation of any permanent sectoral seats and in the alternative
the two percent threshold, this situation will repeat the reservation of the party-list system to the
itself even if we increase the available party-list sectoral groups. In defining a “party” that
seats to 60 seats and even if we increase the votes participates in party-list elections as either “a
cast to 100 million. Thus, even if the maximum political party or a sectoral party,” R.A. No. 7941 also
number of parties get two percent of the votes for clearly intended that major political parties will
every party, it is always impossible for the number of participate in the party-list elections. Excluding the
occupied party-list seats to exceed 50 seats as long major political parties in party-list elections is
as the two percent threshold is present. The two manifestly against the Constitution, the intent of the
percent threshold presents an unwarranted obstacle Constitutional Commission, and R.A. No. 7941. This
to the full implementation of Section 5(2), Article VI Court cannot engage in socio-political engineering
of the Constitution and prevents the attainment of and judicially legislate the exclusion of major political
“the broadest possible representation of party, parties from the party-list elections in patent
sectoral or group interests in the House of violation of the Constitution and the law.
Representatives.”
Read together, R.A. No. 7941 and the
deliberations of the Constitutional Commission state
that major political parties are allowed to establish,
3. In determining the allocation of seats for party-list or form coalitions with, sectoral organizations for
representatives under Section 11 of R.A. No. 7941, electoral or political purposes. There should not be a
the following procedure shall be observed: problem if, for example, the Liberal Party participates
in the party-list election through the Kabataang
Liberal ng Pilipinas (KALIPI), its sectoral youth wing.
The other major political parties can thus organize, or
affiliate with, their chosen sector or sectors. To
a. The parties, organizations, and coalitions shall further illustrate, the Nacionalista Party can establish
be ranked from the highest to the lowest a fisherfolk wing to participate in the party-list
based on the number of votes they garnered election, and this fisherfolk wing can field its
during the elections; fisherfolk nominees. Kabalikat ng Malayang Pilipino
b. The parties, organizations, and coalitions (KAMPI) can do the same for the urban poor.
receiving at least two percent (2%) of the
total votes cast for the party-list system shall
be entitled to one guaranteed seat each; Fermin vs. Comelec
c. Those garnering sufficient number of votes,
according to the ranking in paragraph 1, shall
be entitled to additional seats in proportion to
their total number of votes until all the Facts:
additional seats are allocated;
d. Each party, organization, or coalition shall be
entitled to not more than three (3) seats.
After the creation of Shariff kabunsuan, the ARMM
Regional passed Autonomy Act No. 205 creating the

7
Municipality of Northern Kabuntalan in Shariff 3.Wheather or not the COMELEC ravely abuse its
kabunsuan. This new municipality constituted by discretion when it declared petitioner as not a
separating 11 Barangays including Brgy. Indatuan resident of the locality for at least one year prior to
from the Municipality of Kabuntalan. the May 14, 2007 elections; and

Mike Fermin was a registered voter of Barangay


Payan, Kabuntulan. On December 30,2006, formally
making Barangay Indatuan a component of Northern
Kabuntalan.
Held:
Thereafter, on January 8, 2007, the COMELEC
approved Fermin's application for the transfer of his 1. The nature of a petition to deny due course to or
voting record and registration as a voter to Precint cancel a CoC under Section 78 of the OEC. The
21A of Barangay Indatuan, Morthern Kabuntalan in petition contains the essential allegations of a
the May 14,2007 elections. “Section 78” petition, namely:

