puboff nov 9

7/24/2019 Puboff Nov 9

1/21

SAMPAYAN v. DAZA

A petition for disqualicationwas fled with the SC against Daza romrunning in the 1992 Conressional elections !Nort"ern Sa#ar$or being agreencard holder and a permanent resident o US since Oct. 19!. "orenunciation o such status was done so he is dis#ualifed under Sec $% O&C andSec. 1% Art 11 Const. 'he( cited the case o Caasi ). CO*&+&C and presented in

e)idence the letter rom US DO,- mmigration and "aturalization Ser)ice /"S0certi(ing that Daza became a permanent resident or his possession o agreencard /but he did not appl( or a citizenship0

A petition for pro"i%itionwas also fled against Daza to prohibit him romeercising his unctions o Congressman.

Daza replied that his permanent resident status ceased when he was granted aUS non2immigrant )isa /did not sa( what (ear0. 3urthermore- he renounced thesame when he returned to the 4hils on August 19%5.

issue6O" Daza should be dis#ualifed7N&' t"e case is #oot and acade#ic.

ratio'he frst petition is moot and academic because o the second petition fled

see8ing to unseat Daza in Congress.Assuming arguendo that this case has basis- still- the proper urisdiction is with

:ouse &lectoral 'ribunal. Art. $ Sec. 1 Const. states that :;&' shall be the soleudge o all contests relating to the election- returns and #ualifcation o itsmembers.

6hat is the proper remed(7 &ither


2/21

2 Other irregularities he was onl( witness- and onl( documentar( e)idencepresented naturalization ;A"'&D but *; fled b( :ermo and OSraised case to SC.

2 ,+ 3&N 1992 +lection and 0as proclai#ed on Ma4 22' 1992 EEE+ee- losing candidate- fled with CO*&+&C petition to annul procla#ation!une 1' 1992$ on ground that he was an alien and that naturalization casestill pending.

C&M+/+C en %anc 5 dismissed petition or being fled out of ti#e. ;A 1$$ sec19 pro)ides that period to appeal ruling o the BoC or proceedings was 6 da4s.

/ee led anot"er petition for Manda#usor immediate resolution onaturalization case and or the cancellation o CoC. EEEE C&M+/+C said t"is0as led out of ti#e %ecause t"e issue of disqualication of a candidateis not a#on t"e rounds allo0ed in a pre7procla#ation controvers4.

SC F D> is proper.

3irst- his naturalization was in act ull o irregularities.

8ecause )rivaldo is not 4et a )ilipino citien' insofar as /ee assails "iselii%ilit4' t"e petition is one for quo 0arranto questionin )irvaldo:stitle and see;in to prevent "i# fro# "oldin o7da4 period !Sec. 2?6' &+C$ andC&M+/+C "ad no %asis to dis#iss /ee:s petition.8esides' qualications for pu%lic o


3/21

'an ). CO*&+&C /beore the &lection 4rotests- there were numerous 44Cs fled0

'an- ,i8iri and +oong were candidates or o)ernor o Sulu

Petition to eclude election returns and certicates of canvass !P+$'an fled petitions /*unicipal Board o Can)assers and 4ro)incial BoC0 or theeclusion of election returns and certicates of canvass. All weredismissed b( the BoCs thus 'an fled appeal with the COMELEC 1st Division.

Petition for Declaration of )ailure of +lection !PD)+$ 'an- Burahan and

,i8iri /along with other =??! local candidates in Sulu0 fled 4D3& in the towns o*aimbung- +uu8- 'ong8il- and 4anamao beore COMELEC 2nd division.

rounds for PD)+ s(stematic raud- terrorism- illegal schemes- andmachinations allegedl( perpetrated b( +oong and their supporters resultingin massi)e disenranchisement o )oters [specifc acts: voters were orced to

ax their signatres and th!"!ar#s$ "a%%ots f%%ed ot "& po%% watchersand spporters o Loong' evidence: adavits o po%% watchers and photosshowing e%ection irreg%arities(

C&M+/+C 2nd Division:s action on PD)+< Suspended proclamation but

lited suspension I da(s later and ordered completion o can)ass andproclamation o winning go)ernor.C&M+/+C 1st Division:s action on P+ Ordered BoCs to suspend their

proceedings and to rerain rom proclaiming an( winning candidate.Procla#ation of /oonOn the same da( that the 1st di) issued abo)e

Order- +oong was proclaimed the winning go)ernor o Sulu and he assumed

[email protected] for Annul#ent of Procla#ation !PAP$ and +lectionprotest'an fled a 4etition or Annulment o the 4roclamation which wasgranted b( CO*&+&C 1st Di)ision. ,i8iri fled an election protest which was alsogranted b( 1st di)ision.

