one’s application for repatriation subsists and applies to

VOL. 441, NOVEMBER 10, 2004 65 repatriation under R.A. No. 8171.—Republic Act No. 8171
has impliedly repealed Presidential Decree No. 725. They
Altarejos vs. Commission on Elections
cover the same subject matter: Providing for the
G.R. No. 163256. November 10, 2004. *
repatriation of Filipino women who have lost their
CICERON P. ALTAREJOS, Philippine citizenship by marriage to aliens and of
petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, JOSE natural-born Filipinos. The Court’s ruling in Frivaldo v.
ALMIÑE and VERNON VERSOZA, respondents. Commission on Elections that repatriation retroacts to the
date of filing of one’s application for repatriation subsists
Actions; Moot and Academic Questions; Courts will for the
decide a question otherwise moot and academic if it is _______________
capable of repetition, yet evading review.—As stated by the
Office of the Solicitor General, where the issues have *
EN BANC.
become moot and academic, there is no justiciable 656
controversy, thereby rendering the resolution of the same of
no practical use or value. Nonetheless, courts will decide a 656 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
question otherwise moot and academic if it is capable of Altarejos vs. Commission on Elections
repetition, yet evading review.
same reasons quoted above. Accordingly, petitioner’s
Citizenship; Repatriation; In addition to taking the
repatriation retroacted to the date he filed his application
Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines, the
in 1997. Petitioner was, therefore, qualified to run for a
registration of the Certificate of Repatriation in the proper
mayoralty position in the government in the May 10, 2004
civil registry and the Bureau of Immigration is a
elections. Apparently, the COMELEC was cognizant of this
prerequisite in effecting the repatriation of a citizen.—The
fact since it did not implement the assailed Resolutions
law is clear that repatriation is effected “by taking the oath
disqualifying petitioner to run as mayor of San Jacinto,
of allegiance to the Republic of the
Masbate.
Philippines and registration in the proper civil registry and
Same; Same; Election Law; It is incumbent upon
in the Bureau of Immigration.” Hence, in addition to taking
candidates for an elective office, who are repatriated
the Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines,
citizens, to be ready with sufficient evidence of their
the registration of the Certificate of Repatriation in the
repatriation in case their Filipino citizenship is
proper civil registry and the Bureau of Immigration is a
questioned.—The Court cannot fault the COMELEC en
prerequisite in effecting the repatriation of a citizen.
banc for affirming the decision of the COMELEC, First
Same; Same; While Republic Act No. 8171 has
Division, considering that petitioner failed to prove before
impliedly repealed Presidential Decree No. 725, the Court’s
the COMELEC that he had complied with the requirements
ruling in Frivaldo v. Commission on Elections, 257 SCRA
of repatriation. Petitioner submitted the necessary
727 (1996), that repatriation retroacts to the date of filing of
documents proving compliance with the requirements of
repatriation only during his motion for reconsideration, petitioner Ciceron P. Altarejos from running as mayor
when the COMELEC en banc could no longer consider said of San Jacinto, Masbate, and another resolution of the
evidence. As the COMELEC en banc correctly stated: The COMELEC en bancpromulgated on May 7, 2004
Comelec Rules of Procedure provides that insufficiency of denying petitioner’s motion for reconsideration.
evidence to justify the decision is a ground for a motion for
The factual antecedents are as follows:
reconsideration (Rule 19, Section 1). The evidence referred
Petitioner Altarejos was a candidate for mayor in
to in the above provision and to be considered in the Motion
for Reconsideration are those which were submitted during the Municipality of San Jacinto, Masbate in the May
the hearing and attached to the respective Memoranda of 10, 2004 national and local elections.
the parties which are already part of the records of the case. On January 15, 2004, private respondents Jose
In this regard, the evidence of the respondent were not able Almiñe Altiche and Vernon Versoza, registered voters
to overcome the evidence of the petitioners. It is, therefore, of San Jacinto, Masbate, filed with the COMELEC, a
incumbent upon candidates for an elective office, who are petition to disqualify and to deny due course or cancel
repatriated citizens, to be ready with sufficient evidence of the certificate of candidacy of petitioner on the ground
their repatriation in case their Filipino citizenship is that he is not a Filipino citizen and that he made a
questioned to prevent a repetition of this case. false representation in his certificate of candidacy that
“[he] was not a permanent resident of or immigrant to
SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION in the Supreme Court.
a foreign country.”
Certiorari.
Private respondents alleged that based on a
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court. letter from the Bureau of Immigration dated June 25,
1

Paris G. Real for petitioner. 2001, petitioner was a holder of a permanent U.S.
resident visa, an Alien Certificate of Registration No.
AZCUNA, J.: E139507 issued on November 3, 1997, and an
Immigration Certificate of Residence No. 320846
This is a petition for certiorari, with prayer for the issued on November 3, 1997 by the Bureau of
issuance of a temporary restraining order and/or a writ Immigration. 2

of prohibitory and mandatory injunction, to set aside On January 26, 2004, petitioner filed an
the Resolution prom- Answer stating, among others, that he did not commit
3

657 false representation in his application for candidacy as

VOL. 441, NOVEMBER 10, 2004 65 mayor because as early as December 17, 1997, he was
Altarejos vs. Commission on Elections already issued a Certificate of Repatriation by the
ulgated by the Commission on Elections (COMELEC), Special Committee on Naturalization, after he filed a
First Division, on March 22, 2004 disqualifying petition for repatriation pursuant to Republic Act No.
8171. Thus, petitioner claimed that his Filipino municipality, city or province or, in the case of member of the
citizenship was already restored, and he was qualified sangguniang panlalawigan, sangguniang panlungsod, or
sangguniang bayan, the district where he intends to be elected; a
to run as resident therein for at least one (1) year immediately preceding
_______________
the day of the election; and able to read and write Filipino or any
other local language or dialect.
1
COMELEC (First Division) Resolution, Rollo, p. 36.
x x x.
2
COMELEC en banc Resolution, Rollo, p. 43.
3
Rollo, p. 73.
(c) Candidates for the position of mayor or vice-mayor of
independent component cities, component cities or municipalities
658 must be at least twenty-one (21) years of age on election day.
658 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED [SEC. 40. Disqualifications.—The following persons are
disqualified from running for any elective position:]
Altarejos vs. Commission on Elections x x x.
mayor in the May 10, 2004 elections. Petitioner sought
_______________
the dismissal of the petition.
On the date of the hearing, the parties were 4
Supra, note 2.
required to submit their Memoranda within three 5
Supra, note 3, at p. 87.
days. Private respondents filed their Memorandum, 659
while petitioner did not file one within the required VOL. 441, NOVEMBER 10, 2004 659
period. Petitioner,
4
however, filed a Reply
Altarejos vs. Commission on Elections
Memorandum subsequently.
5

(d) Those with dual citizenship.

Atty. Zacarias C. Zaragoza, Jr., regional election x x x.
director for Region V and hearing officer of this case, (f) Permanent residents in a foreign country or those who have
recommended that petitioner Altarejos be disqualified acquired the right to reside abroad and continue to avail of the
from being a candidate for the position of mayor of San same right after the effectivity of this Code; x x x
Jacinto, Masbate in the May 10, 2004 national and Under the terms of the above quoted statutory provisions, it
local elections. He found, thus: is required that an elective local official must be a citizen of
xxx the Philippines, and he must not have a dual citizenship;
The provisions of law governing the qualifications and must not be a permanent resident in a foreign country or
disqualifications of elective local officials are found in must not have acquired the right to reside abroad.
Sections 39 and 40 of Republic Act No. 7160 otherwise In the present case, it has been established by clear and
known as the Local Government Code of 1991, which convincing evidence that respondent is a citizen of the
provide as follows: United States of America. Such fact is proven by his Alien
SEC. 39. Qualifications.—(a) An elective local official must be a Certificate of Registration (ACR) No. E139507 issued on 3
citizen of the Philippines; a registered voter in the barangay, November 1997 and Immigration Certificate of Residence
(ICR) with No. 320846 issued on 3 November 1997 by the Visa would have already been cancelled. The rule is that in
Alien Registration Division, Bureau of Immigration and case of doubt concerning the grant of citizenship, such
Deportation. This was further confirmed in a letter dated doubt should be resolved in favor of the State and against
25 June 2001 of then Commissioner ANDREA D. the applicant (Cheng vs. Republic, L-16999, 22 June 1965).
DOMINGO of the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation. xxx
Although respondent had petitioned for his repatriation Not having been able to prove that he has fully
as a Filipino citizen under Republic Act No. 8171 on 17 reacquired his Filipino citizenship after being naturalized
December 1997, this did not restore to respondent his as a citizen of the United States, it is clear that respondent
Filipino citizenship, because Section 2 of the aforecited is not qualified to be candidate for the position of Mayor of
Republic Act No. 8171 specifically provides San Jacinto, Masbate, in the 10 May 2004 National and
that “repatriation shall be effected by taking the necessary Local Elections, pursuant to the aforequoted Sections 39
oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and and 40 of the Local Government Code of 1991.
registration in the proper civil registry and in the Bureau of As a further consequence of his not being a Filipino
Immigration.” citizen, respondent has also committed false representation
It appears from the records of this case that respondent in his certificate of candidacy by stating therein that he is a
failed to prove that he has fully complied with requirements natural-born Filipino citizen, when in fact, he has not yet
of the above-quoted Section 2 of Republic Act 8171 to even perfected the reacquisition of Filipino citizenship.
perfect his repatriation and reacquire his Filipino Such false representation constitutes a material
citizenship. Respondent has not submitted any document to misrepresentation as it relates to his qualification as a
prove that he has taken his oath of allegiance to the candidate for public office, which could be a valid ground for
Republic of the Philippines and that he has registered his the cancellation of his certificate of candidacy under Section
fact of repatriation in the proper civil registry and in the 78 of the Omnibus Election Code x x x. 6

Bureau of Immigration. In fact, in a letter date 25 June

2001, Commissioner ANDREA DOMINGO stated that In its Resolution promulgated on March 22, 2004, the
RESPONDENT is still a holder of visa under Section 13 (g) COMELEC, First Division, adopted the findings and
of the Philippine Immigration Act of 1940 as amended, with recommendation of Director Zaragoza. The dispositive
an indefinite authorized stay in the Philippines, implying portion of said Resolution stated, thus:
that respondent did not register his supposed Certificate of “WHEREFORE, premises considered, respondent
Repatriation with the Bureau of Immigration otherwise his CICERON PEREZ ALTAREJOS is hereby disqualified to
Alien run as Mayor of San Jacinto, Masbate. Accordingly, his
certificate of candidacy for the position of Municipal Mayor
660
of San Jacinto, Masbate is denied due course and cancelled
660 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED and his name deleted from the certified list of candidates
Altarejos vs. Commission on Elections for the May 10, 2004 elections.”7
On March 25, 2004, petitioner filed a motion for issuance to him of the corresponding
reconsideration and attached the following documents Identification Card as Filipino citizen;
to prove that he 5.​ (5)A letter dated December 17, 1997 from the
_______________ Special Committee on Naturalization to the
Local Registrar of San Jacinto, Masbate that it
6
Supra, note 1, at pp. 39-40.
7
Id., at p. 41. was sending petitioner’s Oath of Allegiance
and Certificate of Repatriation for registration
661
in their records and for petitioner’s
VOL. 441, NOVEMBER 10, 2004 66 reacquisition of his former Philippine
Altarejos vs. Commission on Elections citizenship.
had completed all the requirements for repatriation
which thus entitled him to run for an elective On May 7, 2004, the COMELEC en banc promulgated
office, viz.: a resolution denying the motion for reconsideration,
the dispositive portion of which reads:
1.​ (1)Oath of Allegiance dated December 17, 1997; “WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Commission (En
2.​ (2)Identification Certificate No. 116543 issued Banc) RESOLVED as it hereby RESOLVES to DENY the
by the Bureau of Immigration on March 1, Motion for Reconsideration for UTTER LACK OF MERIT
2004; and AFFIRMS the Resolution of the First Division.” 8

3.​ (3)Certification from the City Civil The Comelec en banc held, thus:
Registration Office, Makati City, that the _______________
Certificate of Repatriation and Oath of
Allegiance of petitioner was received by said 8
Supra, note 3, at p. 47.
office and registered, with the corresponding 662
fee paid, on February 18, 2004; 662 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
4.​ (4)A letter dated December 17, 1997 from the Altarejos vs. Commission on Elections
Special Committee on Naturalization to the “The Comelec Rules of Procedure provides that insufficiency
Bureau on Immigration and Deportation that of evidence to justify the decision is a ground for a motion
it was furnishing said office with the Oath of for reconsideration (Rule 19, Section 1). The evidence
Allegiance and Certificate of Repatriation of referred to in the above provision and to be considered in
petitioner for the cancellation of petitioner’s the Motion for Reconsideration are those which were
registration in said office as an alien, and the submitted during the hearing and attached to the
respective Memoranda of the parties which are already part
of the records of the case. In this regard, the evidence of the repatriation. He failed to comply with the requirements
respondent were not able to overcome the evidence of the under Section 2 of [Republic Act No.] 8171 which provides
petitioners. that repatriation shall be effected by taking the necessary
When the entire records of the case was forwarded to the oath of
Commission (First Division) the respondent’s only evidence
663
was his Certificate of Repatriation dated 17 December 1977
and marked as Annex “1” of his answer. This piece of
VOL. 441, NOVEMBER 10, 2004 663
evidence was not enough to controvert the evidence of the Altarejos vs. Commission on Elections
petitioners which consist of the letter of the then Bureau of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and registration
Immigration Commissioner Andrea Domingo dated 25 June in the proper civil registry and in the Bureau of
2001 which stated that as of the even date respondent is a Immigration.
holder of permanent resident visa (page 15 of the records) The certification was issued by the same Ms. Josephine
and the certification of Josephine C. Camata dated 28 C. Camata, City Civil Registrar, dated February 18, 2004.
January 2004 certifying, that the name of the respondent This time, she certifies that Ciceron Perez Altarejos was
could not be found in the records of repatriation. (page 42 of registered under Registry No. 1, Page 19, Book No. 1, Series
the records) The questioned resolution, is therefore, in order of 2004 and paid under OR nos. 88325/8833256 dated
as the evidence submitted by the respondent were February 18, 2004. (page 65 of the records). Obviously, he
insufficient to rebut the evidence of the petitioner. was able to register in the proper civil registry only on
Now, the respondent, in his Motion for Reconsideration, February 18, 2004.
attempted to introduce to the record new pieces of evidence, The respondent was able to register with the Bureau of
which introduction is not anymore allowed in a Motion for Immigration only on March 1, 2004 as evidenced by the
Reconsideration. These are the following a) Annex Bureau of Immigration Identification Certificate attached
“2”—Oath of Allegiance; b) Annex “3”—Bureau of to the Motion as Annex “3.”
Immigration Identification Certificate; c) Annex This fact confirms the finding of the Commission (First
“4”—Certification of the City Civil Registrar of Makati City; Division) that at the time respondent filed his certificate of
d) Annex “5”—Letter addressed to the Local Civil Registrar candidacy he is yet to complete the requirement under
of San Jacinto, Masbate by Aurora P. Cortes of Special section two (2) of RA 8171.
Committee on Naturalization; and e) Annex “6”—Letter As a consequence of not being a Filipino citizen, he has
addressed to the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation by committed false representation in his certificate of
Aurora P. Cortes of Special Committee on Naturalization. candidacy. Such false representation constitutes a material
Assuming that the new evidence of the respondent are misrepresentation as it relates to his qualification as a
admitted, with more reason should we cancel his certificate candidate. As such the certificate of candidacy may be
of candidacy for his act of [misrepresenting] himself as a cancelled on such ground.” (Ycain vs. Caneja, 18 Phil. 778) 9

Filipino citizen when at the time he filed his certificate of

candidacy, he has not yet perfected the process of
On May 10, 2004, the election day itself, petitioner list of candidates voted upon by the electorate in the
filed this petition praying that: (1) The petition be said municipality. Hence, the cancellation of
given due course and a temporary restraining order petitioner’s certificate of candidacy was never
and/or writ of preliminary injunction be issued ex implemented. The COMELEC also informed the Office
parte restraining the respondents and all persons of the Solicitor General that petitioner’s opponent, Dr.
acting on their behalf, from fully implementing the Emilio Aris V. Espinosa, was already proclaimed duly
questioned COMELEC Resolutions promulgated on elected Mayor of San Jacinto, Masbate.
March 22, 2004 and May 7, 2004; (2) a writ of The Office of the Solicitor General contends that
preliminary mandatory injunction be issued ordering said supervening event has rendered the instant
the COMELEC and all persons acting on its behalf to petition moot and academic, and it prayed for the
allow petitioner to run as Mayor of San Jacinto, dismissal of the petition.
Masbate in the May 10, 2004 elections, and to count In his Reply, petitioner opposed the dismissal of his
11

and canvass the votes cast in his favor and to proclaim petition. He claims that the COMELEC resolutions
him as the winning mayor of San Jacinto, Masbate; disqualifying him from running as a mayoralty
and (3) after proper proceedings, judgment be candidate adversely affected his candidacy, since his
rendered de- supporters were made to believe that his votes would
_______________ not be counted. Moreover, he stated that said
COMELEC resolutions cast a doubt on his Philippine
9
Id., at pp. 44-47.
citizenship.
664 Petitioner points out that he took his Oath of
664 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED Allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines on
Altarejos vs. Commission on Elections December 17, 1997. In view thereof, he ran and was
claring null and void and setting aside the COMELEC even elected as Mayor of San Jacinto, Masbate during
Resolutions promulgated on March 22, 2004 and May the 1998 elections. He argues that if there was delay
7, 2004 and other related Orders of the COMELEC or in the registration of his Certificate of Repatriation
its representatives which have the effect of illegally with the Bureau of Immigration and with the proper
preventing petitioner from running as Mayor of San civil registry, the same was brought about by the
Jacinto, Masbate. inaction on the part of said offices since the records of
In its Comment, the Office of the Solicitor General
10 the Special Committee
stated that, based on the information relayed to it by _______________
the COMELEC, petitioner’s name, as a mayoralty 10
Id., at p. 106.
candidate in San Jacinto, Masbate, was retained in the 11
Id., at p. 112.
 665 with the Bureau of Immigration a prerequisite in
VOL. 441, NOVEMBER 10, 2004 66 effecting repatriation?
Altarejos vs. Commission on Elections _______________
on Naturalization show that his Certificate of 12
Albaña v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 163302, July 23,
Repatriation and Oath of Allegiance have long been 2004, 435 SCRA 98; Garcia v. Commission on Elections, 258 SCRA
transmitted to said offices. 754, 757 (1996); Yorac v. Magalona, 3 SCRA 76, 77 (1961).
Petitioner also asserts that the subsequent 13
Albaña v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 163302, July 23,
2004, supra, citing Brillantes, Jr. v. Commission on Elections, G.R.
registration of his Certificate of Repatriation with the
No. 163193, June 15, 2004, 432 SCRA 269.
Bureau of Immigration and with the Civil Registry of
Makati City prior to the May 10, 2004 elections has 666
the effect of curing the defect, if any, in the 666 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
reacquisition of his Filipino citizenship as his Altarejos vs. Commission on Elections
repatriation retroacted to the date of his application The provision of law applicable in this case is Section 2
for repatriation as held in Frivaldo v. Comelec. of Republic Act No. 8171, thus: 14

The pertinent issues raised are the following: (1) Is _______________

the registration of petitioner’s repatriation with the 14
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8171:
proper civil registry and with the Bureau of “AN ACT PROVIDING FOR THE REPATRIATION OF FILIPINO WOMEN
Immigration a prerequisite in effecting repatriation; WHO HAVE LOST THEIR PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP BY MARRIAGE TO
ALIENS AND OF NATURAL-BORN FILIPINOS
and (2) whether or not the COMELEC en
banc committed grave abuse of discretion amounting Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
to excess or lack of jurisdiction in affirming the Philippines in Congress assembled:
SECTION 1. Filipino women who have lost their Philippine citizenship by
Resolution of the COMELEC, First Division. marriage to aliens and natural-born Filipinos who have lost their Philippine
As stated by the Office of the Solicitor General, citizenship, including their minor children, on account of political or economic
necessity, may reacquire Philippine citizenship through repatriation in the
where the issues have become moot and academic, manner provided in Section 4 of Commonwealth Act No. 63, as
there is no justiciable controversy, thereby rendering amended: Provided, That the applicant is not a:
the resolution of the same of no practical use or
value. Nonetheless, courts will decide a question
12 1.​ (1)Person opposed to organized government or affiliated with an
association or group of persons who uphold and teach doctrines
otherwise moot and academic if it is capable of opposing organized government;
repetition, yet evading review.13 2.​ (2)Person defending or teaching the necessity or propriety of
violence, personal assault, or association for the predominance of
First Issue: Is the registration of petitioner’s their ideas;
repatriation with the proper civil registry and 3.​ (3)Person convicted of crimes involving moral turpitude; or
 4.​ (4)Person suffering from mental alienation or incurable contagious 2004. Petitioner, therefore, completed all the
diseases.
requirements of repatriation only after he filed his
SEC. 2. Repatriation shall be effected by taking the necessary oath of certificate of candidacy for a mayoralty position,
allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and registration in the proper but before the elections.
civil registry and in the Bureau of Immigration. The Bureau of Immigration
shall thereupon cancel the pertinent alien certificate of registration and issue When does the citizenship qualification of a
the certificate of identification as Filipino citizen to the repatriated citizen. candidate for an elective office apply?
SEC. 3. All laws, decrees, orders, rules and regulations, or parts thereof
inconsistent with this Act are hereby repealed or amended accordingly.
In Frivaldo v. Commission on Elections, the Court 15

ruled that the citizenship qualification must be

667 construed as “applying to the time of proclamation of
VOL. 441, NOVEMBER 10, 2004 66 the elected official and at the start of his term.” The
Altarejos vs. Commission on Elections Court, through Justice Artemio V. Panganiban,
SEC. 2. Repatriation shall be effected by taking the discussed, thus:
necessary oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Under Sec. 39 of the Local Government Code, “(a)n elective
Philippines and registration in the proper civil registry and local official must be:
in the Bureau of Immigration. The Bureau of Immigration
_______________
shall thereupon cancel the pertinent alien certificate of
registration and issue the certificate of identification as SEC. 4. This Act shall take effect thirty (30) days after its publication in a
Filipino citizen to the repatriated citizen. newspaper of general circulation.”

