FLORES vs.

COMELEC 184 SCRA 484 Facts: Petitioner Roque Flores was declared by the board of canvassers as having the highest number of votes for kagawad on the March 1989 elections, in Baranga y Poblacion, Tayum, Abra, and thus proclaimed punong barangay in accordance with Section 5 of R.A. 6679. However, his election was protested by private responde nt Rapisora, who placed second in the election with one vote less than the petit ioner. The Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Tayum sustained Rapisora and install ed him as punong barangay in place of the petitioner after deducting two votes a s stray from the latter s total. Flores appealed to the RTC, which affirmed the ch allenged decision in toto. The judge agreed that the four votes cast for Flores on ly, without any distinguishing first name or initial, should all have been consi dered invalid instead of being divided equally between the petitioner and Anasta cio Flores, another candidate for kagawad. The total credited to the petitioner was correctly reduced by 2, demoting him to second place. The petitioner went to the COMELEC, which dismissed his appeal on the ground tha t it had no power to review the decision of the RTC, based on Section 9 of R.A. 6679, that decisions of the RTC in a protest appealed to it from the municipal t rial court in barangay elections on questions of fact shall be final and non-appe alable . In his petition for certiorari, the COMELEC is faulted for not taking cog nizance of the petitioners appeal. Issue: Whether or not the decisions of Municipal or Metropolitan Courts in baran gay election contests are subject to the exclusive appellate jurisdiction of the COMELEC considering Section 9 of R.A. No. 6679? Held: The dismissal of the appeal is justified, but on an entirely different and more significant ground, to wit, Article IX-C, Section 2(2) of the Constitution , providing that the COMELEC shall Exercise exclusive original jurisdiction over all contests relating to the elections, returns and qualifications of all electi ve regional, provincial, and city officials, and appellate jurisdiction over all contests involving elective municipal officials decided by trial courts of gene ral jurisdiction, or involving elective barangay officials decided by trial cour ts of limited jurisdiction . Municipal or Metropolitan Courts being courts of limi ted jurisdiction, their decisions in barangay election contests are subject to t he exclusive appellate jurisdiction of the COMELEC under the afore-quoted sectio n. Hence, the decision rendered by the Municipal Circuit Trial Court, should hav e been appealed directly to the COMELEC and not to the RTC. Accordingly, Section 9 of Rep. Act No. 6679, insofar as it provides that the decision of the municip al or metropolitan court in a barangay election case should be appealed to the R TC, must be declared unconstitutional.