C&M+/+C en %anc:s rulin on t"e PD)+ !Co##issioner Sadain

dissented$ dismissed all because none o the grounds relied upon b(petitioners all under an( o the three instances1 usti(ing a declaration oailure o election. 4etitioners grounds /see abo)e0 are best )entilated in anelection protest. Also- e)idence presented /a@da)its0 were sel2ser)ing.

Co##issioner Sadain:s dissentthere was ailure o elections as the )oters wereallegedl( not su@cientl( inormed about the change and transer o polling places/clustering o precincts0 appro)ed on the e)e o the *a( 1?- =??! elections. [)ote:*his was sed "& petitioners as a grond in their appea% with +C. Cort said the& can,tse this an&!ore since the& ai%ed to raise it ear%ier(

1 Based on e)idence- a )alid election was held as scheduled- there was no suspension othe election as )oting continued normall(- +oong was elected b( a pluralit( o )otes asproclaimed b( the 4BC


4/21

/oon:s Motion to Dis#iss+oong fled *tD against 'ans 4A4 and ,i8iris &4

on the ground that CO*&+&C had no urisdiction to ta8e cognizance o &4 iledout of ti#e.

C&M+/+C 1st division:s action on MtD denied *tD ruling that the protest

0as not led out of ti#e as t"ere 0ere still pendin pre7procla#ationcasesbeore it- the result o which could aJect +oongs motion.

issues1. 6O" CO*&+&C has urisdiction to entertain electoral protests fled be(ond 1?

da(s ater the proclamation o the results o an election or a gi)en pro)incialo@ce 2Y+S

=. 6O" CO*&+&C has urisdiction to entertain simultaneousl( pre2proclamationcontro)ersies and electoral protests 2Y+S

I. 6O" CO*&+&C committed AD in dismissing the consolidated 4D3& despitethe e)ident massi)e disenranchisement o the )oters F N&

a- O) the proc%a!ation o Loong$ a%"eit patent%& n%% and void$ "ars thef%ing o the instant /D0Es issue is moot

ratioLOONGs petition

1. C&M+/+C "as urisdiction to entertain electoral protest led %4 i;iri /&&N:S =,+&(Y< Citing Sec. 250 OECE/ sha%% "e f%ed w3in 14 da&s ater

proc%a!ation o the e%ection res%ts-$ the period or f%ing e%ection protest wasuntil June 3, 2004 or 14 da&s ro! his proc%a!ation on Ma& 25$ 2445. *hs$

6i#iri,s E/ f%ed on 6%& 17 e8ective%& deprived COMELEC o 9risdiction toentertain protest.

C&E(=:S (E/-N+oongs theor( did not ta8e into consideration Sec. =!%

O&C which pro)ides that fling o certain petitions wor8s to stop the running o

the reglementar( period to fle an election protest. &4 was fled on time. Interpretation (harmonie 24!2 an" 2503# Sec. =!% contemplates =

points o reerence i.e. pre2 and post2proclamation. 4re2proc 2 petition to suspend or stop an impending proclamation

/purpose< nip in the bud the occurrence o Kgrab the proclamation-prolong the protestL situation0

+Fect of lin< tolls 1?2da( period or fling &4

4ost2 proc 2 petition to annul or undo a proclamation made

+Fect of lin< interrupts the running o the 1?2da( period

= S+C=-&N 2GH. E8ect o f%ing petition to ann% or to sspend the proc%a!ation. 'hefling with the Commission o a petition to annul or to suspend the proclamation o an(candidate shall suspend the running o the period within which to fle an election protestor o warrantoproceedings.I S+C. 2?>. E%ection contests or ;atasang /a!"ansa$ regiona%$ provincia% and cit&oces. A sworn petition contesting the election o an( regional- pro)incial or cit(o@cial shall be fled with the Commission b( an( candidate who has dul( fled acertifcate o candidac( and has been )oted or the same o@ce- within ten da(s ater theproclamation o the results o the election.