The law is clear that repatriation is effected “by taking 15

257 SCRA 727 (1996).
the oath of allegiance to the Republic of the 668
Philippines andregistration in the proper civil registry 668 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
and in the Bureau of Immigration.” Hence, in addition Altarejos vs. Commission on Elections
to taking the Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines, the registration of the Certificate of ●​ * a citizen of the Philippines;
Repatriation in the proper civil registry and the ●​ * a registered voter in the barangay, municipality, city, or
Bureau of Immigration is a prerequisite in effecting province x x x where he intends to be elected;
the repatriation of a citizen. ●​ * a resident therein for at least one (1) year immediately
In this case, petitioner took his Oath of Allegiance preceding the day of the election;
on December 17, 1997, but his Certificate of ●​ * able to read and write Filipino or any other local
Repatriation was registered with the Civil Registry of language or dialect.”
Makati City only after six years or on February 18,
2004, and with the Bureau of Immigration on March 1,
●​ * In addition, “candidates for the position of governor x x 669
x must be at least twenty-three (23) years of age on VOL. 441, NOVEMBER 10, 2004 669
election day.” Altarejos vs. Commission on Elections
elected official and at the start of his term. (Emphasis
16

From the above, it will be noted that the law does not supplied.)
specify any particular date or time when the candidate
must possess citizenship, unlike that for residence (which Moreover, in the case of Frivaldo v. Commission on
must consist of at least one year’s residency immediately Elections, the Court ruled that “the repatriation of
preceding the day of election) and age (at least twenty three Frivaldo RETROACTED to the date of the filing of his
years of age on election day). application.” In said case, the repatriation of Frivaldo
Philippine citizenship is an indispensable requirement was by virtue of Presidential Decree No. 725, which
for holding an elective public office, and the purpose of the
took effect on June 5, 1975. The Court therein declared
citizenship qualification is none other than to ensure that
no alien, i.e., no person owing allegiance to another nation, that Presidential Decree No. 725 was a curative
shall govern our people and our country or a unit of statute, which is retroactive in nature. The
territory thereof. Now, an official begins to govern or to retroactivity of Frivaldo’s repatriation to the date of
discharge his functions only upon his proclamation and on filing of his application was justified by the Court,
the day the law mandates his term of office to begin. Since thus:
Frivaldo re-assumed his citizenship on June 30, 1995—the xxx
very day the term of office of governor (and other elective . . . The reason for this is simply that if, as in this case, it
officials) began—he was therefore already qualified to be was the intent of the legislative authority that the law
proclaimed, to hold such office and to discharge the should apply to past events—i.e., situations and
functions and responsibilities thereof as of said date. In transactions existing even before the law came into
short, at that time, he was already qualified to govern his being—in order to benefit the greatest number of former
native Sorsogon. This is the liberal interpretation that Filipinos possible thereby enabling them to enjoy and
should give spirit, life and meaning to our law on exercise the constitutionally guaranteed right of citizenship,
qualifications consistent with the purpose for which such and such legislative intention is to be given the fullest effect
law was enacted. x x x Paraphrasing this Court’s ruling and expression, then there is all the more reason to have the
in Vasquez v. Giap and Li Seng Giap & Sons, if the purpose law apply in a retroactive or retrospective manner to
of the citizenship requirement is to ensure that our people situations, events and transactions subsequent to the
and country do not end up being governed by passage of such law. That is, the repatriation granted to
aliens, i.e., persons owing allegiance to another nation, that Frivaldo x x x can and should be made to take effect as of
aim or purpose would not be thwarted but instead date of his application. As earlier mentioned, there is
achieved by construing the citizenshipqualification as nothing in the law that would bar this or would show a
applying to the time of proclamation of the contrary intention on the part of the legislative authority;
and there is no showing that damage or prejudice to the date of filing of one’s application for repatriation
anyone, or anything unjust or injurious would result from subsists for the same reasons quoted above.
giving retroactivity to his repatriation. Neither has Lee Accordingly, petitioner’s repatriation retroacted to
shown that there will result the impairment of any the date he filed his application in 1997. Petitioner
contractual obligation, disturbance of any vested right or
was, therefore, qualified to run for a mayoralty
breach of some constitutional guaranty.
position in the government in the May 10, 2004
xxx
Another argument for retroactivity to the date of filing is elections. Apparently, the COMELEC was cognizant of
that it would prevent prejudice to applicants. If P.D. 725 this fact since it did not implement the assailed
were not to be given retroactive effect, and the Special Resolutions disqualifying petitioner to run as mayor of
Committee decides not to San Jacinto, Masbate.
_______________ Second Issue: Whether or not the COMELEC en
16
Id., at pp. 748-749.
banc gravely abused its discretion in affirming
the Resolution of the COMELEC, First Division?
670
The Court cannot fault the COMELEC en banc for
670 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED affirming the decision of the COMELEC, First
Altarejos vs. Commission on Elections Division, considering that petitioner failed to prove
act, i.e., to delay the processing of applications for any before the COMELEC that he had complied with the
substantial length of time, then the former Filipinos who requirements of repatriation. Petitioner submitted the
may be stateless, as Frivaldo—having already renounced necessary documents proving compliance with the
his American citizenship—was, may be prejudiced for
requirements of repatriation only during his motion
causes outside their control. This should not be. In case of
doubt in the interpretation or application of laws, it is to be
for reconsideration, when the COMELEC en
presumed that the law-making body intended right and banc could no
_______________
justice to prevail. 17

Republic Act No. 8171 has impliedly repealed

18
17
Id., at pp. 754-756.
18
Republic Act No. 8171 took effect on January 12, 1996.
Presidential `Decree No. 725. They cover the same
subject matter: Providing for the repatriation of 671
Filipino women who have lost their Philippine VOL. 441, NOVEMBER 10, 2004 671
citizenship by marriage to aliens and of natural-born Altarejos vs. Commission on Elections
Filipinos. The Court’s ruling in Frivaldo v. longer consider said evidence. As the COMELEC en
Commission on Elections that repatriation retroacts to banccorrectly stated:
“The Comelec Rules of Procedure provides that insufficiency the successor of respondent mayor” resolves the issues
of evidence to justify the decision is a ground for a motion raised in the pleadings,
for reconsideration (Rule 19, Section 1). The evidence _______________
referred to in the above provision and to be considered in
the Motion for Reconsideration are those which were 19
Supra, note 3, at p. 44.
submitted during the hearing and attached to the 672
respective Memoranda of the parties which are already part
of the records of the case. In this regard, the evidence of the 672 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
respondent were not able to overcome the evidence of the Altarejos vs. Commission on Elections
petitioners.”
19

and upon attaining finality, becomes the law of the

It is, therefore, incumbent upon candidates for an case and constitutes a bar to any relitigation of the
elective office, who are repatriated citizens, to be ready same issues in any other proceeding under the
with sufficient evidence of their repatriation in case principle of res judicata. (Rosete vs. Court of
their Filipino citizenship is questioned to prevent a Appeals, 264 SCRA 147 [1996])
repetition of this case. Courts will decide a question otherwise moot and
WHEREFORE, the petition seeking the academic if it is “capable of repetition, yet evading
nullification of the Resolution of the COMELEC en review.” (Alunan III vs. Mirasol, 276 SCRA 501 [1997])
banc of May 7, 2004, affirming the Resolution of its
First Division dated March 22, 2004, is hereby ——o0o——
DENIED. No costs.
© Copyright 2019 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights
SO ORDERED.
reserved.
Davide,
Jr. (C.J.), Panganiban, Ynares-Santiago,Sandoval-Gut
ierrez, Carpio, Austria-Martinez, Carpio-Morales, Call
ejo, Sr., Chico-Nazario and Garcia, JJ.,concur.
Puno and Tinga, JJ., On Official Leave.
Quisumbing, J., In the result.
Corona, J., On Leave.
Petition denied.
Notes.—A resolution dismissing a petition for being
moot and academic after “considering the pleadings
and the annexes together with the Comment filed by
 VOL. 436, AUGUST 10, 2004 45 powers of government—executive or administrative,
Cipriano vs. Commission on Elections legislative, and quasi-judicial powers. The administrative
powers of the COMELEC, for example, include the power to
G.R. No. 158830. August 10, 2004. *

determine the number and location of polling places,

ELLAN MARIE P. CIPRIANO, a minor represented by
appoint election officials and inspectors, conduct
her father ROLANDO CIPRIANO, (AND OTHER registration of voters, deputize law enforcement agencies
YOUTH OF THE LAND AFFECTED AND and government instrumentalities to ensure free, orderly,
SIMILARLY SITUATED), honest, peaceful and credible elections; register political
petitioners, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, parties, organization or coalitions, accredit citizens’ arms of
DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR AND LOCAL the Commission, prosecute election offenses, and
GOVERNMENT, Election Officer LOPE GAYO, JR., recommend to the President the removal or imposition of
1st District, Pasay City, SANGGUNIANG BARANGAY any other disciplinary action upon any officer or employee it
thru its Chairman JOHNNY SANTIAGO of Barangay has deputized for violation or disregard of its directive,
38, Pasay City, GREG PAOLO ALCERA in his capacity order or decision. It also has direct control and supervision
over all personnel involved in the conduct of election. Its
as SK Federation President of Pasay City, EDNA
legislative authority is found in its power to promulgate
TIBAR—a minor assisted by parents, KRISTAL GALE
rules and regulations implementing the provisions of the
BONGGO—a minor assisted by parents, SK Chairman Omnibus Election Code or other laws which the
RUEL TAYAM DECENA of Barangay 142, Pasay City, Commission is required to enforce and administer.
THE PRESIDENT OF THE PAMBANSANG
KATIPUNAN NG MGA SANGGUNIANG _______________
KABATAAN, and ALL SK OFFICERS AND YOUTH *
EN BANC.
OF THE LAND SIMILARLY SITUATED and THEIR 46
AGENTS AND REPRESENTATIVES, respondents. 46 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Election Law; Commission on Elections; Powers; As an
Cipriano vs. Commission on Elections
independent Constitutional Commission, it is clothed with
the three powers of government—executive or The Constitution has also vested it with quasi-judicial
administrative, legislative, and quasi-judicial powers.—The powers when it was granted exclusive original jurisdiction
COMELEC is an institution created by the Constitution to over all contests relating to the elections, returns and
govern the conduct of elections and to ensure that the qualifications of all elective regional, provincial and city
electoral process is clean, honest, orderly, and peaceful. It is officials; and appellate jurisdiction over all contests
mandated to “enforce and administer all laws and involving elective municipal officials decided by trial courts
regulations relative to the conduct of an election, plebiscite, of general jurisdiction, or involving
initiative, referendum and recall.” As an independent elective barangay officials decided by trial courts of limited
Constitutional Commission, it is clothed with the three jurisdiction.
 Same; Same; Same; Limitation; Certificate of a party be given an opportunity to adduce his evidence to
Candidacy; The Court has ruled that the Commission has support his side of the case and that the evidence should be
no discretion to give or not to give due course to petitioner’s considered in the adjudication of the case. In a petition to
certificate of candidacy.—The Commission may not, by deny due course to or cancel a certificate of candidacy, since
itself, without the proper proceedings, deny due course to or the proceedings are required to be summary, the parties
cancel a certificate of candidacy filed in due form. When a may, after due notice, be required to submit their position
candidate files his certificate of candidacy, the COMELEC papers together with affidavits, counter-affidavits, and
has a ministerial duty to receive and acknowledge its other documentary evidence in lieu of oral testimony. When
receipt. This is provided in Sec. 76 of the Omnibus Election there is a need for clarification of certain matters, at the
Code, thus: Sec. 76. Ministerial duty of receiving and discretion of the Commission en banc or Division, the
acknowledging receipt.—The Commission, provincial parties may be allowed to cross-examine the affiants.
election supervisor, election registrar or officer designated 47
by the Commission or the board of election inspectors under VOL. 436, AUGUST 10, 2004 47
the succeeding section shall have the ministerial duty to Cipriano vs. Commission on Elections
receive and acknowledge receipt of the certificate of Same; Same; Same; Same; Same; It is not sufficient
candidacy. The Court has ruled that the Commission has no that the candidate be notified of the Commission’s inquiry
discretion to give or not to give due course to petitioner’s into the veracity of the contents of his certificate of
certificate of candidacy. The duty of the COMELEC to give candidacy, but he must also be allowed to present his own
due course to certificates of candidacy filed in due form is evidence to prove that he possesses the qualifications for the
ministerial in character. While the Commission may look office he seeks.—The determination whether a material
into patent defects in the certificates, it may not go into representation in the certificate of candidacy is false or not,
matters not appearing on their face. The question of or the determination whether a candidate is eligible for the
eligibility or ineligibility of a candidate is thus beyond the position he is seeking involves a determination of fact
usual and proper cognizance of said body. where both parties must be allowed to adduce evidence in
Same; Same; Same; Same; Due Process; It is therefore support of their contentions. Because the resolution of such
clear that the law mandates that the candidate must be fact may result to a deprivation of one’s right to run for
notified of the petition against him and he should be given public office, or, as in this case, one’s right to hold public
the opportunity to present evidence in his behalf.—It is office, it is only proper and fair that the candidate
therefore clear that the law mandates that the candidate concerned be notified of the proceedings against him and
must be notified of the petition against him and he should that he be given the opportunity to refute the allegations
be given the opportunity to present evidence in his behalf. against him. It should be stressed that it is not sufficient, as
This is the essence of due process. Due process demands the COMELEC claims, that the candidate be notified of the
prior notice and hearing. Then after the hearing, it is also Commission’s inquiry into the veracity of the contents of his
necessary that the tribunal shows substantial evidence to certificate of candidacy, but he must also be allowed to
support its ruling. In other words, due process requires that
present his own evidence to prove that he possesses the Annex “E”, Petition, Rollo, p. 73.
1

qualifications for the office he seeks. 48

48 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION in the Supreme Court. Cipriano vs. Commission on Elections
Certiorari.
On the date of the elections, July 15, 2002, the
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court. COMELEC issued Resolution No. 5363 adopting the
(Darill) Roque A. Amante, Jr. for petitioner. recommendation of the Commission’s Law Department
The Solicitor General for respondents. to deny due course to or cancel the certificates of
candidacy of several candidates for the SK elections,
including petitioners. The ruling was based on the
PUNO, J.: findings of the Law Department that petitioner and all
the other candidates affected by said resolution were
not registered voters in the barangay where they
May the Commission on Elections (COMELEC), on intended to run. 2

its own, in the exercise of its power to enforce and Petitioner, nonetheless, was allowed to vote in the
administer election laws, look into the qualifications of July 15 SK elections and her name was not deleted
a candidate and cancel his certificate of candidacy on from the official list of candidates. After the
the ground that he lacks the qualifications prescribed canvassing of votes, petitioner was proclaimed by
by law? This is the issue that needs to be resolved in the Barangay Board of Canvassers the duly elected SK
this petition for certiorari filed by Ellan Marie P. Chairman of Barangay 38, Pasay City. She took her
3

Cipriano, the duly elected SK Chairman of Barangay oath of office on August 14, 2002. 4

