Republic of the
Supreme Court
EN BANC
LYDIA R. PAGADUAN, G.R. No. 172278
Petitioner,
Present:
PUNO,
C.J.,
QUISUMBING,
YNARES-SANTIAGO,
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ,
CARPIO,
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ,
- versus -
CARPIO-MORALES,
CALLEJO, SR.,
TINGA,
CHICO-NAZARIO,
GARCIA,
VELASCO,
JR., and
NACHURA,
JJ.
COMMISSION
ON ELECTIONS,
ARTURO
Y. CUSTODIO and
TEODORICO
B. CORNES, JR.,
Respondents. Promulgated:
March
29, 2007
x-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - x
D E C I S I O N
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ,
J.:
This
resolves the Petition for Certiorari seeking to set aside the Resolution[1]
of public respondent Commission on Elections First Division (COMELEC First
Division) dated December 12, 2005 and the Resolution[2]
of the Commission on Elections En Banc (COMELEC En Banc) dated
April 3, 2006.
The
antecedent facts, as accurately summarized in the Resolution of the COMELEC En
Banc dated
x x x x
Protestant [petitioner] and protestee
[respondent Custodio] were candidates for Municipal
Mayor of
On
Protestee, in his Answer, denied the above allegations of the protestant and move for the dismissal of the protest case. Pending decision by the court a quo, protestee died. Protestee's counsel move for the dismissal of the protest case claiming that the death of the protestee renders this case moot and academic. This motion was denied by the court a quo ruling that Teodorico B. Cornes (Cornes for brevity), the vice-mayor elect, may intervene.
On
On
Unsatisfied, Cornes
appealed to this Commission. In its
Resolution promulgated on
x x x x
Petitioner then moved for
reconsideration of the aforementioned Resolution of the COMELEC First Division
and the case was referred to the COMELEC En Banc. The latter body then promulgated a Resolution
on
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Motion for Reconsideration filed by Lydia S. Pagaduan is hereby DENIED. The Resolution of the Commission (First Division) declaring Arturo Y. Custodio as the duly elected Municipal Mayor of Zaragoza, Nueva Ecija during the 10 May 2004 Elections is hereby AFFIRMED WITH MODIFICATION: protestee Arturo Y. Custodio has a total number of six thousand five hundred thirty-three 6,533 votes while of Lydia S. Pagaduan has a total of six thousand one hundred forty-three (6,143) votes. Custodio has a marginal lead of 391 votes.
In view of the death of Arturo Y. Custodio, intervenor-appellant Vice-Mayor elect Teodorico B. Cornes, Jr. is hereby declared as Mayor of Zaragoza, Nueva Ecija pursuant to Section 44 of the Local Government Code.
SO ORDERED.[4]
Aggrieved by the foregoing
Resolutions of the COMELEC First
Division and the COMELEC En Banc, petitioner comes before this
Court via a Petition for Certiorari, alleging that:
1. The COMELEC First Division committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in rendering its questioned Decision, reversing the 04 April 2005 Decision of the Regional Trial Court in Election Protest Case No. 02-04 and thereby validating several ballots in favor of the deceased protestee Arturo Custodio, said questioned Decision not being supported by evidence on record and is not in accordance with law.
2.
The COMELEC First Division committed grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in rendering its
questioned Decision declaring the deceased protestee
Arturo Custodio as the duly elected Municipal Mayor
of
3.
The COMELEC En Banc committed grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction in rendering its questioned Resolution denying herein
petitioner Lydia R. Pagaduan's Motion for
Reconsideration dated 16 December 2005 and affirming with modification the said
questioned Decision of the Honorable Commission's First Division, such
Resolution being clearly without basis in fact and in law.[5]
Mainly, petitioner questions the COMELEC's (both the First
Division's and the En Banc's) appreciation of the impugned ballots,
contending that the COMELEC failed to take into consideration the observation
of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) that the padlocks and/ or seals of some
ballot boxes were missing, broken or destroyed.
Petitioner's main argument is that due to the missing or destroyed
padlocks and/or seals of some ballot boxes, the presence of erasures,
superimpositions, crossed-out words, alteration of letters in the names of
candidates, symbols such as “----, /, or xxx”, different handwritings on one
ballot or the same handwriting for several ballots, and lack of signature of
the Board of Election Inspectors Chairman on some ballots, should have been
interpreted by the COMELEC as markings which would invalidate said
ballots.
The COMELEC En Banc held that
pursuant to Section 211 of the Omnibus Election Code, which mandates liberality
in the appreciation of ballots, all doubts should be resolved in favor of the
validity of the ballot. Hence, after
re-examining the ballots, the COMELEC ruled
that the appearance of some erasures, superimpositions, alteration of
letters, are attempts by the voters to
correct or rectify what they had originally written, while the appearance of
crosses or lines put on the spaces for which the voter had not voted are signs
to indicate the voter's desistance from voting.
The COMELEC First Division and the COMELEC En Banc then found
Arturo Y. Custodio to be the duly elected Municipal
Mayor of
Petitioner insists that it was the
RTC which ruled correctly on the validity of the ballots, thereby proclaiming
her to be the duly elected mayor.
The other issue presented by
petitioner is whether or not it was proper for the COMELEC First Division and
the COMELEC En Banc to declare Vice-Mayor elect Teodorico
B. Cornes, Jr. as Mayor of Zaragoza,
Nueva Ecija, pursuant to
Section 44 of the Local Government Code.