5/21

n other words- in a +ec. 25< petition to suspen" where the 1?2da(

period did not start to run at all- the fling o a +ec. 2=4 e%ection contestater the 1?th da( rom proclamation is not late. On the other hand- in a+ec. 25< petition to annul- the part( see8ing annulment must fle thepetition beore the epiration o the 1?2da( period.

$s applie"%+oongs arguments on the belated fling o therespondents &4 ma( merit consideration had the petitions

against him been onl( or the annulment o his *a( =!-=??! proclamation. :owe)er- the n!eros e%ectionre%ated

petitions$ which were f%ed against petitioner Loong "& theother +% g"ernatoria% candidates$ soght to suspen" histhen i!pending proc%a!ation which$ as trned ot$ waseventa%%& !ade on Ma& 25$ 2445.And as e)ents unolded-some o the petitions ad)erted to resulted in the issuanceon *a( 1- =??! o an Order suspending the proclamationo the go)ernor2elect o Sulu. Also- CO*&+&C 1st di)isionactuall( annulled +oongs proclamation.

n short- &4 fled on ,ul( 19 /5$ da(s ater +oongsproclamation0 was fled on time because the 1?2da(reglementar( period to fle such protest which ordinaril(would ha)e epired on ,une I did not start to run at all. nact- the pre2proclamation contro)ers( fled b( 'an was onl(resol)ed on *arch =??5. Also- it did not matter that the pre2proc contro)ers( was fled not b( ,i8iri but b( 'an becauseSec. =!% does not re#uire such.

=. Si#ultaneous prosecution of pre7procla#ation controversies andelection protests is allo0ed and encouraed %4 court

/&&N:S =,+&(Y an e%ection contest sho%d "e pt on ho%d nti% preproc%a!ation controversies are conc%dedC&E(=:S (E/-N+oongs argument has no legal basis.

o 'here is no law or rule prohibiting the simultaneous prosecution or

adudication o pre2proclamation contro)ersies and elections protests.>%%owing the si!%taneos prosection scenario !a& "e exp%ained "&the act that preproc%a!ation controversies and e%ection protestsdi8er in ter!s o the isses invo%ved and the evidence ad!issi"%e ineach case and the o"9ective each see#s to achieve.

;O>U&;O ). CO*&+&C /1? da( period tolled when pre2proclamation *; fled buthe onl( had 5 more da(s0

2 ;o#uero and Hillano were candidates or *a(or o San ,ose del *onte-Bulacan or the *a( % 1995 elections


6/21

2 On ,ul( 1% 1995 CO*&+&C issued an order directing the *unicipal Board oCan)assers /*BC0 to recon)ene- prepare the certs o can)ass /COC0 andproclaim the winning candidates. (oquero 0as proclai#ed 0innerwith=?8 )otes o)er 1%8 on ,ul( 19.

7 Onul4 2G 199?- *illano tried to lea pre7procla#ation M(o theCO*&+&Cs order directing the *BC to recon)ene. Such was denied. 'hecase reached the SC b( certiorari but it was ultimatel( denied b( the highest

tribunal- e)en on *;. Said decision reac"ed *illano on Ma4 I 199J.

2 ="at:s 0"4 *illanofled an election protest %efore t"e (=C of Maloloson Ma4 1I 199J.Beore summons could be ser)ed on ;o#uero- Hillanofled a supplemental petition enumerating the 1?! precincts o San ,ose Del*onte he was contesting.

2 D+)+NS+ 2 ;o#uero fled a *'D on ,ul( 15 199$ on the ground that theelection protest did not allege acts constituting a cause o action or anelection protest and that the election protest 0as led %e4ond t"e 1>7da4 rele#entar4 periodor fling the same

2 August =9 199$- ,udge Barrientos denied the *tD. ,udge then ordered theparties to name their representati)es as members o the Committee on;e)ision which was set to start its re)ision and recount o ballots.

2 'hats wh( ;o#uero fled a petition or certiorari and prohibition re the ;'CCase with CO*&+&C. Comelec ust set aside ;o#ueros petition. Anent thefling o the protest beore the reglementar( period- the CO*&+&C ust citedthe common ci)il law rule that or computation o the period- the 1stda(shall be ecluded and the last da( included. Since Hillano recei)ed the SCdecision /anent his 1stcomplaint with the CO*&+&C0 on *a( - then hiselection protest on *a( 1 was fled on time.

issue6hether the election protest was fled b( Hillano on time7Y+S &( N& PA(AK-=A AAD.