38, Pasay City, whose certificate of candidacy was On August 19, 2002, petitioner, after learning of
cancelled by the COMELEC motu proprio on the Resolution No. 5363, filed with the COMELEC a
ground that she was not a registered voter in motion for reconsideration of said resolution. She
the barangaywhere she intended to run. argued that a certificate of candidacy may only be
On June 7, 2002, petitioner filed with the denied due course or cancelled via an appropriate
COMELEC her certificate of candidacy as Chairman of petition filed by any registered candidate for the same
the Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) for the SK elections position under Section 78 of the Omnibus Election
held on July 15, 2002.1 Code in relation to Sections 5 and 7 of Republic Act
(R.A.) No. 6646. According to petitioner, the report of
_______________ the Election Officer of Pasay City cannot be considered
a petition under Section 78 of the Omnibus Election ineligible for not being registered voters in the place
Code, and the COMELEC cannot, by itself, deny due where they were elected. It explained:
course to or cancel one’s certificate of candidacy. A portion of Resolution No. 5584 explained the
Petitioner also claimed that she was denied due procedure adopted by the Commission in denying due
process when her certificate of candidacy was course the certificate of candidacy of a candidate. It reads:
Under COMELEC Resolution No. 4801, Election
cancelled by the Commission without notice and
Officers were given the duty to: (1) verify whether all
hearing. Petitioner further argued that the candidates for barangayand sangguniang
COMELEC en banc did not have jurisdiction to act on kabataan positions are registered voters of
the cancellation of her certificate of candidacy on the the barangay where they filed their certificates of
first instance because it is the Division of the candidacy; and (2) examine the entries of the certificates of
candidacy and determine on the basis of said entries
Commission that has authority to decide
whether the candidate concerned possesses all the
election-related cases, including pre-proclamation qualifications of a candidate.
controversies. Finally, she contended that she may Further, Election Officers are mandated to report by
only be removed by a petition for quo warranto after registered mail and by rush telegram to the Law
her proclamation as duly-elected SK Chairman. 5 Department of this Commission the names of candidates
who are not registered voters in the place where they seek
_______________ to run for public office within three (3) days from the last
day for filing of certificates of candidacy. The names of
2
Annex “A”, Petition, Rollo, pp. 53-56. these candidates, however, shall still be included in the
3
Annex “F”, Petition, Rollo, p. 74. certified lists of candidates until the Commission directs
4
Annex “G”, Petition, Rollo, p. 75. otherwise.
5
Annex “B”, Petition, Rollo, pp. 57-62. By virtue of the said report, the Law Department
49 makes a recommendation to the Commission En Banc, and
VOL. 436, AUGUST 10, 2004 49 the latter, by virtue of an En Banc Resolution either gives
due course to or denies/cancels the certificates of candidacy
Cipriano vs. Commission on Elections of the said candidates.
Verily, the administrative inquiry of the Commission on
On October 7, 2002, the COMELEC issued the eligibility of candidates starts from the time they filed
Resolution No. 5781, resolving petitioner’s motion for
6 their certificates of candidacy. The candidates, by virtue of
reconsideration. It cited its previous resolution, the publication of COMELEC Resolution No. 4801 on May
25, 2002 in the Manila Standard and Manila Bulletin are
Resolution No. 5584, in relation to Resolution No. deemed to have constructive notice of the said
4801. The Commission stated in Resolution No. 5584 administrative inquiry. Thus, the Commission, by virtue of
its policy on proclaimed candidates found to be its administrative powers, may motu proprio deny/cancel
the certificates of candidacy of candidates who are found to
 be not registered voters in the place where they seek to run report of the Election Officer or the petition to deny
for public office. due course to or cancel the certificate of candidacy
Any registered candidate for the same office may also filed against them.
file a verified petition to deny due course to or cancel a On the matter of petitions for disqualification, the
certificate of candidacy pursuant to Section 69 (nuisance
provisions of COMELEC Resolution No. 4801 are
candidate) or Sec. 78 (material misrepresentation in the
certificate of candidacy) of the Omnibus
likewise clear: (1) ‘A verified petition to disqualify a
candidate on the ground of ineligibility or under
_______________ Section 68 of the Omnibus Election Code may be filed
at anytime before proclamationof the winning
Annex “C”, Petition, Rollo, pp. 63-71.
6
candidate by any registered voter or any candidate for
50 the same office,’ (2) ‘All disqualification cases filed on
50 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED the ground of ineligibility shall survive, although the
Cipriano vs. Commission on Elections candidate has already been proclaimed.’
Election Code either personally or through a duly Clearly, by virtue of the above-quoted provisions,
authorized representative within five (5) days from the proclamation of a candidate who is found to be
the last day for filing of certificate of candidacy disqualified is also not a bar to the Commission’s
directly with the Office of the Provincial Election power to order a proclaimed candidate to cease and
Supervisor or with the Office of the Election Officer desist from taking his oath of office or from assuming
concerned. the position to which he was elected.
Hence, as long as the Election Officer reported the By way of contrast, in case of proclaimed
alleged ineligibility in accordance with COMELEC candidates who were found to be ineligible only after
Resolution No. 4801, or the petition to deny due they were elected and proclaimed, the provisions of
course to or cancel a certificate of candidacy was filed Section 253 of the Omnibus Election Code are clear:
within the reglementary period, the fact that the The remedy of losing candidates is to file a petition
Resolution of this Commission, denying due course to for quo warranto before the metropolitan or municipal
or canceling the certificate of candidacy of an trial court. This is logical—The Commission did not
ineligible candidate, was not promulgated or did not acquire jurisdiction over these proclaimed candidates
arrive prior to or on the day of the elections is prior to election (i.e., There was no report from the
therefore of no moment. The proclamation of an Election Officer regarding their ineligibility and no
ineligible candidate is not a bar to the exercise of this petition to deny due course to or cancel certificate of
Commission’s power to implement the said Resolution candidacy and/or petition for disqualification was
of the Commission En Banc because it already filed against them.) Thus, the Commission has no
acquired the jurisdiction to determine the ineligibility jurisdiction to annul their proclamation on the ground
of the candidates who filed their certificates of of ineligibility, except in cases wherein the
candidacy even before elections by virtue of either the
 proclamation is null and void for being based on Considering that there are queries as to the status of the
incomplete canvass. proclamation of disqualified candidates as an offshoot of
51 Resolution No. 5584, the same was amended by virtue of
VOL. 436, AUGUST 10, 2004 51 Resolution No. 5666, the dispositive portion of which now
Cipriano vs. Commission on Elections reads:
Thus, the Commission ruled: Considering the above-quoted provision, the
Commission RESOLVED, as it hereby RESOLVES, to
Premises considered, the Commission, RESOLVED, as it
APPROVE the recommendation of Commissioner Sadain to
hereby RESOLVES, to establish a policy as follows: amend Resolution No. 5584 promulgated on 10 August
ON PROCLAIMED CANDIDATES FOUND TO BE 2002 with modification.
INELIGIBLE FOR BEING NOT REGISTERED VOTERS Accordingly, Resolution No. 5584 shall now read as
IN THE PLACE WHERE THEY WERE ELECTED. follows:

1.​ (a)For a proclaimed candidate whose certificate of I

candidacy was denied due course to or cancelled by
virtue of a Resolution of the Commission En Banc ON PROCLAIMED CANDIDATES FOUND TO BE
INELIGIBLE FOR BEING NOT REGISTERED VOTERS
albeit such Resolution did not arrive on time.
IN THE PLACE WHERE THEY WERE ELECTED X X X X
XX
1.​ 1.To DIRECT the Election Officers concerned to 1.​ (a)x x x
implement the resolution of the Commission 2.​ (b)x x x
deleting the name of the candidate whose 3.​ (c)x x x
certificate of candidacy was denied due course;
2.​ 2.To DIRECT the candidate whose name was _______________
ordered deleted to cease and desist from taking his
oath of office or from assuming the position to Rollo, pp. 67-69.
7

52
which he was elected, unless a temporary
restraining order was issued by the Supreme Court; 52 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
and Cipriano vs. Commission on Elections
3.​ 3.To RECONVENE the Board of Canvassers for the (d) For both (a) and (b), in the event that the
purpose of proclaiming the duly-elected candidates disqualified candidate is proclaimed the winner
and correcting the Certificate of Canvass of despite his disqualification or despite the pending
Proclamation.7 disqualification case filed before his proclamation, but
which is subsequently resolved against him, the
proclamation of said disqualified candidate is hereby
The Commission further stated: declared void from the beginning, even if the
dispositive portion of the resolution disqualifying him
 or canceling his certificate of candidacy does not cease and desist from continuously functioning as
provide for such an annulment. 8
such SK Officers and Members and to vacate their
respective SK Officers position, as they are no
Hence, petitioner filed the instant petition seeking: longer members of the Sangguniang Kabataan
organization or Katipunan ng Kabataan
1.​ a)To declare illegal and unconstitutional the organization for being over age upon attaining the
COMELEC Resolution No. 5363 promulgated on 15 age of 18 years old.
July 2002 and COMELEC Resolution No. 5781 5.​ e)To direct respondents to pay the salary, allowance
promulgated on October 7, 2002 and any other and other benefits of the petitioner as SK
COMELEC actions and resolutions which are Chairperson of Barangay 38, Pasay City. 9

intended to summarily oust and remove petitioner

as SK Chairman of Barangay 38, Pasay City
without any notice, inquiry, election protest, Stripped of the non-essentials, the only issue in this
petition for quo warranto, investigation and case is the validity of Resolution No. 5363 of the
hearing, and therefore a clear violation of due COMELEC.
process of law.
2.​ b)To declare illegal the aforesaid COMELEC _______________
Resolutions sitting en banc which does not have
authority to decide election related case, including Rollo, p. 70.
8

Petition, Rollo, pp. 6-7.

9
pre-proclamation controversies, in the first
53
instance, in consonance to this Honorable Court’s
ruling in the cases of Sarmiento vs.
VOL. 436, AUGUST 10, 2004 53
COMELEC,G.R. No. 87308, August 29, 1989 Cipriano vs. Commission on Elections
and Garvida vs. Sales, G.R. No. 124893, April 18,
1997. Petitioner argues that she was deprived of due
3.​ c)To declare unconstitutional Sections 6 and 7 of process when the COMELEC issued Resolution No.
R.A. 9164 and also to declare the age of 5363 canceling her certificate of candidacy. She claims
membership and its officers of the KK or SK that the resolution was intended to oust her from her
organization from 15 to 21 years old in accordance position as SK Chairman without any appropriate
with Sec. 39 (f) and Sec. 423 (b) and other
action and proceedings.
provisions of R.A. 7160 otherwise known as Local
The COMELEC, on the other hand, defends its
Government Code of 1991.
4.​ d)If Sections 6 and 7 of R.A. 9164 are sustained as resolution by invoking its administrative power to
constitutional to direct all SK Officers and enforce and administer election laws. Thus, in the
Members who are now more than 18 years old to exercise of such power, it may motu proprio deny or
cancel the certificates of candidacy of candidates who disregard of its directive, order or decision. It also has
are found to be unqualified for the position they are direct control and supervision over all personnel
seeking. The Commission further contends that the involved in the conduct of election. Its legislative
11

publication of COMELEC Resolution No. 4801 authority is found in its power to promul-
governing the conduct of the Barangay and SK
_______________
elections in two newspapers of general circulation is
sufficient notice to the candidates regarding the Sec. 2 (1), Article IX C, 1987 Constitution.
10

Commission’s administrative inquiry into their Sec. 2, Article IX C, 1987 Constitution; Sandoval
11
vs.
certificates of candidacy. Commission on Elections, 323 SCRA 403 (2000).
The petition is impressed with merit. 54

The COMELEC is an institution created by the 54 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

Constitution to govern the conduct of elections and to Cipriano vs. Commission on Elections
ensure that the electoral process is clean, honest, gate rules and regulations implementing the
orderly, and peaceful. It is mandated to “enforce and provisions of the Omnibus Election Code or other laws
administer all laws and regulations relative to the which the Commission is required to enforce and
conduct of an election, plebiscite, initiative, administer. The Constitution has also vested it with
12

referendum and re-call.” As an independent

10 quasi-judicial powers when it was granted exclusive
Constitutional Commission, it is clothed with the three original jurisdiction over all contests relating to the
powers of government—executive or administrative, elections, returns and qualifications of all elective
legislative, and quasi-judicial powers. The regional, provincial and city officials; and appellate
administrative powers of the COMELEC, for example, jurisdiction over all contests involving elective
include the power to determine the number and municipal officials decided by trial courts of general
location of polling places, appoint election officials and jurisdiction, or involving elective barangay officials
inspectors, conduct registration of voters, deputize law decided by trial courts of limited jurisdiction.
13

enforcement agencies and government Aside from the powers vested by the Constitution,
instrumentalities to ensure free, orderly, honest, the Commission also exercises other powers expressly
peaceful and credible elections; register political provided in the Omnibus Election Code, one of which
parties, organization or coalitions, accredit citizens’ is the authority to deny due course to or to cancel a
arms of the Commission, prosecute election offenses, certificate of candidacy. The exercise of such authority,
and recommend to the President the removal or however, must be in accordance with the conditions set
imposition of any other disciplinary action upon any by law.
officer or employee it has deputized for violation or
 The COMELEC asserts that it is authorized Cipriano vs. Commission on Elections
to motu proprio deny due course to or cancel a not go into matters not appearing on their face. The
certificate of candidacy based on its broad question of eligibility or ineligibility of a candidate is
administrative power to enforce and administer all thus beyond the usual and proper cognizance of said
laws and regulations relative to the conduct of body.15

elections. Nonetheless, Section 78 of the Omnibus Election

We disagree. The Commission may not, by itself, Code allows any person to file before the COMELEC a
without the proper proceedings, deny due course to or petition to deny due course to or cancel a certificate of
cancel a certificate of candidacy filed in due form. candidacy on the ground that any material
When a candidate files his certificate of candidacy, the representation therein is false. It states:
COMELEC has a ministerial duty to receive and Sec. 78. Petition to deny due course to or cancel a
acknowledge its receipt. This is provided in Sec. 76 of certificate of candidacy.—A verified petition seeking to deny
the Omnibus Election Code, thus: due course or to cancel a certificate of candidacy may be
Sec. 76. Ministerial duty of receiving and acknowledging filed by any person exclusively on the ground that any
receipt.—The Commission, provincial election supervisor, material representation contained therein as required
election registrar or officer designated by the Commission under Section 74 hereof is false. The petition may be filed at
or the board of election inspectors under the succeeding any time not later than twenty-five days from the time of
section shall have the ministerial duty to receive and the filing of the certificate of candidacy and shall be
acknowledge receipt of the certificate of candidacy. decided, after notice and hearing, not later than fifteen days
The Court has ruled that the Commission has no before the election.
discretion to give or not to give due course to Under Rule 23 of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure,
petitioner’s certificate of candidacy. The duty of the
14 the petition shall be heard summarily after due notice.
COMELEC to give due course to certificates of It is therefore clear that the law mandates that the
candidacy filed in due form is ministerial in character. candidate must be notified of the petition against him
While the Commission may look into patent defects in and he should be given the opportunity to present
the certificates, it may evidence in his behalf. This is the essence of due
process. Due process demands prior notice and
_______________ hearing. Then after the hearing, it is also necessary
that the tribunal shows substantial evidence to
12
Sec. 52(c), Omnibus Election Code.
13
Sec. 2 (2), Article IX C, 1087 Constitution. support its ruling. In other words, due process requires
14
Abcede vs. Hon. Imperial, 103 Phil. 136 (1958). that a party be given an opportunity to adduce his
55 evidence to support his side of the case and that the
VOL. 436, AUGUST 10, 2004 55 evidence should be considered in the adjudication of
the case. In a petition to deny due course to or cancel
16
functions of a judge, or is conferred upon an officer
a certificate of candidacy, since the proceedings are other than a judicial officer, it is deemed
required to be summary, the parties may, after due quasi-judicial.
19

notice, be required to submit their position papers The determination whether a material
together with affidavits, counter-affidavits, and other representation in the certificate of candidacy is false or
documentary evidence in lieu of oral testimony. When not, or the determination whether a candidate is
there is a need for clarification of certain matters, at eligible for the position he is seeking involves a
the discretion of the Commission en banc or Division, determination of fact where both parties must be
the parties may be allowed to cross-examine the allowed to adduce evidence in support of their
affiants. 17
contentions. Because the resolution of such fact may
result to a deprivation of one’s right to run for public
_______________
office, or, as in this case, one’s right to hold public
Sanchez vs. Del Rosario, 111 Phil. 733; 1 SCRA 1102 (1961).
15 office, it is only proper and fair that the candidate
Sandoval vs. Commission on Elections, supra.
16 concerned be notified of the proceedings against him
17
Saya-ang, Sr. vs. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 155087, and that he be given the opportunity to refute the
November 28, 2003, 416 SCRA 650.
allegations against him. It should be stressed that it is
56
not sufficient, as the COMELEC claims, that the
56 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
candidate be notified of the Commission’s inquiry into
Cipriano vs. Commission on Elections
the veracity of the contents of his certificate of
candidacy, but he must also be allowed to present his
Contrary to the submission of the COMELEC, the own evidence to prove that he possesses the
denial of due course or cancellation of one’s certificate qualifications for the office he seeks.
of candidacy is not within the administrative powers of In view of the foregoing discussion, we rule that
the Commission, but rather calls for the exercise of its Resolution No. 5363 and Resolution No. 5781,
quasi-judicial functions. Administrative power is canceling petitioner’s certificate of candidacy without
concerned with the work of applying policies and proper proceedings, are tainted with grave abuse of
enforcing orders as determined by proper discretion and therefore void.
governmental organs. We have earlier enumerated
18

We need not rule on the question raised by

the scope of the Commission’s administrative petitioner as regards the constitutionality of Sections 6
functions. On the other hand, where a power rests in and 7 of Republic Act No. 9164 lowering the age of
judgment or discretion, so that it is of judicial nature membership in the SK as it is not the lis mota of this
or character, but does not involve the exercise of case.
 IN VIEW WHEREOF, COMELEC Resolution No.
5363 promulgated on July 15, 2002 and COMELEC
Resolution No. 5781 issued on October 7, 2002 are
hereby SET ASIDE.
_______________

Ople vs. Torres, 293 SCRA 150 (1998).

18

Sandoval vs. Commission on Elections, supra.

19

57
VOL. 436, AUGUST 11, 2004 57
Barbuco vs. Beltran

SO ORDERED.
Davide,
Jr. (C.J)., Panganiban, Quisumbing, Ynares-Santiago,
Carpio, Austria-Martinez, Corona, Carpio-Morales,
Callejo, Sr., Azcuna, Tinga and Chico-Nazario,
JJ., concur.
Sandoval-Gutierrez, J., On Leave.
COMELEC Resolution No. 5363 and COMELEC
Resolution No. 5781 set aside.
Note.—Proceedings for denial or cancellation of a
certificate of candidacy are summary in nature.
(Coquilla vs. Commission on Elections, 385 SCRA
607 [2002])

——o0o——

© Copyright 2019 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights

reserved.
98 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED yet evading review. In this case, we find it necessary to
Albaña vs. Commission on Elections resolve the issues raised in the petition in order to prevent
a repetition thereof and, thus, enhance free, orderly, and
G.R. No. 163302. July 23, 2004. *

peaceful elections. For this reason, we resolve to grant the

ROBERTO ALBAÑA, KATHERINE BELO,
petition.
GENEROSO DERRAMAS, VICENTE DURAN, Same; Disqualification Cases; The COMELEC is
RICARDO ARAQUE, LILIA ARANAS, MERLINDA mandated to dismiss a complaint for disqualification of a
DEGALA, GABRIEL ARANAS, ERNESTO BITO-ON candidate who has been charged with an election offense but
AND JUVIC DESLATE, who has already been proclaimed as winner by the Board of
petitioners, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, PIO Canvassers.—Section 2 of COMELEC Resolution No. 2050
JUDE S. BELO, RODOLFO DEOCAMPO AND is as clear as day: the COMELEC is mandated to dismiss a
LORENCITO B. DIAZ, respondents. complaint for the disqualification of a candidate who has
Election Law; Moot and Academic Questions; “Capable been charged with an election offense but who has already
of Repetition Yet Evading Review” Rule; The expiration of been proclaimed as winner by the Municipal Board of
the challenged term of the offices renders the corresponding Canvassers. COMELEC Resolution No. 2050 specifically
petition for the nullification of the COMELEC resolutions mandates a definite policy and procedure for
and the proclamation of winning candidates moot and disqualification cases; hence, should be applied and given
academic; Court will decide a question otherwise moot and effect.
academic if it is capable of repetition yet evading
_______________
review.—On the first issue, we agree with the COMELEC
that the petition for the nullification of its October 21, 2003 *
EN BANC.
and May 5, 2004 Resolutions and the proclamation of the 99
private respondents on June 10, 2004 was mooted by the VOL. 435, JULY 23, 2004 99
election and proclamation of a new set of municipal officials Albaña vs. Commission on Elections
after the May 10, 2004 elections. In fact, the records show
Same; Same; If the COMELEC finds that there is
that petitioner Katherine Belo was elected as Mayor,
probable cause, it shall order its Law Department to file the
petitioner Generoso Derramas as Vice-Mayor, and
appropriate Information with the Regional Trial Court
petitioners Ricardo Araque and Ernesto Bito-on as
(RTC) which has territorial jurisdiction over the offense, but
members of the Sangguniang Bayan. The expiration of the
shall, nonetheless, order the dismissal of the complaint for
challenged term of the offices renders the corresponding
disqualification, without prejudice to the outcome of the
petition moot and academic. Where the issues have become
criminal case.—It bears stressing that Resolution No. 2050
moot and academic, there is no justiciable controversy,
was approved precisely because of the variance in opinions
thereby rendering the resolution of the same of no practical
of the members of the respondent COMELEC on matters of
use or value. Nonetheless, courts will decide a question
procedure in dealing with and evaluating cases for
otherwise moot and academic if it is capable of repetition,
disqualification filed under Section 68 of the Omnibus defeated candidate cannot be deemed elected to the office.
Election Code in relation to Section 6 of Rep. Act No. 6646. The votes intended for the disqualified candidate should not
Under the said resolution, if a complaint is filed with the be considered null and void, as it would amount to
COMELEC against a candidate who has already been disenfranchising the electorate in whom sovereignty
proclaimed winner, charging an election offense under resides. As we held in Reyes vs. Commission on Elections: To
Section 261 of the Omnibus Election Code, as amended by simplistically assume that the second placer would have
Rep. Act Nos. 6646 and 8436, and praying for the received the other votes would be to substitute our
disqualification of the said candidate, the COMELEC shall judgment for the mind of the voter. The second placer is just
determine the existence of probable cause for the filing of that, a second placer. He lost the elections. He was
an Information against the candidate for the election repudiated by either a majority or plurality of voters. He
offense charged. However, if the COMELEC finds no could not be considered the first among qualified candidates
probable cause, it is mandated to dismiss the complaint for because in a field which excludes the disqualified candi-
the disqualification of the candidate. If the COMELEC finds 100
that there is probable cause, it shall order its Law 100 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Department to file the appropriate Information with the Albaña vs. Commission on Elections
Regional Trial Court (RTC) which has territorial date, the conditions would have substantially changed.
jurisdiction over the offense, but shall, nonetheless, order We are not prepared to extrapolate the results under the
the dismissal of the complaint for disqualification, without circumstances.
prejudice to the outcome of the criminal case. If the trial
court finds the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION in the Supreme Court.
the offense charged, it shall also order his disqualification Certiorari and Prohibition.
pursuant to Section 264 of the Omnibus Election Code, as
amended by Section 46 of Rep. Act No. 8189. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
Same; Same; It is well-settled that the ineligibility of a Sixto S. Brillantes, Jr. for petitioners.
candidate receiving majority votes does not entitle the
eligible candidate receiving the next highest number of votes CALLEJO, SR., J.:
to be declared elected—a minority or defeated candidate
cannot be deemed elected to the office.—The COMELEC, Before us is a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition
likewise, committed a grave abuse of its discretion when it
for the nullification of the Resolution of the
ordered the Municipal Election Officers to convene a new
Commission on Elections (COMELEC), First Division,
Board of Canvassers and proclaim the winners after the
petitioners were declared disqualified. It is well-settled that dated October 21, 2003 annulling the proclamation of
the ineligibility of a candidate receiving majority votes does the petitioners as the duly-elected municipal officials
not entitle the eligible candidate receiving the next highest of Panitan, Capiz, during the May 14, 2001 elections,
number of votes to be declared elected. A minority or and the Resolution of the COMELEC En Banc dated
May 5, 2004, denying their motion for reconsideration. acts of terrorism punishable by Section 261(e) of the 2