However, Umbra Ramil Bayam Dilangalen, another (1) The candidate made a representation in his
mayoralty candidate , filed a Petition for certificate; (2) the representation
Disqualification against Fermin before the COMELEC.
The petition alleged that Fermin did not possess the
period of residency required for candidacy and that pertains to a material matter which would affect the
he perjured himself in his COC and his application for substantive rights of the candidate (the right to run
transfer of voting record. for the election for which he filed his certificate); and
(3) the candidate made the false representation with
the intention to deceive the electorate as to his
Elections were held pending the petition. Dilangalen qualification for public office or deliberately
was proclaimed winner while Fermin as second.The attempted to mislead, misinform, or hide a fact
latter filed an election protest with RTC of Cotabato which would otherwise render him ineligible. It
City. Meanwhile, the COMELEC ruled against Fermin likewise appropriately raises a question on a
and held that he is a resident of Barangay Payan as candidate’s eligibility for public office, in this case,
of April 27, 2006 in his oath of office before Datu his possession of the one-year residency requirement
Andal Ampatuan , Fermin could not have been a under the law.
resident of Barangay Indatuan for at least one year.
COMELEC en banc affirmed. Hence , the petition
before the Supreme Court. The denial of due course to or the cancellation of the
CoC is not based on the lack of qualifications but on
a finding that the candidate made a material
During the pedency of the above petition with the representation that is false, which may relate to the
SC, Dilangalen filed a motion to dismiss in the protest qualifications required of the public office he/she is
case on the ground that Fermin had no legal running for. It is noted that the candidate states in
standing to file the said protest, the COMELEC En his/her CoC that he/she is eligible for the office
Banc having already affirmed his disqualification as a he/she seeks. Section 78 of the OEC, therefore, is to
candidate and that no TRO was issued by the SC. be read in relation to the constitutional and statutory
MTD denied. MR also denied. Dilangalen brought the provisions on qualifications or eligibility for public
case to SC. The two petitions were consolidated. office. If the candidate subsequently states a
material representation in the CoC that is false, the
COMELEC, following the law, is empowered to deny
due course to or cancel such certificate. Indeed, the
ISSUES: Court has already likened a proceeding under
Section 78 to a quo warranto proceeding under
Section 253 of the OEC since they both deal with the
eligibility or qualification of a candidate, with the
1. Wheather or not the Dilangalen petition is one distinction mainly in the fact that a “Section 78”
under Section 68 or Section 78 of the OEC; petition is filed before proclamation, while a petition
for quo warranto is filed after proclamation of the
wining candidate.

2.Wheather or not it was filed on time;


2. Since the Dilangalen petition is one under Section
78 of the OEC, the Court now declares that the same
has to comply with the 25-day statutory period for its
filing.

8
Aznar v. Commission on Elections and Loong v.
Commission on Elections give ascendancy to the
express mandate of the law that “the petition may
be filed at any time not later than twenty-five days
from the time of the filing of the certificate of
candidacy.” Construed in relation to reglementary
periods and the principles of prescription, the
dismissal of “Section 78” petitions filed beyond the
25-day period must come as a matter of course.

3. COMELEC to have gravely abused its discretion


when it precipitately declared that:

Fermin was not a resident of Northern Kabuntalan for


at least one year prior to the said elections. The
COMELEC relied on a single piece of evidence to
support its finding that petitioner was not a resident
of Barangay Indatuan, Northern Kabuntalan, i.e., the
oath of office subscribed and sworn to before
Governor Datu Andal Ampatuan, in which petitioner
indicated that he was a resident of Barangay Payan,
Kabuntalan as of

April 27, 2006. However, this single piece of evidence


does not necessarily support a finding that petitioner
was not a resident of Northern Kabuntalan as of May
14, 2006, or one year prior to the May 14, 2007
elections. Petitioner merely admitted that he was a
resident of another locality as of April 27, 2006,
which was more than a year before the elections. It is
not inconsistent with his subsequent claim that he
complied with the residency requirement for the
elective office, as petitioner could have transferred
to Barangay Indatuan after April 27, 2006, on or
before May 14, 2006.

Neither does this evidence support the allegation


that petitioner failed to comply with the residency
requirement for the transfer of his voting record from
Barangay

Payan to Barangay Indatuan. Given that a voter is


required to reside in the place wherein he proposes
to vote only for six months immediately preceding
the election, petitioner’s application for transfer on
December 13, 2006 does not contradict his earlier
admission that he was a resident of Barangay Payan
as of April 27, 2006. Be that as it may, the issue
involved in the Dilangalen petition is whether or not
petitioner made a material representation that is
false in his CoC, and not in his application for the
transfer of his registration.