(atio2 'he SC held that the CO*&+&C ailed to consider the running o the period to

fle an election protest rom the date o proclamation o ;o#uero. 'heCO*&+&C counted the period rom the time Hllano recei)ed the decision o

the SC.2 Section =51 o the O&C pro)ides that the election protest contesting theelection o a municipal o@cer shall be fled with the proper ;'C b( an(candidate who has fled his own CoC and has been )oted or the same o@ce-0it"in ten da4s after procla#ation of t"e results of t"e election

2 6hen Hillano fled a pre2proclamation *; beore the CO*&+&C ater;o#ueros proclamation- he onl( had 5 da(s let in the 1?2da( reglementar(period. BU'- according to Section 2GH of t"e &+C


7/21

Section =!%. E8ect o f%ing petition to ann% or sspend theproc%a!ation F 'he fling with the Commission o a petition to annul orsuspend the proclamation o an( candidate s"all suspend t"e runnin oft"e period 0it"in 0"ic" to le an election protest or quo 0arrantoproceedins

2 t thus appears that during said time- Hillanos 5 da( deadline wassuspended. BU'- since he onl( fled the election protest 1? da(s /not 50 rom

the receipt o the SCs decision den(ing his pre2proclamation motion- he isdeemed to ha)e belatedl( fled the same. 'he rule prescribing the ten2da(period is mandator( and urisdictional and the fling o a protest be(ond theperiod depri)es the court o urisdiction o)er the protest.

2 Such is a strict procedure that must be ollowed. n +im ) CO*&+&C- thecourt reiterated that a counterprotest must also be fled within the period-otherwise the court ac#uires no urisdiction.

2 Minor -ssueo ;o#uero was also tr(ing to argue that upon receipt o CO*&+&Cs 1st

decision den(ing Hllanos pre2proclamation *;- the 5 da( period

should ha)e begun to run againo SC said that the running o the reglementar( period to fle an election

protest is tolled b( a part(s ele)ation the SC o a CO*&+&C decision oa pre2proclamation case. 'he appeal b( certiorari to the SC is part oan entire proceeding. 'he case is not terminated until the SC hasrendered udgment.

DA/&C v. C&M+/+C

Salambai Ambolodto and Su8arno Samad were #a4oralt4 candidatesin the*a( 11- 199% election in Ka%untalan' Mauindanao. 3ollowing the casting o)otes- Sa#ad 0as declared t"e #a4or and he- along with Salipongan Dagloc

/candidate or Hice2*a(or0- was proclai#ed on Ma4 1G' 199H.

&n Ma4 26' 199H- Ambolodto fled a petition to declare a failure of

election andLor annul t"e election results in their localit( beore theCO*&+&C.

Subse#uentl(- &n une 19' 199H' s"e led an election protest e&a'un"anti cautela0it" t"e (=C. She would e)entuall( withdraw her initialpetition beore the CO*&+&C in order to ocus on her election protest with the;'C.


8/21

D&3&"S& 2 n response to the election fled against him- Samad sought to ha)eit dismissed on the ground that it was led #ore t"an 1> da4s fro# t"e dateof procla#ation on Ma4 1G' 199H. According to him- unless suspended b( thefling o a case concerning a pre2proclamation contro)ers(- a losing candidate has

ust 1? da(s ater proclamation to fle an election protest. As applied- he wasproclaimed on *a( 1!- 199% while the election contest was lodged onl( on ,une19- 199%.

(=C denied Samads motion to dismissG ollowing this ruling and pending theappeal beore the CO*&+&C- Samad passed awa( and Dagloc- as )ice ma(or-succeeded him as ma(or and was substituted in Samads place in the case at bar.

C&M+/+C 'he 1? da( period was indeed suspended b( the frst case. 6hile thepetition fled b( Samad was denominated as petition to declare a ailure oelection andMor to annul the election results in their localit(- the case was actuall(a petition or annulment o proclamation which- under =!% o the Omnibus&lection Code- suspended t"e runnino the period or fling an election

protest.

rimar) arguments

PetitionerCO*&+&C committed gra)e abuse o discretion in holding that thefling o the petition to declare a ailure o election andMor annul the electionresults suspended the running o the 1?2da( period or fling an election contest

(espondent< Sec. =!% o the &lection Code is not limited to the fling o apre2proclamation contro)ers( but includes the fling o a petition to declare

a ailure o election among the causes that will suspend the running o the1?2da( period or the fling o election contests.