The petitioners aver that the public respondent Omnibus Election Code, and engaged in vote-buying,
committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack punishable under Section 261(a) of the Omnibus 3

or excess of jurisdiction in issuing the assailed Election Code. The private respondents prayed that
resolutions. the petitioners be charged of the said crimes and
The Antecedents disqualified from holding office under Section 68 of the 4

During the May 14, 2001 elections, the petitioners and said Code, and Section
private respondents ran for the positions of Mayor,
_______________
Vice-Mayor and Members of the Sangguniang
Bayan in the Municipality of Panitan, Capiz. On May Rollo, p. 131.
1

18, 2001, the petitioners were duly elected and Sec. 261. Prohibited Acts.—The following shall be guilty of an
2

proclaimed winners to the following positions: election offense:

...
(e) Threats, intimidation, terrorism, use of fraudulent device or other
1.​ (a)Roberto Albaña—Mayor forms of coercion.—Any person who, directly or indirectly, threatens,
2.​ (b)Katherine Belo—Vice-Mayor intimidates or actually causes, inflicts or produces any violence, injury,
punishment, damage, loss or disadvantage upon any person or persons or
3.​ (c)Generoso Derramas—Member of the
that of the immediate members of his family, his honor or property, or uses
Sang[g]uniang Bayan (SB) any fraudulent device or scheme to compel or induce the registration or
4.​ (d)Vicente Duran—Member of the SB refraining from registration of any voter, or the participation in a campaign
5.​ (e)Ricardo Araque—Member of the SB or refraining or desistance from any campaign, or the casting of any vote or
omission to vote, or any promise of such registration, campaign, vote or
6.​ (f)Lilia Aranas—Member of the SB omission therefrom.
7.​ (g)Merlinda Degala—Member of the SB 3
The provisions reads, thus:
8.​ (h)Gabriel Aranas—Member of the SB (a) Vote-buying and vote-selling.—
9.​ (i)Ernesto Bito-on—Member of the SB
1.​ (1)Any person who gives, offers or promises money or anything of
value, gives or promises any office or employment, franchise or
101 grant, public or private, or makes or offers to make an
VOL. 435, JULY 23, 2004 10 expenditure, directly or indirectly, or cause to be made to any
person association, corporation, entity, or community in order to
Albaña vs. Commission on Elections induce anyone or the public in general to vote for or against any
candidate or withhold his vote in the election, or to vote for or
1.​ (j)Juvic Deslate—Member of the SB
1 against any aspirant for the nomination or choice of a candidate in
a convention or similar selection process of a political party.
2.​ (2)Any person, association, corporation, group or community who
On June 23, 2001, the private respondents filed a solicits or receives, directly or indirectly, any expenditure or
promise of any office or employment, public or private, for any of
complaint against the petitioners with the COMELEC the foregoing considerations.
Law Department, alleging that the latter committed
 Sec. 68. Disqualifications.—Any candidate who, in an action or
4
election campaign an amount in excess of that allowed by this Code;
protest in which he is a party is declared by final decision of a (d) solicited, received or made any contribution prohibited under
competent Sections 89, 95, 96, 97 and 104; or (e) violated any of Sections 80, 83,
102 85, 86 and 261, paragraphs d, e, k, v, and cc, subparagraph 6, shall be
102 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED disqualified from continuing as a candidate, or if he has been elected,
from holding the office. Any person who is a permanent resident of or
Albaña vs. Commission on Elections an immigrant to a foreign country shall not be qualified to run for
6 of Republic Act No. 6646. The case was docketed as
5
any elective office under this Code, unless said person has waived his
Election Offense Case No. 01-111. status as a permanent resident or immigrant of a foreign country in
accordance with the residence requirement provided for in the
The Law Department of the COMELEC found election laws.
a prima facie case and issued a Resolution on January 5
Sec. 6. Effect of Disqualification Case.—Any candidate who has
15, 2002, recommending the filing of an Information been declared by final judgment to be disqualified shall not be voted
against the petitioners for violation of Section 261(e) of for, and the votes cast for him shall not be counted. If, for any reason,
a candidate is not declared by final judgment before an election to be
the Omnibus Election Code, in relation to Section 28 of disqualified and he is voted for and receives the winning number of
Republic Act No. 6648. It, likewise, recommended the votes in such election, the Court or Commission shall continue with
disqualification of all the petitioners from further the trial and hearing of the action, inquiry or protest and, upon
holding office, and the reconvening of the Municipal motion of the complainant or any intervenor, may during the
pendency thereof order the suspension of the proclamation of such
Board of Canvassers (MBC) in order to proclaim the candidate whenever the evidence of his guilt is strong.
qualified candidates who obtained the highest number 6
Id., at p. 29.
of votes. 6 103
Acting on the said resolution, the COMELEC En VOL. 435, JULY 23, 2004 103
Bancissued, on February 28, 2003, a Resolution Albaña vs. Commission on Elections
directing its Law Department to file the appropriate IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, We DIRECT the LAW
Information against the petitioners for violation of DEPARTMENT to FILE THE NECESSARY
Section 261(e) of the Omnibus Election Code and INFORMATION against ROBERTO ALBAÑA,
directing the Clerk of the Commission to docket the KATHERINE BELO, GENEROSO DERRAMAS, VICENTE
electoral aspect of the complaint as a disqualification DURAN, RICARDO ARAQUE, LILIA ARANAS,
MERLINDA DEGALA, GABRIEL ARANAS, ERNESTO
case. The dispositive portion reads:
BITO-ON and JUVIC DESLATE before a court of
_______________ competent jurisdiction.
The Clerk of the Commission is likewise directed to
court guilty of, or found by the Commission of having (a) given docket the electoral aspect of the complaint as a
money or other material consideration to influence, induce or corrupt disqualification case and immediately assign the same to a
the voters or public officials performing electoral functions; (b) division which shall resolve the case on the basis of the
committed acts of terrorism to enhance his candidacy; (c) spent in his recommendation of the Law Department. 7
The petitioners filed a motion for which shall disregard the votes garnered by the
reconsideration thereon, alleging that the COMELEC
8 respondents, prepare a new Certificate of Canvass on the
did not make any findings of fact in its resolution, and
_______________
that there was even no disquisition as to the merits of
the affidavits of their witnesses and the evidence 7
Id.
presented by them. The petitioners also alleged that 8
Id., at p. 56.
9
Id., at p. 63.
the COMELEC erred in ordering the docketing of the 104
electoral aspect of the complaint, in light of Section 2 104 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
of COMELEC Resolution No. 2050. Albaña vs. Commission on Elections
On June 3, 2003, the COMELEC issued a basis of the votes of the candidates for the position held by
Resolution denying the said motion for lack of merit
9
the respondents to the exclusion of the latter and
and for having been filed out of time. The Clerk of the immediately, proclaim the winners.
Commission docketed the disqualification case against SO ORDERED.” 10

the petitioners as SPA No. 03-006. The petitioners’ motion for reconsideration and
On October 21, 2003, the COMELEC First Division supplement to the motion for reconsideration were
rendered the assailed resolution in SPA No. 03-006 denied by the COMELEC En Banc in the Resolution of
annulling the petitioners’ proclamation on the ground May 5, 2004, declaring that the disqualification case
that they violated Section 261(a) and (e) of the was the result of the findings of the Commission En
Omnibus Election Code, and directing the election Banc. It also held that as an aftermath of petitioners’
officer of Panitan to constitute a new municipal board violation of Section 261(e) in relation to Section 68 of
of canvassers, thus: the Omnibus Election Code, they are considered
“WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the proclamation disqualified candidates and, therefore, the votes they
of respondents Roberto Albaña, Katherine Belo, Generoso received are deemed stray votes. Commissioners
11

Derramas, Vicente Duran, Ricardo Araque, Lilia Aranas, Mehol K. Sadain and Florentino A. Tuason, Jr. filed
Merlinda Degala, Gabriel Aranas, Ernesto Bito-on and
separate dissenting opinions.
Juvic Deslate as Mayor, Vice-Mayor and members of the
Sangguniang Bayan of Panitan, Capiz, are hereby annulled On the same day, the private respondents moved for
on the ground that they committed election offenses as the execution pending appeal of the assailed
provided for under Section 261 (a) of the Omnibus Election resolutions on the ground that decisions on election
Code in relation to Section 28 of RA 6646 and Section 261 contests rendered by the COMELEC may be executed
(e) of the same Code in relation to Section 68 thereof. The pending appeal for good reasons. They contended that
Election Officer of the municipality of Panitan is hereby a good reason existed in this case, considering that
directed to constitute a new Municipal Board of Canvassers their terms of office were about to expire. 12
The Present Petition of municipal officials after the May 10, 2004 elections;
On May 13, 2004, the petitioners filed this Petition for and, (b) if in the negative, whether the COMELEC
Certiorari and Prohibition with Application for a committed a grave abuse of discretion amounting to
Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) or a Writ of excess or lack of jurisdiction in issuing the assailed
Preliminary Injunction seeking to nullify the two resolutions.
Resolutions dated October 21, 2003 and May 5, 2004. The Ruling of the Court
Since the Court did not issue a temporary restraining On the first issue, we agree with the COMELEC that
order, the COMELEC declared the assailed the petition for the nullification of its October 21, 2003
Resolutions as final and executory and directed the and May 5, 2004 Resolutions and the proclamation of
Regional Election Director to implement the same in the private respondents on June 10, 2004 was mooted
an Order dated May 27, 2004. 13
by the election and proclamation of a new set of
On June 1, 2004, the Municipal Election Officer municipal officials after the May 10, 2004 elections. In
issued a Notice to the Members of the Municipal Board fact, the records show that petitioner Katherine Belo
of Canvassers informing them that the Board shall was elected as Mayor, petitioner Generoso Derramas
convene on June 8, 2004. On June 10, 2004, the
14
as Vice-Mayor, and petitioners Ricardo Araque and
Municipal Board of Canvassers proclaimed the private Ernesto Bito-on as members of the Sangguniang
Bayan. The expiration of the challenged term of the
_______________
offices renders the corresponding petition moot and
10
Id., at p. 35. academic. 16

11
Id., at pp. 45-48. Where the issues have become moot and academic,
12
Id., at p. 113. there is no justiciable controversy, thereby rendering
Id., at p. 158.
the resolution of the same of no practical use or
13

14
Id., at p. 169.
105 value. Nonetheless, courts will decide a question
17

VOL. 435, JULY 23, 2004 10 otherwise moot and academic if it is capable of
Albaña vs. Commission on Elections repetition, yet evading review. In this case, we find it
18

respondents as the winners in the May 14, 2001 necessary to resolve the issues raised in the petition in
elections, with Pio Jude S. Belo as Mayor, Rodolfo order to prevent a repetition thereof and, thus,
Deocampo as Vice-Mayor and Lorencito B. Diaz as a enhance free, orderly, and peaceful elections. For this
Member of the Sangguniang Bayan. 15
reason, we resolve to grant the petition.
The threshold issues raised by the parties in this On the second issue, the petitioners aver that since
case are the following: (a) whether the petition was they were already proclaimed the duly-elected
mooted by the election and proclamation of the new set municipal officials of Panitan, Capiz, on May 18, 2001,
the COMELEC should have dismissed the complaint proclamation of the respondent with the court before which
for their disqualification which the private the criminal case is pending and the said court may order
respondents filed only on June 23, 2001, more than a the suspension of the proclamation if the evidence of guilt is
month after such procla- strong. (Emphasis supplied)
The petitioners cite the ruling of this Court
_______________ in Bagatsing vs. COMELEC, and the dissenting
19

opinion of Commissioner Mehol Sadain, that after the

15
Id., at p. 178.
16
Trinidad vs. Commission on Elections, 315 SCRA 175 (1999).
COMELEC directed its Law Department on February
17
Garcia vs. Commission on Elections, 258 SCRA 754 (1996). 28, 2003 to file the appropriate Informations against
18
Sixto S. Brillantes, Jr. vs. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. the petitioners for violations of Section 261(a) and (e)
163193, 15 June 2004, 432 SCRA 269. of the Omnibus Election Code, it should have refrained
106
from making a finding of disqualification before the
106 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED petitioners’ conviction by final judgment, since by so
Albaña vs. Commission on Elections doing, the COMELEC preempted the decision of the
mation. They aver that such dismissal was mandated trial court.
by Section 2 of COMELEC Resolution No. 2050, The Office of the Solicitor General, for its part,
adopted on November 3, 1988, which reads: asserts that the petition at bar, considering the
2. Any complaint for disqualification based on petitioners’ plea for a writ of preliminary injunction,
Section 68 ofthe Omnibus Election Code in relation to
was designed to eschew criminal prosecution for
Section 6 of Rep. Act No. 6646 filed after the election
against a candidate who has already been
violation of Section 261(a)(e) of the Omnibus Election
proclaimed as winner shall be dismissed as a Code.
disqualification case. However, the complainant shall be We rule for the petitioners.
referred for preliminary investigation to the Law Section 2 of COMELEC Resolution No. 2050 is as
Department of the commission. clear as day: the COMELEC is mandated to dismiss a
Where a similar complaint is filed after election but complaint for the disqualification of a candidate who
before proclamation of the respondent candidate, the has been charged with an election offense but who has
complaint shall, nevertheless, be dismissed as a already been proclaimed as winner by the Municipal
disqualification case. However, the complaint shall be Board of Canvassers. COMELEC Resolution No. 2050
referred for preliminary investigation to the Law
Department. If, before proclamation, the Law Department _______________
makes a prima facie finding of guilt and the corresponding
information has been filed with the appropriate trial court, 320 SCRA 817 (1999).
19

the complainant may file a petition for suspension of the 107

 VOL. 435, JULY 23, 2004 10 Omnibus Election Code in relation to Section 6 of Rep.
Albaña vs. Commission on Elections Act No. 6646. 23

specifically mandates a definite policy and procedure Under the said resolution, if a complaint is filed
for disqualification cases; hence, should be applied
20 with the COMELEC against a candidate who has
and given effect. In Bagatsing vs. Commission on already been proclaimed winner, charging an election
Elections, this Court ruled that a complaint for
21 offense under Section 261 of the Omnibus Election
disqualification filed after the election against a Code, as amended by Rep. Act Nos. 6646 and 8436,
candidate before or after his proclamation as winner and praying for the disqualification of the said
shall be dismissed by the COMELEC, viz.: candidate, the COMELEC shall determine the
Second, as laid down in paragraph 2, a complaint for existence of probable cause for the filing of an
24

disqualification filed after the election against a candidate Information against the candidate for the election
(a) who has not yet been proclaimed as winner, or (b) who
has already been proclaimed as winner. In both cases, the _______________
complaint shall be dismissed as a disqualification case but 20
Lozano vs. Yorac, 203 SCRA 256 (1991).
shall be referred to the Law Department of the COMELEC 21
Supra.
for preliminary investigation. . . . 22
Id., at pp. 828-830.
... 23
Lozano vs. Yorac, supra.
In sharp contrast, the complaint for disqualification 24
See Webb vs. De Leon, 247 SCRA 652 (1995).
against private respondent in the case at bar was lodged on 108
May 18, 1998 or seven (7) days after the 1998 elections. 108 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Pursuant to paragraph 2 of Resolution No. 2050, the Albaña vs. Commission on Elections
complaint shall be dismissed as a disqualification case and offense charged. However, if the COMELEC finds no
shall be referred for preliminary investigation to the Law probable cause, it is mandated to dismiss the
Department of the COMELEC. Under this scenario, the
complaint for the disqualification of the candidate.
complaint for disqualification is filed after the election
which may be either before or after the proclamation of the
If the COMELEC finds that there is probable cause,
respondent candidate. 22
it shall order its Law Department to file the
It bears stressing that Resolution No. 2050 was appropriate Information with the Regional Trial Court
approved precisely because of the variance in opinions (RTC) which has territorial jurisdiction over the
of the members of the respondent COMELEC on offense, but shall, nonetheless, order the dismissal of
matters of procedure in dealing with and evaluating the complaint for disqualification, without prejudice to
cases for disqualification filed under Section 68 of the the outcome of the criminal case. If the trial court
finds the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
the offense charged, it shall also order his
disqualification pursuant to Section 264 of the stated in their petition that “inasmuch as the
Omnibus Election Code, as amended by Section 46 of COMELEC had already directed the prosecution of the
Rep. Act No. 8189 which reads: herein petitioners in a criminal case which is now
SEC. 46. Penalties.—Any person found guilty of any pending in the Regional Trial Court of
Election offense under this Act shall be punished with 109
imprisonment of not less than one (1) year but not more VOL. 435, JULY 23, 2004 109
than six (6) years and shall not be subject to probation. In Albaña vs. Commission on Elections
addition, the guilty party shall be sentenced to suffer Capiz, their supposed disqualification should be
disqualification to hold public office and deprivation of the
adjudged by the latter court and not by the
right of suffrage. If he is a foreigner, he shall be deported
after the prison term has been served. Any political party COMELEC.”
found guilty shall be sentenced to pay a fine not less One The COMELEC, likewise, committed a grave abuse
hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) but not more than of its discretion when it ordered the Municipal Election
Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00). Officers to convene a new Board of Canvassers and
In this case, the petitioners were proclaimed winners proclaim the winners after the petitioners were
on May 18, 2001. The private respondents filed their declared disqualified.
complaint for violation of Section 216(a) and (e) of the It is well-settled that the ineligibility of a candidate
Omnibus Election Code and for the disqualification of receiving majority votes does not entitle the eligible
the petitioners only on June 23, 2001. The COMELEC candidate receiving the next highest number of votes
found probable cause against the respondents for the to be declared elected. A minority or defeated
offense charged and directed its Law Department to candidate cannot be deemed elected to the office. The
file the appropriate Information against the votes intended for the disqualified candidate should
petitioners. Patently then, the COMELEC committed not be considered null and void, as it would amount to
a grave abuse of its discretion amounting to excess or disenfranchising the electorate in whom sovereignty
lack of jurisdiction in issuing its assailed resolutions resides. As we held in Reyes vs. Commission on
25

disqualifying the petitioners from the positions they Elections: 26

were respectively elected, in defiance of Resolution No. To simplistically assume that the second placer would have
2050. received the other votes would be to substitute our
The plaint of the Office of the Solicitor General, that judgment for the mind of the voter. The second placer is just
that, a second placer. He lost the elections. He was
the petitioners filed their petition merely and solely to
repudiated by either a majority or plurality of voters. He
eschew criminal prosecution for violation of Section could not be considered the first among qualified candidates
216(a) and (e) of the Omnibus Election Code, as because in a field which excludes the disqualified candidate,
amended, has no factual basis. In fact, the petitioners the conditions would have substantially changed. We are
not prepared to extrapolate the results under the either a majority or plurality of voters—he could not
circumstances. 27
be proclaimed winner as he could not be considered the
WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The first among qualified candidates. (Aquino vs.
COMELEC Resolutions dated October 21, 2003 and Commission on Elections, 248 SCRA 400 [1995])
May 5, 2004 are hereby NULLIFIED AND SET A possible exception to the rule that a second placer
ASIDE. As a necessary consequence, the proclamation may not be declared the winning candidate is
of the private respondents on June 10, 2004 by the predicated on the concurrence of two assumptions,
Municipal Board of Canvassers as the elected Mayor, namely: (1) the one who obtained the highest number
Vice-Mayor and Members of the Sangguniang of votes is disqualified, and (2) the electorate is fully
Bayan of the Municipality of Panitan, Capiz, aware in fact and in law of a candidate’s
respectively, is, likewise, NULLIFIED AND SET disqualification so as to bring such awareness within
ASIDE. No costs. the realm of notoriety but would nonetheless cast their
SO ORDERED. votes in favor of the ineligible candidate. (Grego vs.
Davide, Commission on Elections, 274 SCRA 481 [1997])
Jr. (C.J.), Puno, Panganiban, Quisumbing, Ynares-San
tiago, Sandoval-Gutierrez, Carpio, Austria-Martinez, C ——o0o——
arpio-Morales, Azcuna, Tinga and Chico-Nazario,
JJ., concur. © Copyright 2019 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights
reserved.
_______________