Petitioner's asseverations are
unmeritorious.
The settled principle is that “unless
the COMELEC is shown to have committed grave abuse of discretion, its decision
will not be interfered with by this Court.”[6] Grave abuse of discretion is described in
this wise:
There is grave abuse of discretion where
the public respondent acts in a capricious, whimsical, arbitrary or despotic
manner in the exercise of its judgment as to be equivalent to lack of
jurisdiction. The abuse of discretion
must be so patent and gross as to amount to an evasion of a positive duty
or a virtual refusal to perform a duty enjoined by law, or to act at all in
contemplation of law as where the power is exercised in an arbitrary and
despotic manner by reason of passion or hostility.[7] (Emphasis
supplied)
In this case, petitioner miserably
failed to present satisfactory proof that the COMELEC First Division or the
COMELEC En Banc acted in a capricious, whimsical, arbitrary, or despotic
manner which would warrant the issuance of a writ of certiorari.
First of all, it is inaccurate to say
that the COMELEC did not take into consideration the finding of the trial court
that some of the ballot boxes had missing padlocks and/or broken or destroyed
seals. It is presumed that official duty
has been regularly performed,[8]
and that all the matters within an issue raised in a case were laid before the
court and passed upon by it.[9] In this case, there is no sufficient
evidence to overturn said presumptions.
A perusal of the COMELEC First Division's Resolution dated
It should be stressed that the
COMELEC is the constitutional body which has special knowledge and expertise
over election matters. Thus, it is in a
better position to rule on questions of
fact such as the appreciation of contested ballots, and its findings on such
matters are generally accorded great respect, if not finality by the
courts. Such findings will only be set
aside by the Court upon proof that the COMELEC grossly misappreciated
evidence of such nature as to compel a contrary conclusion.[11] Herein
petitioner absolutely failed to discharge the required burden of proof.
Moreover, absent any showing of grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, the issue of whether or not the
COMELEC made the proper or correct rulings cannot be the subject of an action
for certiorari. In People
v. Court of Appeals,[12]
the Court expounded on the function of the remedy of certiorari as
follows:
As observed in Land Bank of the
The
COMELEC First Division and the COMELEC En Banc likewise cannot be said
to have committed grave abuse of discretion in ruling that the Vice-Mayor
elect, Teodorico B. Cornes,
Jr., succeeded to the office of the Municipal Mayor upon the death of the duly
elected mayor. The COMELEC was merely
applying the provisions of Section 44 of the Local Government Code, to wit:
SECTION
44. Permanent Vacancies in the Offices of the Governor, Vice Governor,
Mayor, and Vice-Mayor. –
a) If a permanent vacancy occurs in the office of the governor or mayor, the vice-governor or vice-mayor concerned shall become the governor or mayor. If a permanent vacancy occurs in the offices of the governor, vice-governor, mayor, or vice-mayor, the highest ranking sanggunian member or, in case of his permanent inability, the second highest ranking sanggunian member, shall become the governor, vice-governor, mayor or vice-mayor, as the case may be. Subsequent vacancies in the said office shall be filled automatically by the other sanggunian members according to their ranking as defined herein. (Emphasis supplied)
x x
x x
IN VIEW OF
THE FOREGOING, the petition is DISMISSED for lack of merit.
Costs against petitioners.
SO ORDERED.
MA.
ALICIA AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ
Associate Justice
WE CONCUR:
REYNATO S. PUNO
Chief Justice
|
LEONARDO A. QUISUMBING Associate Justice |
CONSUELO YNARES-SANTIAGO Associate
Justice |
|
ANGELINA
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ Associate Justice |
ANTONIO T. CARPIO Associate Justice |
|
RENATO C. CORONA Associate Justice |
CONCHITA CARPIO-MORALES Associate
Justice |
|
ROMEO J. CALLEJO, SR. Associate Justice |
ADOLFO S. AZCUNA Associate Justice |
|
DANTE O. TINGA Associate Justice |
MINITA V. CHICO-NAZARIO Associate Justice |
|
CANCIO C. GARCIA
Associate Justice |
PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR. Associate Justice |
ANTONIO EDUARDO B. NACHURA
Associate Justice
Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII
of the Constitution, it is hereby certified that the conclusions in the above
Decision had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the
writer of the opinion of the Court.
Chief Justice
[1] Penned by Commissioner Resurreccion Z. Borra, with
Commissioners Rufino S.B. Javier and Romeo A. Brawner, concurring;
rollo, pp. 58-83.
[2] Penned by Commissioner Florentino A. Tuason, Jr., with Commissioners Benjamin S. Abalos, Sr., Resurreccion Z. Borra, and Romeo A. Brawner, concurring; id. at 84-121.
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6] Sarangani v. Commission on Elections, 461 Phil. 300, 311 (2003).
[7] People v. Sandiganbayan,
G.R. No. 156394,
[8] Rules of Court, Rule 131, Sec. 3, par. (m).
[9] Rules
of Court, Rule 131, Sec. 3, par.
(o).
[10] Resolution of COMELEC First Division, rollo, pp. 67-69, 71-72, 75-76.
[11] De Guzman v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 159713, March 31, 2004, 426 SCRA 698, 707-708.
[12] G.R. No. 142051,
[13]