issue6O" the election contest fled b( Ambolodto was timel( fled 5 N&

ratio

3irst- the Court discussed the rationale %e"ind Sec. 2GH of t"e +lectionCodeGKN unless the proclamation o a winning candidate is suspended or- i it has been

held- set aside- the polic( behind the allowance o pre2proclamation contro)ersies-i.e.- to pre)ent losing candidates rom grabbing the proclamation and dela(ing theresolution o the electoral contest- will be deeated N 'he suspension o the 1?2da( statutor( period or the fling o an election protest until such time as theCommission on &lections has fnall( decided the pending pre2proclamationcontro)ers( is but logical and ust- since i the protestant pre)ails in the pre2

! 'he fling with the Commission on &lectionsP o a petition to annul or to suspend the proclamation o an( candidate shall suspendthe running o the period within which to fle an election protest or o warranto proceedings.


9/21

proclamation contro)ers(- there would be no urther need or him to fle a regularelection protest.L

'his line o reasoning has been upheld b( and adhered to b( numerous rulings othe Court.

Second- the Court made it clear that the suspension o the 1?2da( period or

fling election contro)ersies is not limited to the application o Sec. =!%. 'here aret0o ot"er causesor the suspension o such period under ;A $$!$ /&lectoral;eorms +aw o 19%0- namel(>> cas" depositas re#uired b( its rules.

une 2J' 199Hpaid 45-??? ater recei)ing cop( o resolution and attachedreceipt in *;.,(+=*; denied- in )iew o ;ule I= o the 199% :;&' ;ules which re#uired a45-???.?? cash deposit in addition to fling ees or o warranto cases.

issue


20/21

6O" this Court can ta8e cognizance o the instant petition or certiorari7Y+S.6O" a petition or #uo warranto beore the :;&' ma( be summaril( dismissed orailure to pa( cash deposit- notwithstanding that petitioner rectifed pa(mentthereo7Y+S.ratio="e Supre#e Court #a4 eercise its etraordinar4 urisdiction upons"o0in of rave a%use of discretion !AD$ on t"e part of ,(+=' despite

Constitutional provision t"at ,(+= s"all %e t"e sole ude of all contestsrelatin to t"e elections' returns and qualications of its #e#%ers.6hile the udgments o the 'ribunal are be(ond udicial intererence- the Courtma( do so- howe)er- but onl( in the eercise o this Courts so2called etraordinar(

urisdiction- upon a determination that the 'ribunals decision or resolution wasrendered without or in ecess o urisdiction- or with AD /?o"%es v. @?E*0.

'he Court has ruled that the power o the &lectoral Commission is be(ond udicialintererence ecept- in an( e)ent- upon a clear showing o arbitrar( andimpro)ident use o power as will constitute a denial o due process /Morrero v.;ocar0.

Section 1- Article H o the Constitution epanded udicial power to include thedetermination o whether or not there has been a AD amounting to lac8 orecess o urisdiction on the part o an( branch or instrumentalit( o theo)ernment.

199H (ules of t"e ,(+=(ule 62pro)ides that in addition to lin fees' a petitioner in uowarranto proceedins s"ould #a;e a P?'>>> cas" deposit 0it" t"e=ri%unal.(ule 21go)erns Summar( Dismissal o &lection Contests.

/I0 the fling ee is not paid within the period pro)ided or fling the protest orpetition or #uo warrantoG/!0 in case o protests where a cash deposit is re#uired- the cash deposit or thefrst 41??-???.?? thereo- is not paid within 1? da(s ater the fling o the protestG(ule 66+Fect of )ailure to Ma;e Cas" Deposit. a part( ails to ma8e thecash deposits or additional deposits herein pro)ided within the prescribed timelimit- t"e =ri%unal #a4 dis#iss t"e protest' counter7protest' or petitionfor quo 0arranto- or ta8e such action as it ma( deem e#uitable under thecircumstances.

Applied4etitioners did not initiall( pa( the re#uired cash depositG but ater theirpetition was summaril( dismissed b( the :;&' or such non2pa(ment- petitionersrectifed their inad)ertence and paid the 45-??? re#uired cash deposit- at thesame time see8ing a reconsideration o the dismissal.

Aru#entUnli8e in the case o election protests- no period is pro)ided or toma8e the cash deposit in the case o petitions or o warranto.Ans0er'he Court diJerentiated >uo 6arranto and 4rotest cash deposits

puboff nov 9

Documents