25
Labo, Jr. vs. Commission on Elections, 211 SCRA 297 (1992).
26
254 SCRA 514 (1996).
27
Id., at p. 529.
110
110 SUPREME COURT REPORTS
ANNOTATED
Globe Telecom, Inc. vs. National Telecommunications
Commission
Corona, J., On Leave.
Petition granted.
Notes.—The second placer is just that, a second
placer—he lost the elections, he was repudiated by
 VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 45 patent error, or serious inconsistencies in the findings, the
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections Court should not disturb the same. The factual findings of
the COMELEC, based on its own assessments and duly
G.R. No. 154512. November 12, 2002. *

supported by gathered evidence, are conclusive upon the

VICTORINO DENNIS M. SOCRATES, Mayor of
court, more so, in the absence of a substantiated attack on
Puerto Princesa City, petitioner, vs. THE the validity of the same.” In the instant case, we do not find
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, THE any valid reason to hold that the COMELEC’s findings of
PREPARATORY RECALL ASSEMBLY (PRA) of fact are patently erroneous.
Puerto Princesa City, PRA Interim Chairman Punong
Bgy. MARK DAVID HAGEDORN, PRA Interim _______________
Secretary Punong Bgy. BENJAMIN JARILLA, PRA *
EN BANC.
Chairman and Presiding Officer Punong Bgy. EARL S. 458
BUENVIAJE and PRA Secretary Punong Bgy. 458 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
CARLOS ABALLA, JR., respondents. Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
G.R. No. 154683. November 12, 2002. *
Same; Constitutional Law; Term of Office; The intent in
VICENTE S. SANDOVAL, JR., petitioner, vs. THE Section 8, Article X of the Constitution and under Section 43
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, respondent. (b) of RA No. 7160 is that only consecutive terms count in
G.R. Nos. 155083-84. November 12, 2002. * determining the three-term limit rule; Involuntary severance
MA. FLORES P. ADOVO, MERCY E. GILO and from office for any length of time interrupts continuity of
BIENVENIDO OLLAVE, SR., petitioners, vs. THE service.—These constitutional and statutory provisions have
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, and EDWARD S. two parts. The first part provides that an elective local
official cannot serve for more than three consecutive terms.
HAGEDORN, respondents.
The clear intent is that only consecutive terms count in
Election Law; Commission on Elections; Court is bound
determining the three-term limit rule. The second part
by the findings of fact of the COMELEC on matters within
states that voluntary renunciation of office for any length of
the competence and expertise of the COMELEC, unless the
time does not interrupt the continuity of service. The clear
findings are patently erroneous.—This Court is bound by
intent is that involuntary severance from office for any
the findings of fact of the COMELEC on matters within the
length of time interrupts continuity of service and prevents
competence and expertise of the COMELEC, unless the
the service before and after the interruption from being
findings are patently erroneous. In Malonzo v. COMELEC,
joined together to form a continuous service or consecutive
which also dealt with alleged defective service of notice to
terms.
PRA members, we ruled that—“Needless to state, the issue
Same; Same; Same; After three consecutive terms, an
of propriety of the notices sent to the PRA members is
elective local official cannot seek immediate reelection for a
factual in nature, and the determination of the same is
fourth term; Any subsequent election, like a recall election, is
therefore a function of the COMELEC. In the absence of
no longer covered by the prohibition.—After three VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 459
consecutive terms, an elective local official cannot seek Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
immediate reelection for a fourth term. The prohibited to the 2001 elections. One who wins and serves a recall
election refers to the next regular election for the same term does not serve the full term of his predecessor but only
office following the end of the third consecutive term. Any the unexpired term. The period of time prior to the recall
subsequent election, like a recall election, is no longer term, when another elective official holds office, constitutes
covered by the prohibition for two reasons. First, a an interruption in continuity of service. Clearly, Adormeo
subsequent election like a recall election is no longer an established the rule that the winner in the recall election
immediate reelection after three consecutive terms. Second, cannot be charged or credited with the full term of three
the intervening period constitutes an involuntary years for purposes of counting the consecutiveness of an
interruption in the continuity of service. elective official’s terms in office.
Same; Same; Same; Recall; A recall election mid-way
in the term following the third consecutive term is a DAVIDE, JR., (C.J.), Concurring and Dissenting
subsequent election but not an immediate reelection after the
Opinion:
third term.—Clearly, what the Constitution prohibits is an
immediate reelection for a fourth term following three Election Law; Constitutional Law; Term of Office; For
consecutive terms. The Constitution, however, does not one to be able to run again after three consecutive terms, he
prohibit a subsequent reelection for a fourth term as long as has to rest for the entire immediately succeeding fourth
the reelection is not immediately after the end of the third term.—I wish to add that the Constitutional Commission
consecutive term. A recall election mid-way in the term debates on the issue of “no immediate reelection” after three
following the third consecutive term is a subsequent consecutive terms for members of Congress clearly
election but not an immediate reelection after the third indicated that the “no immediate reelection” after the
term. 3-term limit would equally apply to the elective local
Same; Same; Same; Same; The winner in the recall officials. This accounted for the immediate acceptance by
election cannot be charged or credited with the full term of the Committee on Local Governments of the
three years for purposes of counting the consecutiveness of aforementioned Amendment of Commissioner Davide,
an elective official’s terms in office.—In Adormeo, the recall which is now Section 8 of Article X of the Constitution.
term of Talaga began only from the date he assumed office These debates clearly showed the intent of the Commission
after winning the recall election. Talaga’s recall term did that the ban against an immediate reelection after three
not retroact to include the tenure in office of his consecutive terms applies to the fourthterm, i.e., the term
predecessor. If Talaga’s recall term was made to so retroact, immediately following the three consecutive terms, to be
then he would have been disqualified to run in the 2001 filled up by the regular election for such fourth term. For
elections because he would already have served three one to be able to run again after three consecutive terms, he
consecutive terms prior has to rest for the entire immediately succeeding fourth
459
term. On the next fifth term he can run again to start a new for brevity) in relation to the recall election for mayor
series of three consecutive terms. of Puerto Princesa City, Palawan.
Same; Same; Same; The term of office of one who is The Antecedents
elected in a special election is considered one term for On July 2, 2002, 312 out of 528 members of the then
purposes of determining the three consecutive terms.—On
incumbent barangay officials of the Puerto Princesa
the contrary, it is clear from the views of Commissioners
convened themselves into a Preparatory Recall
Suarez and Davide that the term of office of one who is
elected in a special election is considered one term for Assembly (“PRA” for brevity) at the Gymnasium of
purposes of determining the three consecutive terms. Barangay San Jose from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon. The
PRA was convened to initiate the recall of Victorino
2

SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION in the Supreme Court. Dennis M. Socrates (“Socrates” for brevity) who
Certiorari. assumed office as Puerto Princesa’s mayor on June 30,
2001. The members of the PRA designated Mark
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court. David M. Hagedorn, president of the Association of
Stephen V. Jaromay for petitioners. Barangay Captains, as interim chair of the PRA.
Edwin B. Gastanes for petitioner in G.R. No. On the same date, the PRA passed Resolution No.
154512. 01-02 (“Recall Resolution” for, brevity) which declared
Aristotle Q. Sarmiento for petitioner in G.R. No. its loss of confidence in Socrates and called for his
154683. recall. The PRA requested the COMELEC to schedule
George Erwin M. Garcia; Dela Cruz, Albano & the recall election for mayor within 30 days from
Associates and receipt of the Recall Resolution.
M.M. Lazaro & Associates for private respondent On July 16, 2002, Socrates filed with the
E. Hagedorn. COMELEC a petition, docketed as E.M. No. 02-010
460 (RC), to nullify and deny due course to the Recall
460 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED Resolution.
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections On August 14, 2002, the COMELEC en
banc promulgated a resolution dismissing for lack of
3

CARPIO, J.: merit Socrates’ petition. The COMELEC gave due

course to the Recall Resolution and scheduled the
The Case
recall election on September 7, 2002.
Before us are consolidated petitions for
certiorari seeking the reversal of the resolutions
1
_______________
issued by the Commission on Elections (“COMELEC”
 1
Filed under Rule 65 in relation to Rule 64 of the 1997 Rules of from running for a fourth consecutive term, having
Civil Procedure with prayers for preliminary injunction and
temporary restraining orders.
been elected and having served as mayor of the city for
2
Pursuant to the provisions of Republic Act 7160 or the Local three (3) consecutive full terms immediately prior to
Government Code of 1991, Chapter 5, Sections 69 to 75. the instant recall election for the same post.”
3
Composed of Benjamin S. Abalos, Sr. as Chairman with Subsequently, SPA Nos. 02-492 and 02-539 were
Commissioners Luzviminda G. Tancangco, Rufino S.B. Javier, Ralph
C. Lantion, Mehol K. Sadain, Resurreccion Z. Borra and Florentino
consolidated.
A. Tuason, Jr. In a resolution promulgated on September 20, 2002,
461 the COMELEC’s First Division dismissed for lack of
4

VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 46 merit SPA Nos. 02-492 and 02-539. The COMELEC
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections declared Hagedorn qualified to run in the-recall
On August 21, 2002, the COMELEC en election. The COMELEC also reset the recall election
banc promulgated Resolution No. 5673 prescribing the from September 7, 2002 to September 24, 2002.
calendar of activities and periods of certain prohibited On September 23, 2002, the COMELEC en
acts in connection with the recall election. The bancpromulgated a resolution denying the motion for
COMELEC fixed the campaign period from August 27, reconsideration of Adovo and Gilo. The COMELEC
2002 to September 5, 2002 or a period of 10 days. affirmed the resolution declaring Hagedorn qualified
On August 23, 2002, Edward M. Hagedorn to run in the recall election.
(“Hagedorn” for brevity) filed his certificate of Hence, the instant consolidated petitions.
candidacy for mayor in the recall election.
_______________
On August 17, 2002, Ma. Flores F. Adovo (“Adovo”
for brevity) and Merly E. Gilo (“Gilo” for brevity) filed 4
With Mehol K. Sadain as Presiding Commissioner and
a petition before the COMELEC, docketed as SPA No. Luzviminda G. Tancangco and Resurreccion Z. Borra as
02-492, to disqualify Hagedorn from running in the Commissioners.
462
recall election and to cancel his certificate of candidacy.
On August 30, 2002, a certain Bienvenido Ollave, Sr.
462 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
(“Ollave” for brevity) filed a petition-in-intervention in Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
SPA No. 02-492 also seeking to disqualify Hagedorn. G.R. No. 154512
On the same date, a certain Genaro V. Manaay filed Petitioner Socrates seeks to nullify the COMELEC en
another petition, docketed as SPA No. 02539, against banc resolution dated August 14, 2002 in E.M. No.
Hagedorn alleging substantially the same facts and 02-010 (RC) which gave due course to the Recall
involving the same issues. The petitions were all Resolution and scheduled the recall election on
anchored on the ground that “Hagedorn is disqualified September 7, 2002.
 Socrates alleges that the COMELEC gravely Accordingly, on September 9, 2002, the
abused its discretion in upholding the Recall COMELEC en banc issued Resolution No. 5708 giving
Resolution. Socrates cites the following circumstances the candidates an additional 15 days from September
as legal infirmities attending the convening of the PRA 7, 2002 within which to campaign. Thus, the
and its issuance of the Recall Resolution: (1) not all COMELEC reset the recall election to September 24,
members of the PRA were notified of the meeting to 2002.
adopt the resolution; (2) the proof of service of notice 463
was palpably and legally deficient; (3) the members of VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 463
the PRA were themselves seeking a new electoral Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
mandate from their respective constituents; (4) the G.R. Nos. 155083-84
adoption of the resolution was exercised with grave Petitioners Adovo, Gilo and Ollave assail the
abuse of authority; and (5) the PRA proceedings were COMELEC’s resolutions dated September 20, 2002
conducted in a manner that violated his and the and September 23, 2002 in SPA Nos. 02-492 and
public’s constitutional right to information. 02-539 declaring Hagedorn qualified to run for mayor
G.R. No. 154683 in the recall election. They likewise prayed for the
Petitioner Vicente S. Sandoval, Jr. seeks to annul issuance of a temporary restraining order to enjoin the
COMELEC Resolution No. 5673 dated August 21, proclamation of the winning candidate in the recall
2002 insofar as it fixed the recall election on election.
September 7, 2002, giving the candidates only a Petitioners argue that the COMELEC gravely
ten-day campaign period. He prayed that the abused its discretion in upholding Hagedorn’s
COMELEC be enjoined from holding the recall election qualification to run for mayor in the recall election
on September 7, 2002 and that a new date be fixed despite the constitutional and statutory prohibitions
giving the candidates at least an additional 15 days to against a fourth consecutive term for elective local
campaign. officials.
In a resolution dated September 3, 2002, the In a resolution dated September 24, 2002, the Court
Court en banc enjoined the COMELEC from ordered the COMELEC to desist from proclaiming any
implementing Resolution No. 5673 insofar as it fixed winning candidate in the recall election until further
the date of the recall election on September 7, 2002. orders from the Court. Petitioners were required to
The Court directed the COMELEC to give the post a P20,000 bond.
candidates an additional fifteen 15 days from On September 27, 2002, Socrates filed a motion for
September 7, 2002 within which to campaign. leave to file an attached petition for intervention
seeking the same reliefs as those sought by Adovo, 15 days for the campaign period as prayed for by
Gilo and Ollave. petitioner.
In the meantime, Hagedorn garnered the highest First Issue: Validity of the Recall Resolution.
number of votes in the recall election with 20,238 Petitioner Socrates argues that the COMELEC
votes. Rival candidates Socrates and Sandoval committed grave abuse of discretion in upholding the
obtained 17,220 votes and 13,241 votes, respectively. Recall Resolution despite the absence of notice to 130
Hagedorn filed motions to lift the order restraining PRA members and the defective service of notice to
the COMELEC from proclaiming the winning other PRA members. The COMELEC, however, found
candidate and to allow him to assume office to give that—
effect to the will of the electorate. “On various dates, in the month of June 2002, the
On October, 1, 2002, the Court granted Socrates’ proponents for the Recall of incumbent City Mayor
motion for leave to file a petition for intervention. Victorino Dennis M. Socrates sent notices of the convening
The Issues of the PRA to the members thereof pursuant to Section 70
of the Local Government Code. Copies of the said notice are
The issues for resolution of the Court are:
in Volumes I and II entitled Notices to PRA. Likewise, Proof
of Service for each of the said notices were attached to the
1.​ 1.In G.R. No. 154512, whether the COMELEC
Petition and marked as Annex “G” of Volumes II and III of
committed grave abuse of discretion in giving due
the Petition.
course to the Recall Resolution and scheduling the
Notices were likewise posted in conspicuous places
recall election for mayor of Puerto Princesa.
particularly at the Barangay Hall. Photos establishing the
same were attached to the Petition and marked as Annex
464
“H”. The proponents likewise utilized the broadcast mass
464 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED media in the dissemination of the convening of the PRA.
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections Notices of the convening of the Puerto Princesa PRA
were also sent to the following: [a list of 25 names of
1.​ 2.In G.R. Nos. 155083-84, whether Hagedorn is provincial elective officials, print and broadcast media
qualified to run for mayor in the recall election of practitioners, PNP officials, COMELEC city, regional and
Puerto Princesa on September 24, 2002. national officials, and DILG officials].
xxx
In G.R. No. 154683, the issue of whether the The City Election Officer of Puerto Princesa City in her
COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in Certification dated 10 July 2002 certified that upon a
fixing a campaign period of only 10 days has become ‘thorough and careful verification of the signatures
moot. Our Resolution of September 3, 2002 and appearing in PRA Resolution 01-02, x x x the majority of all
members of the PRA concerned approved said resolution.’
COMELEC Resolution No. 5708 granted an additional
She likewise certified ‘that not a single member/signatory of In the instant case, we do not find any valid reason to
the PRA complained or objected as to the veracity and hold that the COMELEC’s findings of fact are patently
authenticity of their signatures.’ erroneous.
465
Socrates also claims that the PRA members had no
VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 46 authority to adopt the Recall Resolution on July 2,
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections 2002 because a majority of PRA members were seeking
The Provincial Election Supervisor of Palawan, Atty. a new electoral mandate in the barangay elections
Urbano Arlando, in his Indorsement dated 10 July 2002,
scheduled on July 15, 2002. This argument deserves
stated, upon proper review, all documents submitted are
found in order.’
scant consideration considering that when the PRA
The Acting Director IV, Region IV, in his study dated 30 members adopted the Recall Resolution their terms of
July 2002 submitted the following recommendations: office had not yet expired. They were all de
‘This Office, after evaluating the documents filed, finds the jure sangguniang barangay members with no legal
instant Petition sufficient in form and substance. That the PRA disqualification to participate in the recall assembly
was validly constituted and that the majority of all members under Section 70 of the Local Government Code.
thereof approved Resolution No. 01-02 calling for the recall of
Mayor Victorino Dennis M. Socrates.’ _______________
x x x.”
This Court is bound by the findings of fact of the 5
269 SCRA 380 (1997).
COMELEC on matters within the competence and 466
expertise of the COMELEC, unless the findings are 466 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
patently erroneous. In Malonzo v. COMELEC, which 5 Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
also dealt with alleged defective service of notice to Socrates bewails that the manner private respondents
PRA members, we ruled that— conducted the PRA proceedings violated his
“Needless to state, the issue of propriety of the notices sent constitutional right to information on matters of public
to the PRA members is factual in nature, and the concern. Socrates, however, admits receiving notice of
determination of the same is therefore a function of the the PRA meeting and of even sending his
COMELEC. In the absence of patent error, or serious representative and counsel who were present during
inconsistencies in the findings, the Court should not disturb
the entire PRA proceedings. Proponents of the recall
the same. The factual findings of the COMELEC, based on
election submitted to the COMELEC the Recall
its own assessments and duly supported by gathered
evidence, are conclusive upon the court, more so, in the Resolution, minutes of the PRA proceedings, the
absence of a substantiated attack on the validity of the journal of the PRA assembly, attendance sheets,
same.” notices sent to PRA members, and authenticated
master list of barangay officials in Puerto Princesa.
Socrates had the right to examine and copy all these VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 467
public records in the official custody of the COMELEC. Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
Socrates, however, does not claim that the COMELEC continuity of service for the full term for which the elective
denied him this right. There is no legal basis in official was elected.”
Socrates’ claim that respondents violated his These constitutional and statutory provisions have two
constitutional right to information on matters of public parts. The first part provides that an elective local
concern. official cannot serve for more than three consecutive
Thus, we rule that the COMELEC did not commit terms. The clear intent is that only consecutive
grave abuse of discretion in upholding the validity of terms count in determining the three-term limit rule.
the Recall Resolution and in scheduling the recall The second part states that voluntary renunciation of
election on September 24, 2002. office for any length of time does not interrupt the
Second Issue: Hagedorn’s qualification to run for continuity of service. The clear intent is
mayor in the recall election of September 24, that involuntary severance from office for any length of
2002. time interrupts continuity of service and prevents the
The three-term limit rule for elective local officials is service before and after the interruption from being
found in Section 8, Article X of the Constitution, which joined together to form a continuous service or
states: consecutive terms.
“Section 8. The term of office of elective local officials, After three consecutive terms, an elective local
except barangay officials, which shall be determined by law, official cannot seek immediate reelection for a fourth
shall be three years and no such official shall serve for more term. The prohibited election refers to the next regular
than three consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the election for the same office following the end of the
office for any length of time shall not be considered as an
third consecutive term. Any subsequent election, like a
interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term
recall election, is no longer covered by the prohibition
for which he was elected.”
This three-term limit rule is reiterated in Section 43 for two reasons. First, a subsequent election like a
(b) of RA No. 7160, otherwise known as the Local recall election is no longer an immediate reelection
Government Code, which provides: after three consecutive terms. Second, the intervening
“Section 43. Term of Office.—(a) x x x period constitutes an involuntary interruption in the
(b) No local elective official shall serve for more than continuity of service.
three (3) consecutive terms in the same position. Voluntary When the framers of the Constitution debated on
renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be the term limit of elective local officials, the question
considered as an interruption in the asked was whether there would be no further election
467 after three terms, or whether there would be “no
immediate reelection” after three terms. This is clear The framers of the Constitution used the same “no
from the following deliberations of the Constitutional immediate reelection” question in voting for the term
Commission: limits of Senators and Representatives of the House.
9 10

