SC okays Comelec hearing of Bulacan electoral suit

10/16/2009

With less than eight months to go before the holding of the simultaneous national and local elections, the Supreme Court (SC) has ruled that the Commission on Elections (Comelec) can now proceed with the election protest filed by Roberto Pagdanganan against Bulacan Gov. Joselito Mendoza in the May 14, 2007 Bulacan gubernatorial elections.

In a 24-page decision rendered by Justice Arturo Brion, the SC, by a unanimous vote of 11-0, dismissed Mendoza’s petition for lack of merit and lifted its July 14, 2009 status quo order against the Comelec in connection with Pagdanganan’s poll protest. It said the status quo order was issued only upon a preliminary finding of a genuine due process issue.

Concurring with the ruling were Acting Chief Justice Leonardo Quisumbing and Justices Antonio Carpio, Renato Corona, Conchita Carpio Morales, Minita Chico-Nazario, Antonio Eduardo Nachura, Teresita Leonardo-De Castro, Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin and Roberto Abad.

Chief Justice Reynato Puno and Justices Presbitero Velasco and Mariano Del Castillo were on official leave.

In his petition, Mendoza was questioning the alleged “secret proceedings” sometime last June by the Comelec in connection with the election protest filed against him by Pagdanganan and the April 29, 2009 and May 26, 2009 orders of the Comelec’s Second Division allowing the continuation of the revision of ballots, which are presently in the custody of the Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET) pursuant to the election protest filed by Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III against Sen. Juan Miguel Zubiri.

He said he was not informed of such, in violation of his fundamental due process rights.

The SC, however, said it was not convinced as it held that there was no grave abuse of discretion on Comelec’s part.

The high court said the contested proceedings at the SET were no longer part of the adversarial aspects of the election contest that would require notice of hearing and the participation of the parties. It stressed that what took place at the SET were the internal deliberations of the Comelec, as a quasi-judicial body, in the course of appreciating the evidence presented and deciding the provincial election contest on the merits. These deliberations, the court stressed, are no different from its judicial deliberations which are considered confidential and privileged.

“The Comelec is under no legal obligation to notify either party of the steps it is taking in the course of deliberating on the merits of the provincial election contest. In the context of our standard of review for the petition, we see no grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction committed by the Comelec in its deliberation on the Bulacan election contest and the appreciation of ballots this deliberation entailed,” the SC said in the ruling.

The SC also ruled that in absence of a decision by the Comelec, there is nothing for it to apply the deliberation stage rights under the Ang Tibay doctrine for administrative or quasi-judicial proceedings; hence there is no basis yet to determine the existence of any grave abuse of discretion.

The high tribunal also cited Section 4 of the Comelec Rules of Procedure which provides that the poll body “may use all auxiliary writs, processes and other means to carry into effect its powers of jurisdiction; if the procedure to be followed in the exercise of such power or jurisdiction is not specifically provided for by law or the Rules of Procedure, any suitable process or proceeding not prohibited by law or by its rules may be adopted.”

“On the basis of the standards set by Section 4 of the Comelec Rules of Procedure, and of the Constitution itself in the handling of election cases, we rule that the Comelec action is a valid exercise of discretion as it is a suitable and reasonable process within the exercise of its jurisdiction over provincial election contests, aimed at expediting the disposition of this case, and with no adverse, prejudicial or discriminatory effects on the parties to the contest that would render the rule unreasonable,” the high court said.

The SC stressed that the Comelec did not lose jurisdiction over the provincial election contest, contrary to Mendoza’s contention, because of the transmittal of the provincial ballot boxes and other election materials to the SET.

The high court said that the Comelec’s jurisdiction cannot be ousted by subsequent events such as the temporary transfer of evidence and material records of the proceedings to another tribunal exercising its own jurisdiction over another election contest pursuant to the Constitution. Benjamin B. Pulta

Back to top

For comments about this website:Webmaster@tribune.net.ph
The Daily Tribune © 2006