“THE PRESIDENT: The Acting Floor Leader is

_______________
recognized.
MR. ROMULO: We are now ready to discuss the two
6
8
Journal of the Constitutional Commission, Vol. I, p. 420.
issues, as indicated on the blackboard, and these 9
“MR. ROMULO: Madam President, we are now ready to vote on
are Alternative No. I where there is no further the question of the Senators, and the schemes are as follows: The
first scheme is, no further election after two terms; the second scheme
election after a total of three terms and Alternative
is, no immediate reelection after two successive terms. Madam
No. 2 where there is no immediate reelection after President, inasmuch as the principles applicable here are the same
three successive terms.” 7
as those for the House of Representatives I move that we go directly
to the voting and forego any further discussions.
_______________ THE PRESIDENT: Please distribute the ballots for this
particular item for Senators. Are we ready now? The
6
Ricardo J. Romulo, Commissioner of the 1986 Constitutional Secretary-General will please count the ballots.
Convention. COUNTING OF BALLOTS
7
Record of the Constitutional Commission, Vol. 2, p. 236. THE SECRETARY-GENERAL: We have 43 ballots here, Madam
468 President. We shall now begin to count.
468 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED THE PRESIDENT: Please proceed.
THE SECRETARY-GENERAL, reading:
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections Scheme No. I—/////-/////-//
The Journal of the Constitutional Commission reports Scheme No. II—/////-/////-/////-/////-/////-/////-//
the following manifestation on the term of elective THE PRESIDENT: The results show 12 votes for Scheme No. I
and 32 votes for Scheme No. II; Scheme No. II is approved.”
local officials: (Emphasis supplied) Record of the Constitutional Commission, Vol. 2,
pp. 244-245.
“MANIFESTATION OF MR. ROMULO 10
“MR. GASCON: Is this voting just for Congressmen?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
Upon resumption of session, Mr. Romulo manifested that The Secretary-General will now please proceed to count the votes.
the Body would proceed to the consideration of two issues COUNTING OF BALLOTS
on the term of Representatives and local officials, namely: THE SECRETARY-GENERAL: Madam President, we have here
43 ballots cast. We will now start the counting.
1) Alternative No. 1 (no further reelection after a total of
469
three terms), and 2) Alternative No. 2 (no immediate
VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 469
reelection after three successive terms).”
8

Socrates vs. Commission on Elections

Clearly, what the Constitution prohibits is In the debates on the term limit of Senators, the
an immediate reelection for a fourth term following following exchange in the Constitutional Convention is
three consecutive terms. The Constitution, however, instructive:
does not prohibit a subsequent reelection for a fourth
_______________
term as long as the reelection is not immediately after
the end of the third consecutive term. A recall election Alternative No. 1—no further election after a total of three terms:
mid-way in the term following the third consecutive /////-/////-/////-//
term is a subsequent election but not an immediate Alternative No. 2—no immediate reelection after three successive
terms://///-/////-/////-/////-/////-/
reelection after the third term.
THE PRESIDENT: The results show 17 votes for Alternative No.
Neither does the Constitution prohibit one barred I and 26 votes for Alternative No. 2; Alternative No. 2 is approved.”
from seeking immediate reelection to run in any other (Emphasis supplied) Record of the Constitutional Commission, Vol. 2,
subsequent election involving the same term of office. pp. 243-244.
11
Second paragraph of Section 4, Article VI of the Constitution.
What the Constitution prohibits is a consecutive fourth
470
term. The debates in the Constitutional Commission 470 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
evidently show that the prohibited election referred to
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
by the framers of the Constitution is the immediate
“GASCON: I would like to ask a question with regard
12

reelection after the third term, not any other

to the issue after the second term. We will allow the
subsequent election.
Senator to rest for a period of time before he can
If the prohibition on elective local officials is applied
run again?
to any election within the three-year full term
DAVIDE: That is correct.
13

following the three-term limit, then Senators should

GASCON: And the question that we left behind
also be prohibited from running in any election within
before—if the Gentleman will remember—was: How
the six-year full term following their two-term limit.
long will that period of rest be? Will it be one
The constitutional provision on the term limit of
election which is three years or one term which is
Senators is worded exactly like the term limit of
six years?
elective local officials, thus:
“No Senator shall serve for more than two consecutive DAVIDE: If the Gentleman will remember,
terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of Commissioner Rodrigo expressed the view that
time shall not be considered as an interruption in the during the election following the expiration of the
continuity of his service for the full term for which he was first 12 years, whether such election will be on the
elected.”
11 third or on the sixth year thereafter, this particular
member of the Senate can run. So, it is not really a
 period of hibernation for sixyears. That was the Hagedorn was elected for three consecutive terms in
Committee’s stand. the 1992, 1995 and 1998 elections and served in full
GASCON: So, effectively, the period of rest would be his three consecutive terms as mayor of Puerto
three years at the least.” (Emphasis supplied)
14
Princesa. Under the Constitution and the Local
The framers of the Constitution thus clarified that a Government Code, Hagedorn could no longer run for
Senator can run after only three years following his
15
mayor in the 2001 elections. The Constitution and the
completion of two terms. The framers expressly Local Government Code disqualified Hagedorn, who
acknowledged that the prohibited election refers only had reached the maximum three-term limit, from
to the immediate reelection, and not to any subsequent running for a fourth consecutive term as mayor. Thus,
election, during the six-year period following the two Hagedorn did not run for mayor in the 2001
term limit. The framers of the Constitution did not elections. Socrates ran and won as mayor of Puerto
16

intend “the period of rest” of an elective official who Princesa in the 2001 elections. After Hagedorn ceased
has reached his term limit to be the full extent of the to be mayor on June 30, 2001, he became a private
succeeding term. citizen until the recall election of September 24, 2002
In the case of Hagedorn, his candidacy in the recall when he won by 3,018 votes over his closest opponent,
election on September 24, 2002 is not an immediate Socrates.
reelection after his third consecutive term which ended From June 30, 2001 until the recall election on
on June 30, 2001. The immediate reelection that the September 24, 2002, the mayor of Puerto Princesa was
Constitution barred Hagedorn from seeking referred to Socrates. During the same period, Hagedorn was
the regular elections in 2001. Hagedorn did not seek simply a private citizen. This period is clearly an
reelection in the 2001 elections. interruption in the continuity of Hagedorn’s service as
mayor, not because of his voluntary renunciation, but
_______________
because of a legal prohibition. Hagedorn’s three
12
Jose Luis Martin C. Gascon, Commissioner of the 1986 consecutive terms ended on June 30, 2001. Hagedorn’s
Constitutional Commission. new recall term from September 24, 2002 to June 30,
13
Hilario G. Davide, Jr., Commissioner of the 1986 Constitutional 2004 is not a seamless continuation of his previous
Commission, and now Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
three consecutive terms as mayor. One cannot stitch
14
Record of the Constitutional Commission, Vol. II, p. 590.
15
Bernas, The Intent of the 1986 Constitution Writers, p. 341 together Hagedorn’s previous three-terms with his new
(1995). recall term to make the recall term a fourth
471 consecutive term because factually it is not. An
VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 47 involuntary interruption occurred from June 30, 2001
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
to September 24, 2002, which broke the continuity or years. The clear intent is that interruption “for any
consecutive character of Hagedorn’s service as mayor. length of time,” as long as the cause is involuntary, is
In Lonzanida v. Comelec, the Court had occasion to
17
sufficient to break an elective local official’s continuity
explain interruption of continuity of service in this of service.
manner: In the recent case of Adormeo v. Comelec and
“x x x The second sentence of the constitutional provision Talaga, a unanimous Court reiterated the rule that
18

under scrutiny states, “Voluntary renunciation of office for an interruption consisting of a portion of a term of
any length of time shall not be considered as an office breaks the continuity of service of an elective
interruption in the continuity of service for the full term for local official. In Adormeo, Ramon Y. Talaga, Jr. had
which he was elected.” The clear intent of the framers of the
served two consecutive full terms as mayor of Lucena
constitution to bar any attempt to circumvent the
City. In his third bid for election as mayor in 1998,
three-term limit by a
Talaga lost to Bernard G. Tagarao. However, in the
_______________ recall election of May 12, 2000, Talaga won and served
the unexpired term of Tagarao from May 12, 2000 to
16
Hagedorn instead ran for Governor of Palawan in the 2001
elections but lost.
June 30, 2001. When Talaga ran again for mayor in
17
311 SCRA 602 (1999). the 2001 elections, Raymundo Adormeo, the other
472 candidate for mayor, petitioned for Talaga’s
472 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED disqualification on the ground that Talaga had already
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections served three consecutive terms as mayor.
voluntary renunciation of office and at the same time Thus, the issue in Adormeo was whether Talaga’s
respect the people’s choice and grant their elected official recall term was a continuation of his previous two
full service of a term is evident in this provision. Voluntary terms so that he was deemed to have already served
renunciation of a term does not cancel the renounced term three consecutive terms as mayor. The Court ruled
in the computation of the three-term limit; conversely, that Talaga was qualified to run in the 2001 elections,
involuntary severance from office for any length of time
stating that the period from June 30, 1998 to May 12,
short of the full term provided by law amounts to an
interruption of continuity of service. x x x.” (Emphasis
2000 when Talaga was out of office interrupted the
supplied) continuity of his service as mayor. Talaga’s recall term
In Hagedorn’s case, the nearly 15-month period he was as mayor was not consecutive to his previous two
out of office, although short of a full term of three terms because of this interruption, there having been a
years, constituted an interruption in the continuity of break of almost two years during which time Tagarao
his service as mayor. The Constitution does not require was the mayor.
the interruption or hiatus to be a full term of three
_______________ another elective official holds office, constitutes an
interruption in continuity of service. Clearly, Adormeo
G.R. No. 147927, February 4, 2002, 376 SCRA 90.
18

473 established the rule that the winner in the recall

VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 47 election cannot be charged or credited with the full
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections term of three years for purposes of counting the
We held in Adormeo that the period an elective local consecutiveness of an elective official’s terms in office.
official is out of office interrupts the continuity of his In the same manner, Hagedorn’s recall term does
service and prevents his recall term from being not retroact to include the tenure in office of Socrates.
stitched together as a seamless continuation of his Hagedorn can only be disqualified to run in the
previous two consecutive terms. In the instant case, we September 24, 2002 recall election if the recall term is
likewise hold that the nearly 15 months Hagedorn was made to retroact to June 30, 2001, for only then can
out of office interrupted his continuity of service and the recall term constitute a fourth consecutive term.
prevents his recall term from being stitched together But to consider Hagedorn’s recall term as a full term of
as a seamless continuation of his previous three three years, retroacting to June 30, 2001, despite the
consecutive terms. The only difference fact that he won his recall term only last September
between Adormeo and the instant case is the time of 24, 2002, is to ignore reality. This Court cannot declare
the interruption. In Adormeo, the interruption as consecutive or successive terms of office which
occurred after the first two consecutive terms. In the historically and factually are not.
474
instant case, the interruption happened after the first
474 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
three consecutive terms. In both cases, the
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
respondents were seeking election for a fourth term.
In Adormeo, the recall term of Talaga began only Worse, to make Hagedorn’s recall term retroact to
from the date he assumed office after winning the June 30, 2001 creates a legal fiction that unduly
recall election. Talaga’s recall term did not retroact to curtails the freedom of the people to choose their
include the tenure in office of his predecessor. If leaders through popular elections. The concept of term
Talaga’s recall term was made to so retroact, then he limits is in derogation of the sovereign will of the
would have been disqualified to run in the 2001 people to elect the leaders of their own choosing. Term
elections because he would already have served three limits must be construed striptly to give the fullest
consecutive terms prior to the 2001 elections. One who possible effect to the sovereign will of the people. As
wins and serves a recall term does not serve the full this Court aptly stated in Borja, Jr. v. Comelec:
“Thus, a consideration of the historical background of Art.
term of his predecessor but only the unexpired term.
X, §8 of the Constitution reveals that the members of the
The period of time prior to the recall term, when
Constitutional Commission were as much concerned 295 SCRA 157 (1998).
19

with preserving the freedom of choice of the people as they Jose E. Suarez, Commissioner of the 1986 Constitutional
20

Commission.
were with preventing the monopolization of political
475
power. Indeed, they rejected a proposal put forth by
Commissioner Edmundo F. Garcia that after serving three
VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 475
consecutive terms or nine years there should be no further Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
reelection for local and legislative officials. Instead, they ning? Is that the meaning of this provision on
adopted the alternative proposal of Commissioner Christian disqualification, Madam President?
Monsod that such officials be simply barred from running DAVIDE: Yes, because we speak of ‘term,’ and if there
for the same position in the succeeding election following the is a special election, he will serve only for the
expiration of the third consecutive term. Monsod warned unexpired portion of that particular term plus one
against ‘prescreening candidates [from] whom the people more term for the Senator and two more terms for
will choose’ as a result of the proposed absolute
the Members of the Lower House.” 21

disqualification, considering that the draft constitution

contained provisions ‘recognizing people’s power.’
Although the discussion referred to special elections
” (Emphasis supplied)
19
for Senators and Representatives of the House, the
A necessary consequence of the interruption of same principle applies to a recall election of local
continuity of service is the start of a new term officials. Otherwise, an elective local official who
following the interruption. An official elected in recall serves a recall term can serve for more than nine
election serves the unexpired term of the recalled consecutive years comprising of the recall term plus
official. This unexpired term is in itself one term for the regular three full terms. A local official who serves
purposes of counting the three-term limit. This is clear a recall term should know that the recall term is in
from the following discussion in the Constitutional itself one term although less than three years. This is
Commission: the inherent limitation he takes by running and
“SUAREZ: For example, a special election is called
20
winning in the recall election.
for a Senator, and the Senator newly elected would In summary, we hold that Hagedorn is qualified to
have to serve the unexpired portion of the term. run in the September 24, 2002 recall election for
Would that mean that serving the unexpired mayor of Puerto Princesa because:
portion of the term is already considered one term?
1.​ 1.Hagedorn is not running for immediate reelection
So, half a term, which is actually the correct
following his three consecutive terms as mayor
statement, plus one term would disqualify the
which ended on June 30, 2001;
Senator concerned from run- 2.​ 2.Hagedorn’s continuity of service as mayor was
involuntarily interrupted from June 30, 2001 to
_______________
 September 24, 2002 during which time he was a Mendoza, J., In the result, without to the filing
private citizen; of separate opinion.
3.​ 3.Hagedorn’s recall term from September 24, 2002 Austria-Martinez, J., On leave.
to June 30, 2004 cannot be made to retroact to June Corona, J., No part—prior consultation.
30, 2001 to make a fourth consecutive term because
Azcuna, J., I join the Chief Justice in his
factually the recall term is not a fourth consecutive
separate opinion.
term; and
4.​ 4.Term limits should be construed strictly to give CONCURRING AND DISSENTING OPINION
the fullest possible effect to the right of the
electorate to choose their leaders. DAVIDE, JR., C.J.:

I concur with the opinion and conclusion of Mr. Justice

WHEREFORE, the petitions in G.R. Nos. 154512,
Antonio T. Carpio in G.R. No. 154512 and G.R. No.
154683 and 155083-84 are DISMISSED. The
154683. The Commission on Elections (COMELEC)
temporary restraining order issued by this Court on
committed no grave abuse of discretion in giving due
September 24, 2002 enjoining the proclama-
course to the Recall Resolution. Dismissal then of G.R.
_______________ No. 154512 is inevitable. This notwithstanding, I still
hold on to my dissenting view in G.R. No.
Record of the Constitutional Commission, Vol. II, p. 592.
21
111511 (Garcia, et al. vs. COMELEC, et al., 227 SCRA
476
100, 121 [1993]) that the provision on the preparatory
476 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
recall assembly in Section 70 of the Local Government
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections Code of 1991 is unconstitutional.
tion of the winning candidate for mayor of Puerto Our issuance of the Resolution of 3 September 2002
Princesa in the recall election of September 24, 2002 is in G.R. No. 154683 enjoining the COMELEC from
lifted. No costs. implementing its Resolution No. 5673 insofar as it
SO ORDERED. fixed the recall election on 7 September 2002, and the
Bellosillo, Panganiban, Quisumbing, Ynares-S subsequent Resolution of the COMELEC giving the
antiago, Sandoval-Gutierrez, Carpio-Morales and Call candidates an additional campaign period of fifteen
ejo, Sr., JJ., concur. days from 7 September 2002 rendered moot and
Davide, Jr. (C.J.), See concurring and academic the principal issue in G.R. No. 154683. The
dissenting opinion. dismissal of the petition therein is also in order.
Puno, J., Pls. see concurring opinion. 477
Vitug, J., In the result. VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 477
 Socrates vs. Commission on Elections This provision was not found among the Committee’s
However, I regret I cannot concur with the argument proposals but came as an amendment proposed by
and conclusion relative to G.R. Nos. 155083-84. I Commissioner Davide. It was readily accepted without
much discussion and formally approved.
respectfully submit that private respondent Edward S.
Section 8 sets the duration of a term at three years,
Hagedorn is disqualified from running for the position
and prohibits elective local officials from serving for
of Mayor of Puerto Princesa City in the recall election
more than three consecutive terms.
in question.
Pursuant to the second paragraph of Section 1 of
Section 8 of Article X of the Constitution expressly
Article XVIII (The Transitory Provision) of the
provides:
SEC. 8. The term of office of elective local officials, except
Constitution, and Executive Order No. 270, as
barangay officials, which shall be determined by law, shall amended by R.A. No. 6636, the first local election,
478
be three years and no such official shall serve for more than
three consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the 478 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
office for any length of time shall not be considered as an Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term that is, the election for the first term under the
for which he was elected. Constitution for elective local officials, was on 18
Paragraph (b), Section 43 of R.A. No. 7160 (The Local January 1988. By express provision of Section 5 of R.A.
Government Code) restates this constitutional No. 6636, in relation to Section 2 of Article XVIII of the
restriction, thus: Constitution, that term expired at noon of 30 June
SEC. 43. Term of office.— 1992. The second election, i.e., the election for the
... second term of elective local officials which expired at
(b) No local elective official shall serve for more than noon of 30 June 1995, for elective local officials, was on
three (3) consecutive terms in the same position. Voluntary
the second Monday of May 1992 pursuant to R.A. No.
renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be
7166 (An Act Providing for Synchronized National and
considered as an interruption in the continuity of service for
the full term for which the elective official was elected. Local Elections and for Electoral Reforms). The third
Section 8 of Article X of the Constitution was not found election, i.e., for the third term which expired at noon
in the Report of the Committee on Local Governments of 30 June 1998, was on the second Monday of May
of the Constitutional Commission of 1986. It was 1995, pursuant to Section 2 of R.A. No. 7166. The
introduced at the plenary session by Commissioner fourth election, or for the fourth term which expired at
Hilario G. Davide, Jr. Commenting thereon in his book noon of 30 June 2001, was on the second Monday of
emitted “The Intent of 1986 Constitution Writers” (1995 May 1998. The fifth election, i.e., for the fifth term
ed., p. 699), Commissioner Joaquin Bernas states:
which would expire at noon of 30 June 2004, was on terms, like Hagedorn, is disqualified from seeking
the second Monday of May 2001. re-election for the succeeding fourth term. The
Conformably with Section 8 of Article X of the provision bars the holding of four consecutive terms.
Constitution and Section 43(b) of R.A. No. 7160, a local The ponencia is then correct when it holds that the
official elected in the first local election of 18 January three-term limit bars an immediate reelection for a
1988 may be reelected in the synchronized elections in fourth term. But I disagree when it rules that in the
May 1992 and in May 1995. He could not seek another case of Hagedorn he did not seek an immediate
reelection in the May 1998 election because that would reelection for a fourth term because he was not a
have been his fourth term. Similarly, a local official candidate for reelection in the May 2001 election. It
who was elected in the May 1992 election could be forgets that what would have been his fourth term by
reelected in the May 1995 and May 1998 elections. virtue of the May 2001 election was for the period from
Private respondent Hagedorn was first elected as 30 June 2001 to 30 June 2004. The flaw in the ruling
City Mayor of Puerto Princesa City in the May 1992 results from an
election. He was reelected in the May 1995 and May apparent confusion between term and election, the root
1998 elections. His third term, by virtue of his election cause of which is the attempt to distinguish “voluntary
in the May 1998 election, expired on 30 June 2001. renunciation” of office from “involuntary severance”
Therefore, he was constitutionally and statutorily from office and the term of office to which it relates.
barred from seeking reelection in the May 2001 Let me first discuss the matter of whether the
election, which would have been his fourth term. Constitutional Commission did approve the rule of “no
The term of office covered by the May 2001 election immediate reelection after three consecutive terms.” In
is up to 30 June 2004. Section 8 of Article X of the support of its affirmative conclusion
Constitution and Section 43(b) of R.A. No. 7160 are the ponencia quotes the Manifestation of
clear in what is prohibited, which is the fourth Commissioner Romulo as entered in the Journal of the
term. Nothing can be clearer from the wordings Constitutional Commission, thus:
thereof: “the term of office of elective local officials ...
shall be three years and no such official shall serve for MANIFESTATION OF MR. ROMULO
more that three consecutive terms.” In short, an
Upon resumption of session, Mr. Romulo manifested that
elective local official who has served three consecutive
the Body would proceed to the consideration of two issues
479
on the term of Representatives and local officials, namely:
VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 47 a) Alternative No. 1 (no further reelection after a total of
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections three terms), and 2) Alternative No. 2 (no immediate
reelection after three successiveterms).
This is inaccurate. What actually happened was that because we are now discussing the legislative
the issue was originally for elective national and local department.
officials. However, the Commission decided to consider MR. DAVIDE. Madam President.
first the term of the members of Congress; and to defer THE PRESIDENT. Commissioner Davide is
the discussion on the term of elective local officials recognized.
until the. Commission would consider the report of the MR. DAVIDE. I will agree really that this matter
Committee on Local Governments. On this point I should relate only to the term of office of the
quote the pertinent portions of Volume Two, pages Representatives.
238-245 of the Record of the Constitutional THE PRESIDENT. But are we agreed on these two
Commission of its proceedings on 25 July 1986: proposals—the one of Commissioner Garcia where
THE PRESIDENT. Maybe it will be of help we just there is no further election after a total of three
remind ourselves that what we have before us now terms and the other where there is no immediate
is the report of the Committee on the Legislative. reelection after three successive terms?
Therefore, maybe we should confine MR. OPLE. Madam President, originally if I
480 remember right, the Commission decided to
480 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED consider the synchronization of elections. And from
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections that original commitment, we proceeded to fix the
ourselves first to what is covered by the report terms and decided related questions within the
which is the term of office of the Senators and the context of synchronization. Are we now abandoning
Representatives. And with respect to the local officials, the original task of synchronization which could
let us await the report of the Committee on Local only be fully settled in terms of delimitations on the
Governments as to its recommendation on this matter. proposed terms of the President and the
MR. RODRIGO. As a matter of fact, I will go further Vice-President, the Members of Congress and the
than that. It is my belief, as regards local officials, local officials, or do we want to postpone the
that we should leave this matter to the legislative. synchronization task to a later time after we hear
THE PRESIDENT. So what is the pleasure now of the from the Committee on Local Governments and the
Acting Floor Leader or of the Chairman of the other concerned committees?
Committee on the Legislative? THE PRESIDENT. What does the Acting Floor
MR. RODRIGO. I wonder if the two proponents, Leader say to this particular question of
Madam President, will agree that we first talk Commissioner Ople?
about the term of office of the Representatives
MR. ROMULO. In a way, Madam President, we have THE PRESIDENT. We are now ready to vote by
settled the synchronization task, because we have ballot. Let us distribute the ballots. Anyway the
decided on the officials’ voting would take only about 10 minutes.
481
VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 481 The session is suspended.
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
absolute terms. All we are really talking about now It was 3:40 p.m.
is whether or not they are eligible for reelection, and I
At this juncture, pieces of paper were distributed, and
think those are separable issues.
the Commissioners wrote down their votes.
MR. OPLE. If they are separable, and we have
already settled the synchronization task, then I RESUMPTION OF SESSION
think that is something to be thankful about. But
considering the immediate business at hand, is it At 3:50 p.m., the session was resumed.
the wish of the Acting Floor Leader that the
election of the local officials should be eliminated THE PRESIDENT. The session is resumed.
from the consideration of those two choices? MR. GASCON. Madam President, may I have a
MR. ROMULO. Yes. I think the sense of the body now clarification before we count the ballots. The voting
is to limit this choice to the Members of the House now is just for Representa-
of Representatives. 482
MR. OPLE. And do the manifestations of both 482 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Commissioners Garcia and Monsod still stand after Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
the elimination of the election of the local officials? tives. We are not speaking of the term of office of
MR. ROMULO. Yes, I think so. the Senators yet. Is that correct?
... THE PRESIDENT. The term of office of the Senators
THE PRESIDENT. Commissioner Davide is was disposed of this morning.
recognized. MR. DAVIDE. Madam President, as This voting now is only for Representatives.
worded, it is a personal disqualification. MR. GASCON. I think the issue of whether the
MR. ROMULO. We are now ready to vote, Madam Senators could run again for election after their two
President. consecutive terms or 12 years after a lapse of a
period of time has not yet been finalized.
SUSPENSION OF SESSION THE PRESIDENT. I beg the Commissioner’s pardon.
MR. GASCON. Is this voting just for Congressmen?
THE PRESIDENT. Yes. 483
The Secretary-General will now please proceed to VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 483
count the votes. Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
run again. That is the question that is not
COUNTING OF BALLOTS answered. I am talking of the Senators.
THE PRESIDENT. This morning, Scheme No. 1,
THE SECRETARY-GENERAL. Madam President, we without reelection, has 3 votes; Scheme No. II, with
have here 43 ballots cast. We will now start the one reelection—22 votes; Scheme No. III, no limit
counting. on reelection—17 votes.
Alternative No. 1—no further election after a total MR. REGALADO. Madam President.
of three terms; /////-/////-/////-// MR. RODRIGO. Madam President.
Alternative No. 2—no immediate reelection after THE PRESIDENT. May we first clarify this from the
three successive terms: /////-/////-/////-/////-/////-/ Secretary-General?
THE PRESIDENT. The results show 17 votes for MR. ROMULO. The question is whether or not in
Alternative No. 1 and 26 votes for Alternative No. 2; voting for the term of six years with one reelection,
Alternative No. 2 is approved. the Senator is perpetually disqualified, so that is a
What does the Acting Floor Leader say? similar question to what we had posed with regard
MR. ROMULO. Alternative No. 2 has won, Madam to the House of Representatives.
President. It seems there are some doubts as to the THE PRESIDENT. In other words, after serving with
term of Office of the Senators, so I propose that we one reelection, whether or not he is perpetually
similarly vote on that to end any doubt. It was my disqualified after serving 12 years?
understanding this morning that when we voted for MR. ROMULO. Yes, Madam President.
the term of office of the Senators, they would not be MR. RODRIGO. Madam President.
perpetually disqualified. THE PRESIDENT. Yes, Commissioner Rodrigo is
THE PRESIDENT. From the transcripts, it appears recognized.
here that with respect to Senators, 22 votes went to MR. RODRIGO. Or, if after one reelection, he is
Scheme No. II; that is, with one reelection. This is perpetually disqualified or he can hibernate—the
already a majority. So, does the Acting Floor Leader very word used—for six years and then run again
propose that we vote again? for reelection but not consecutive, not immediate. In
MR. ROMULO. The question is whether or not that other words, he is entitled to one immediate
will be perpetual, Madam President, or after resting reelection.
for six years they can REV. RIGOS. Another point, Madam President.
MR. RODRIGO. And then, after that, if there is a gap, THE PRESIDENT. The session is resumed.
when he is not a Senator, then he can run for the
same office. The Acting Floor Leader is recognized.
REV. RIGOS. Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT. Yes, Commissioner Rigos is MR. ROMULO. Madam President, we are now ready
recognized. to vote on the question of the Senators, and the
REV. RIGOS. In relation to that, if he will be allowed schemes are as follows: The first scheme is, no
to run again as Senator after a period of further election after two terms; the second scheme
hibernation, we have to clarify how long that should is, no immediate reelection after two successive
be. It could be three years, because in the proposed terms. Madam President, Inasmuch as the
scheme, every three years we can elect the principles applicable here are the same as those for
Senators. the House of Representatives, I move that we go
MR. RODRIGO. Yes, Madam President, it can be directly to the voting and forego any further
three years. discussions.
484 THE PRESIDENT. Please distribute the ballots for
484 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED this particular item for Senators.
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
Are we ready now?
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
The Secretary-General will please count the ballots.
THE PRESIDENT. I will suspend the session again so
COUNTING OF BALLOTS
as to allow the parties to compare with the Acting
Floor Leader so that we will know what we are THE SECRETARY-GENERAL. We have 43 ballots
going to vote on. here, Madam President. We shall now begin to
count.
The session is suspended
THE PRESIDENT. Please proceed.
It was 3:58 p.m. THE SECRETARY-GENERAL, reading:

RESUMPTION OF SESSION Scheme No. I—/////-/////-//

At 4:05 p.m., the session was resumed. Scheme No. II—/////-/////-/////-/////-/////-/////-//

THE PRESIDENT. The results show 12 votes for local officials, excluding the term of barangay officials
Scheme No. I and 32 votes for Scheme No. II; which was a very specific exception.
Scheme No. II is approved. MR. NOLLEDO. One clarificatory question, Madam
485 President. What will be the term of the office of
VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 48 barangay officials as provided for?
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections MR. DAVIDE. As may be determined by law.
All the results will be considered by the Committee on the MR. NOLLEDO. As provided for in the Local
Legislative in preparation of their report. Government Code.
So can we leave this matter now? MR. DAVIDE. Yes.
The corresponding proposal on the three-term limit for MR. NOLLEDO. We accept the amendment. The
elective local officials without immediate reelection was Committee accepts the amendment.
taken up by the Constitutional Commission much later or ...
specifically on 16 August 1986. On this point, the pertinent
THE PRESIDENT. May we have the reaction of the
portions of Vol. Three, pages 406-408, Record of the
Constitutional Commission, read as follows:
Committee?
486
MR. RAMA. Madam President, I ask that
486 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Commissioner Davide be recognized.
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
THE PRESIDENT. Commissioner Davide is
MR. NOLLEDO. The Committee accepts the
recognized.
amendment, as amended, Madam President.
MR. DAVIDE: Thank you, Madam President.
After Section 4, I propose to insert a new section to be THE PRESIDENT. Is there any other comment?
denominated later as Section 5. It provides as follows: THE MR. OPLE. Madam President.
TERM OF OFFICE OF ELECTIVE LOCAL OFFICIALS, THE PRESIDENT. Commissioner Ople is recognized.
EXCEPT BARANGAY OFFICIALS, WHICH SHALL BE MR. OPLE. May we ask the Committee to read the
DETERMINED BY LAW, SHALL BE THREE YEARS AND proposed amendment now.
NO SUCH OFFICIAL SHALL SERVE FOR MORE THAN MR. NOLLEDO. May we ask Commissioner Davide to
THREE CONSECUTIVE TERMS. VOLUNTARY read the new section.
RENUNCIATION OF THE OFFICE FOR ANY LENGTH MR. DAVIDE. THE TERM OF OFFICE OF
OF TIME SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED AS AN ELECTIVE LOCAL OFFICIALS, EXCEPT
INTERRUPTION IN THE CONTINUITY OF HIS
BARANGAY OFFICIALS, WHICH SHALL BE
SERVICE FOR THE FULL TERM FOR WHICH HE WAS
DETERMINED BY LAW, SHALL BE THREE
ELECTED. This is in accordance with the mandate of the
Commission when we voted on the terms of officials up to YEARS AND NO SUCH OFFICIAL SHALL SERVE
FOR MORE THAN THREE CONSECUTIVE
 TERMS. VOLUNTARY RENUNCIATION OF THE Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
OFFICE FOR ANY LENGTH OF TIME SHALL the entire immediately succeeding fourth term. On the
NOT BE CONSIDERED AS AN INTERRUPTION next fifth term he can run again to start a new series
IN THE CONTINUITY OF HIS SERVICE FOR of three consecutive terms. We quote these pertinent
THE FULL TERM FOR WHICH HE WAS portions of the debates, recorded in Volume Two, pages
ELECTED. 232-233 of the Record of the Constitutional
... Commission:
THE PRESIDENT. Then let us vote first on the MR. ROMULO. Madam President, the following are
Davide amendment. the various alternatives:
Is there any objection to this new section proposed by Scheme No. I is without reelection; Scheme No. 11 is
Commissioner Davide which has been read to the body? with one reelection; and Scheme No. III is reelection
(Silence) The Chair hears none; the proposed section is without limit. This is for the Senators.
approved.
At this juncture, pieces of paper were distributed
I wish to add that the Constitutional Commission
and the Commissioners wrote down their votes.
debates on the issue of “no immediate reelection” after
THE PRESIDENT. The Chair asks the Chairman,
three consecutive terms for members of Congress
Commissioner Davide, to please consolidate the
clearly indicated that the “no immediate reelection”
results of the voting for President and
after the 3-term limit would equally apply to the
VicePresident.
elective local officials. This accounted for the
THE SECRETARY GENERAL. Madam President, we
immediate acceptance by the Committee on Local
are ready.
Governments of the aforementioned Amendment of
THE PRESIDENT. The Secretary-General will please
Commissioner Davide, which is now Section 8 of
proceed.
Article X of the Constitution. These debates clearly
showed the intent of the Commission that the ban COUNTING OF BALLOTS
against an immediate reelection after three
consecutive terms applies to the fourth term, i.e., the THE SECRETARY-GENERAL, reading:
term immediately following the three consecutive
terms, to be filled up by the regular election for such Scheme No. I—///
fourth term. For one to be able to run again after three
consecutive terms, he has to rest for Scheme No. II—/////-/////-/////-/////-//
487
VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 48 Scheme No. III—/////-/////-/////-//
THE PRESIDENT. The results show 3 votes for Scheme No. II, with one reelection.
Scheme No. I; 22 votes for Scheme No. II; and 17
votes for Scheme No. III; Scheme No. II is approved. Scheme No. III, with two reelections.
MR. ROMULO. Madam President, the next position is
for the House of Representatives, the Congressmen. Scheme No. IV, no limit on reelection.
I would assume we can use the same choices. Does
MR. DE LOS REYES. Madam President.
any one want any variation?
THE PRESIDENT. Commissioner de los Reyes is
MR. RODRIGO. Madam President.
recognized.
THE PRESIDENT. Commissioner Rodrigo is
MR. DE LOS REYES. The term of the Members of the
recognized.
House of Representatives will be three years,
MR. RODRIGO. For the record, I would like to ask
according to the first voting; the term of the
Commissioner Romulo some questions.
Senators, if they are entitled to one reelection, will
MR. ROMULO. Yes.
488
be 12 years. So, in order for a Member of the House
488 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED of Representatives to have also 12 years, he must be
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections entitled to three reelections. I propose another
scheme with three reelections to make it equal.
MR. RODRIGO. Scheme No. II says “the
MR. RODRIGO. Will the Gentleman maintain the
Vice-President—with one reelection.”
number there and add that as No. V. I filled up my
THE PRESIDENT. No, that is for Senators.
ballot already and if I erase, this might be
MR. GUINGONA. Madam President.
disqualified as a marked ballot.
THE PRESIDENT. Yes, Commissioner Guingona is
THE PRESIDENT. Commissioner Rodrigo may
recognized.
change his ballot.
MR. GUINGONA. May I suggest one more
MR. DE CASTRO. Madam President.
scheme—with two reelections for the Members of
THE PRESIDENT. Commissioner de Castro is
the House of Representatives?
recognized.
THE PRESIDENT. So, we shall distribute ballots
MR. DE CASTRO. The situation stated by
again.
Commissioner de los Reyes is apparently covered by
MR. ROMULO. While the ballots are being
Scheme No. II which we agreed upon earlier. The
distributed, may I read the following four
situation will not happen, because both the
propositions for Congressmen:
Senators and the Congressmen will have five (5)
Scheme No. I, without reelection. years on the first election. So, the possibility that
 the Senators will have a longer term than the THE SECRETARY-GENERAL. Madam President, we
Congressmen is remote. have 43 ballots.
489 THE PRESIDENT. The Secretary-General will please
VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 48 proceed.
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections THE SECRETARY-GENERAL, reading:
MR. MONSOD. Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT. Commissioner Monsod is Scheme No. I—0
recognized.
MR. MONSOD. Madam President, it occurred to us Scheme No. II—//
that the three alternatives are not really mutually
Scheme No. III—/////-/////-/////-/////-/
exclusive. Can we have only these three: without
reelection, with reelection and with unlimited Scheme No. IV—/////-/////-/////
reelection? We are asking here for plurality only,
Madam President. Can we eliminate? Scheme No. V—/////-/
THE PRESIDENT. In other words, we shall have the
same schemes as those for Senators; without THE PRESIDENT. The results show no vote for
reelection, with one reelection and unlimited Scheme No. I; 2 votes for Scheme No. II; 21 votes for
reelection. Scheme No. III; 14 votes for Scheme No. IV; and 6
REV. RIGOS. Madam President, besides we have votes for Scheme No. V; Scheme No. III is approved.
already submitted our ballots. MR. RODRIGO. Madam President.
MR. MONSOD. I withdraw my proposal, Madam 490
President. 490 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
MR. GARCIA. Madam President, I would suggest that Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
the two schemes with the highest votes be voted THE PRESIDENT. Commissioner Rodrigo is
upon to get the key majority. For example, if the recognized.
schemes with two reelections and no limit to MR. RODRIGO. I would like to ask a question for
election get the highest number of votes, then we clarification.
vote again to get the key majority. THE PRESIDENT. Please proceed.
THE PRESIDENT. We will do that. Are all the votes MR. RODRIGO. If the Members of the Lower House
in? can have two reelections, does this mean two
Immediate reelections, or a term of nine consecutive
COUNTING OF BALLOTS years? Let us say that a Member of the Lower
 House has been reelected twice; that means he will Hagedorn, he cannot have suffered “involuntary
serve for nine years. Can he let three years elapse severance from office” because there was nothing to be
and then run again? severed; he was not a holder of an office either in a de
THE PRESIDENT. We will ask the Chairman of the jureor de
Committee on the Legislative to answer the 491
question. VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 491
MR. DAVIDE. That is correct, Madam President, Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
because two reelections mean two successive facto capacity. He knew he was disqualified from
reelections. So he cannot serve beyond nine seeking a third reelection to office. Disqualification is,
consecutive years. definitely, not synonymous with involuntary severance.
MR. RODRIGO. Consecutively? Even if we concede that involuntary severance is an
MR. DAVIDE. Consecutively. act which interrupts the continuity of a term for
MR. RODRIGO. But after nine years he can let one ... purposes of applying the three-term principle the rule
MR. DAVIDE. He can rest. He can hibernate for Three laid down in Lonzanida vs. COMELEC (311 SCRA
years. 609 [1999]), cited in the ponencia, page 17, is not
MR. RODRIGO. And run again. applicable in the case of Hagedorn. The involuntary
MR. DAVIDE. He can run again. severance referred to in that case was one that took
MR. RODRIGO. And again have nine years as a place during any of the three terms; hence, the term
maximum. during which it occurred should be excluded in the
MR. DAVIDE. I do not know if that is also the computation. In the case of Hagedorn, no such
thinking of Commissioner Garcia who is the main involuntary severance took place during any of his
proponent of this proposal on two reelections. I three terms brought about by his election in 1992 and
would seek the opinion of Commissioner Garcia for reelections in 1995 and 1998.
the record. (italics supplied for emphasis.) . . . More importantly, the voluntary
The dichotomy made in the ponencia between renunciation, referred to in Section 8, Article X of the
“voluntary renunciation of the office” as used in Constitution and Section 43(b) of R.A. No. 7160 is one
Section 8 of Article X of the Constitution and Section that takes place at any time during either the first,
43(b) of R.A. No. 7160 and “involuntary severance from second, or third term of, the three consecutive terms.
office” is unnecessary, if not misplaced. From the This is very clear from the last clause of Section 8,
discussion in the ponencia, the latter is made to apply Article X of the Constitution, which reads: “shall not be
to the banned term, i.e., the fourth term immediately considered as an interruption in the continuity of his
following three consecutive terms. Speaking now of service for the full term for which he was elected.” The
purpose of the provision is to prevent an elective local term, which is actually the correct statement, plus
official from voluntarily resigning from office for the one term would disqualify the Senator concerned
purpose of circumventing the rule on the belief that from running? Is that the meaning of this provision
the term during which he resigned would be excluded on disqualification, Madam President?
in the counting of the three-term rule. In short, the DAVIDE: Yes, because we speak of “term.” And if
provision excluded is intended to impose a penalty on there is a special election, he will serve only for the
one who flouts the rule or make a mockery of it by the unexpired portion of that particular term plus one
simple act of resigning. Thus, applying it in the case of more term for the Senator and two more terms for
Hagedorn, even if he voluntarily resigned on his third the Members of the Lower House.
term he would still be barred from seeking reelection On the contrary, it is clear from the views of
in the May 2001 election. Commissioners Suarez and Davide that the term of
Hagedorn cannot likewise avail of the ruling office of one who is elected in a special election is
in Adormeo vs. COMELEC (G.R. No. 147927, 4 considered one term for purposes of determining the
February 2002, 376 SCRA 90) because in that three consecutive terms.
case Talaga did not win in his second reelection bid, or, A declaration that Hagedorn is qualified to seek
for a third term, in the May 1998 elections. He won in reelection in a recall election to remove the Mayor who
the recall election of 12 May 2000. Hagedorn, as was elected for a term for which Hagedorn was
earlier stated, fully served three successive terms. constitutionally and statutorily disqualified to be
Neither can we allow Hagedorn to take refuge reelected to or to hold is to subvert the rationale of the
under the exchange between Commissioner Suarez three-consecutive-term rule and make a mockery of it.
and Commissioner Davide Worse, it abets destructive endless partisan politics
492 and unsound governance. An elective local official who
492 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED is disqualified to seek a fourth term because of the
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections three-term limit but obsessed to hold on to power
found on page 592, Vol. II of the Record of the would spend the first year of the fourth term
Constitutional Commission and quoted on pages 19-20 campaigning for the recall of the incumbent in the
of the ponencia: second year of said term. This would not be a problem
SUAREZ: For example, a special election is called for a if the disqualified official has a solid following and a
Senator, and the Senator newly elected would have strong political machinery. Interestingly, in this case,
to serve the unexpired portion of the term. Would as stated on page 3 of the ponencia, the President of
that mean that serving the unexpired portion of the the Association of Barangay Captains of Puerto
term is already considered one term? So, half a Princesa City is one Mark David M. Hagedorn and he
was designated by the Preparatory Recall Assembly as people is at stake, we must not only be legally right
interim Chairman. but also politically correct.”1

I therefore vote to grant the petition In G.R. Nos. Private respondent Hagedorn was elected mayor of
155083-84, to set aside the resolution of the Puerto Princesa City, Palawan in 1992, 1995 and 1998
COMELEC holding private respondent Edward and served three full terms. In the May 14, 2001
Hagedorn a qualified candidate for the position of national and local elections, he ran for governor for the
Mayor of Puerto Princesa City in the recall election, Province of Palawan and lost. Petitioner-intervenor
and to declare Victorino Dennis M. Socrates was elected mayor of
493 Puerto Princesa City.
VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 49 On July 2, 2002, three hundred twelve (312) out of
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections five hundred twenty eight (528) members of the
him DISQUALIFIED from seeking reelection for a Barangay Officials of Puerto Princesa City convened
fourth term or from being a candidate for Mayor in the themselves into a Preparatory Recall Assembly to
recall election in question. initiate the recall of Mayor Socrates. On August 21,
CONCURRING OPINION 2002, COMELEC promulgated Resolution No. 5673
prescribing a calendar of activities for the recall
PUNO, J.: election. Two days after, Hagedorn filed his certificate
of candidacy for mayor in said election.
The correctness of the decision so ably written by Mr. On August 27, 2002, petitioners Adovo and Gilo
Justice Carpio speaks for itself. Nonetheless, the sought for Hagedorn’s immediate disqualification on
complex constitutional dimensions of the issue for the ground that he had served three consecutive full
resolution compels this humble concurring opinion. terms as mayor of Puerto Princesa City immediately
The issue is whether private respondent Hagedorn is prior to the recall election and was thus pro-
disqualified from running in the September 24, 2002
recall election for mayor of Puerto Princesa City and _______________
from serving the unexpired portion of the 2001-2004
Frivaldo v. COMELEC, 257 SCRA 727 (1996).
mayoralty term considering that he has thrice been
1

494
consecutively elected and has served three full terms
494 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
as Puerto Princesa City mayor from 1992-1998. In
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
illuminating the gray interstices of this election case,
scribed by the Constitution from running in said
prudence dictates that “... where the sovereignty of the
election. On August 30, 2002, petitioner Ollave, Sr.
intervened to disqualify Hagedorn on the same II.
ground.
The recall election was set on September 24, 2002. THE HONORABLE COMELEC GRAVELY ERRED
AND ABUSED ITS DISCRETION WHEN IT PROCEEDED
On September 20, 2002, public respondent
TO DIVIDE A SINGLE TERM OF OFFICE INTO TWO.
COMELEC’s First Division denied the petitions for
Hagedorn’s disqualification. The following day, III.
petitioners Adovo, Gilo and Ollave, Sr. filed a motion
for reconsideration imploring the COMELEC en THE HONORABLE COMELEC COMMITTED GRAVE
banc to reverse the September 20 resolution. On ABUSE OF DISCRETION AND VIOLATED THE INTENT
September 23, 2002, the COMELEC en bancaffirmed AND PURPOSE FOR HOLDING THE SCHEDULED
the resolution of the First Division holding Hagedorn RECALL ELECTIONS FOR THE POSITION OF MAYOR
qualified to run in the recall election. OF PUERTO PRINCESA CITY AND THE
CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY BAR AGAINST A
On September 24, 2002, petitioners Adovo, Gilo,
FOURTH CONSECUTIVE TERM.
and Ollave, Sr. sought recourse in this Court with a 495
Very Urgent Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 495
with Preliminary Injunction and Prayer for Temporary, Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
Restraining Order. On the same date, Mayor Socrates
filed a petition-in-intervention to nullify the IV.
September 23 resolution of the COMELEC.
The petitions before us raise the following issues: THE HONORABLE COMELEC GRAVELY ABUSED ITS
DISCRETION WHEN IT RULED THAT RESPONDENT
“I. HAGEDORN IS NOT DISQUALIFIED FROM RUNNING
IN THE UPCOMING RECALL ELECTIONS AS HIS
THE COMELEC GRAVELY ABUSED ITS DISCRETION INELIGIBILITY IS NOT APPARENT UNDER SECTIONS
WHEN IT RULED THAT RESPONDENT HAGEDORN IS 65 AND 68 OF THE OMNIBUS ELECTION CODE,
NOT DISQUALIFIED FROM RUNNING FOR THE SECTIONS 39 AND 40 OF RA 7160 (LOCAL
POSITION OF MAYOR OF PUERTO PRINCESA CITY IN GOVERNMENT CODE), AND RULES 23 AND 25 OF THE
THE SCHEDULED RECALL ELECTION, THE CLEAR. COMELEC RULES OF PROCEDURE.
AND UNAMBIGUOUS CONSTITUTIONAL AND
STATUTORY PROHIBITION AGAINST A FOURTH V.
CONSECUTIVE TERM FOR LOCAL ELECTIVE
OFFICIALS NOTWITHSTANDING. THE HONORABLE COMELEC COMMITTED GRAVE
ABUSE OF DISCRETION WHEN IT RULED THAT
RESPONDENT HAGEDORN IS QUALIFIED TO RUN IN Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
THE RECALL ELECTION EVEN IF HE STANDS an interruption in the continuity of his service for the
DISQUALIFIED FROM SERVING UNDER A FOURTH full term for which he was elected.”
CONSECUTIVE TERM AS SUCH IS ALLEGEDLY NOT This constitutional provision is restated in the Local
THE PROVINCE OF THE INSTANT DISQUALIFICATION Government Code of 1991, to wit:
PROCEEDINGS.
“Sec. 43. Term of Office.—. . . (b) No local elective official
shall serve for more than three (3) consecutive terms in the
VI.
same position. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any
THE HONORABLE COMELEC COMMITTED GRAVE length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in
ABUSE OF DISCRETION WHEN IT ISSUED A the continuity of service for the full term for which the
DEFECTIVE AND CLEARLY VOID RESOLUTION.” 2
elective official concerned was elected.”
The foregoing issues may be reduced to the singular We have not interpreted Art. X, Sec. 8 of the
issue of whether or not private respondent Hagedorn is Constitution in the recall election context of the cases
disqualified from running in the September 24, 2002 at bar. It is imperative to distill the intent of the
recall election and serving as mayor of Puerto Princesa framers of the Constitution and the people who
City considering that he has been thrice consecutively ratified it. Mere reliance on the surface meaning of the
3

elected and has served three full terms in that position words of the above provision, however, will not suffice
from 1992 to 2001. to capture this elusive intent. Thus, we turn to the
I find the petitions devoid of merit. proceedings and debates of the Constitutional
Art. X, Sec. 8 of the Constitution provides: Commission (ConCom) as an extrinsic aid to
“Sec. 8. The term of office of elective local officials, interpretation. The Record of the Constitutional
4

except barangay officials, which shall be determined by law, Commission shows that Art. X, Sec. 8 was readily
shall be three years and no such official shall serve for more accepted by the Commissioners without much
than three consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the discussion; nonetheless, their debates on setting the
5

office for any length of time shall not be considered as term limit for Representatives show that the rationale
for the limit applies to both Representatives and
_______________
elective local officials. We quote at length the relevant
2
Very Urgent Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition with portions of the debates, to wit:
Preliminary Injunction and Prayer for Temporary Restraining Order “MR. GARCIA. I would like to advocate the proposition that
(Petition), pp. 9-10. The Petition-in-Intervention of Mayor Socrates raises no further election for local and legislative officials be
similar issues.
allowed after a total of three terms or nine years. I have
496
four reasons why I would like to advocate this proposal,
496 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED which are as follows: (1) to prevent monopoly of political
power; (2) to broaden the choice of the people; (3) so that no three terms. And this would also favor not relying on
one is indispensable in running the affairs of the country; (4) personalities no matter how heroic, some of whom, in fact,
to create a reserve of statesmen both in the national and are now in our midst.
local levels. May I explain briefly these four reasons. Lastly, the fact that we will not reelect people after three
terms would also favor the creation of a reserve of
_______________ statesmen both in the national and local levels.
Turnovers in public office after nine years will ensure
3
I L. Tañada and F. Carreon, Political Law of the Philippines 95-96
(1961). that new ideas and new approaches will be welcome. Public
4
R. Martin, Philippine Political Law 27 (New ed. 1998). office will no longer be a preserve of conservatism and
5
J. Bernas, The Intent of the 1986 Constitution Writers 699 (1995); tradition. At the same time, we will create a reserve of
Record of the Constitutional Commission (“Record”), vol. III, pp. 406-408, statesmen, both in the national and local levels, since we
451.
will not deprive the community of the wealth of experience
497
and advice that could come from those who have served for
VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 49 nine years in public office.
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections Finally, the concept of public service, if political dynasty
First: To prevent monopoly of political power—Our symbolized by prolonged stay in particular public offices is
history has shown that prolonged stay in public office can barred, will have fuller meaning. It will not be limited only
lead to the creation of entrenched preserves of political to those who directly hold public office, but also to
dynasties. In this regard, I would also like to advocate that consultative bodies organized by the people, among whom
immediate members of the families of public officials be could be counted those who have served in public office with
barred from occupying the same position being vacated. accomplishment and distinction, for public service must no
Second: To broaden the choice of the, people—Although longer be limited only to public office.
individuals have the right to present themselves for public xxx xxx xxx
office, our times demand that we create structures that will MR. MONSOD. Madam President, I was reflecting on
enable more aspirants to offer to serve and to provide the this issue earlier and I asked to speak because in this draft
people a broader choice so that more and more people can be Constitution, we are recognizing people power. We have
enlisted to the cause of public service, not just limited only to said that now there is a new awareness, a new kind of voter,
those who may have the reason or the advantage due to their a new kind of Filipino. And yet at the same time, we are
position. prescreening candidates among whom they will choose. We
Third: No one is indispensable in running the affairs of are saying that this 48-member Constitutional Commission
the country—After the official’s more than a decade or has decreed that
nearly a decade of occupying the same public office, I think 498
we should try to encourage a more team-oriented 498 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
consensual approach to governance favored by a proposal Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
that will limit public servants to occupy the same office for
those who have served for a period of nine years are barred not run. But let us not bar them for life after serving the
from running for the same position. public for a number of years.
The argument is that there may be other positions. But xxx xxx xxx
there are some people who are very skilled and good at MR. OPLE. . . . The principle involved is really whether
legislation, and yet are not of a national stature to be this Commission shall impose a temporary or a perpetual
Senators. They may be perfectly honest, perfectly competent disqualification on those who have served their terms in
and with integrity. They get voted into office at the age of 25, accordance with the limits on consecutive service as decided
which is the age we provide for Congressmen. And at 34 by the Constitutional Commission. I would be very wary
years old we put them to pasture. about the Commission exercising a sort of omnipotent power
Second, we say that we want to broaden the choices of in order to disqualify those who will already have served
the people. We are talking here only of congressional or their terms from perpetuating themselves in office. I think
senatorial seats. We want to broaden the people’s choice but the Commission achieves its purpose in establishing
we are making a prejudgment today because we exclude a safeguards against the excessive accumulation of power as a
certain number of people. We are, in effect, putting an 499
additional qualification for office—that the officials must VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 499
not have served a total of more than a number of years in Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
their lifetime. Third, we are saying that by putting people to result of consecutive terms. We do put a gap on consecutive
pasture, we are creating a reserve of statesmen, but the service—in the case of the President, six years; in the case of
future participation of these statesmen is limited. Their the Vice-President, unlimited; and in the case of the
skills may only be in some areas, but we are saying that they Senators, one reelection. In the case of the Members of
are going to be barred from running for the same position. Congress, both from the legislative districts and from the
Madam President, the ability and capacity of a party list and sectoral representation, this is now under
statesman depend as well on the day-to-day honing of his discussion and later on the policy concerning local officials
skills and competence, in intellectual combat, in concern will be taken up by the Committee on Local Governments.
and contact with the people, and here we are saying that he The principle remains the same. I think we want to prevent
is going to be barred from the same kind of public service. future situations where, as a result of continuous service and
I do not think it is in our place today to make such a very frequent reelections, officials from the President down to the
important and momentous decision with respect to many of municipal mayor tend to develop a proprietary interest in
our countrymen in the future who may have a lot more years their positions and to accumulate those powers and
ahead of them in the service of their country. perquisites that permit them to stay on indefinitely or to
If we agree that we will make sure that these people do transfer these posts to members of their families in a
not set up structures that will perpetuate them, then let us subsequent election. I think that is taken care of because we
give them this rest period of three years or whatever it put a gap on the continuity or unbroken service of all of
is. Maybe during that time, we would even agree that their these officials. But were we now (to) decide to put these
fathers or mothers or relatives of the second degree should prospective servants of the people or politicians, if we want
to use the coarser term, under a perpetual disqualification, I most critical support for the perpetuation of political
have a feeling that we are taking away too much from the dynasties in the
people, whereas we should be giving as much to the people 500
as we can in terms of their own freedom of choice. 500 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
I think the veterans of the Senate and of the House of Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
Representatives here will say that simply getting Philippines. That is quite a victory, but at the same time,
nominated on a party ticket is a very poor assurance that let us not despise the role of political parties. The strength
the people will return them to the Senate or to the House of of democracy will depend a lot on how strong our
Representatives. There are many casualties along the way democratic parties are, and a splintering of all these parties
of those who want to return to their office, and it is the so that we fall back on, let us say, nontraditional parties
people’s decision that matters. They judge whether or not a entirely will mean a great loss to the vitality and resiliency
Soc Rodrigo, a Sumulong, a Padilla, an Alonto and a of our democracy . . .
Rosales, after a first and second term, should go back to the xxx xxx xxx
Senate. That is a prerogative of the people that we should BISHOP BACANI. I think when we voted on the
not take, away from them—the right to judge those who provision that the illiterate be allowed to vote and when we
have served. In any case, we already take away from the proposed in this Constitutional Commission for initiative as
people the freedom to vote for the third termers because we a way also of empowering our people to engage in the
say that a Senator, say, Mr. Rodrigo, is only good for twelve legislative exercise, we are really presupposing the political
years. But if he wants to be like Cincinnatus, if he is called maturity of our people. Why is it that that political
back by his people to serve again, let us say for a period of maturity seems now to be denied by asking that we should
six years—which Commissioner Davide called a period of put a constitutional bar to a further election of any
hibernation which is spent at his fishpond in Bulacan, Representative after a term of three years? Why should we
Bulacan—because there is a new situation in the country not leave that to the premise accepted by practically
that fairly impels the people to summon him back, like everybody here that our people are politically mature?
Cincinnatus in the past, then there will no longer be any Should we use this assumption only when it is convenient
Cincinnatus. for us, and not when it may also lead to a freedom of choice
That is not perhaps a very important point, but I think for the people and for politicians who may aspire to serve
we already have succeeded in striking a balance of policies, longer?
so that the structures, about which Commissioner Garcia xxx xxx xxx
expressed a very legitimate concern, could henceforth MR. GARCIA. I would like to answer Commissioner
develop to redistribute opportunities, both in terms of Bacani. We put a constitutional bar to reelection of any
political and economic power, to the great majority of the Representative basically because of the undue advantage of
people, because very soon, we will also discuss the the incumbent. It is not because of lack of trust in the
multiparty system. We have unshackled the Philippine people. We realize from history that Mexico fought a
politics from the two-party system, which really was the revolution simply because of the issue of reelection. No
reelection, sufragio universal. Basically, it is because of the The maiden case was Borja, Jr. v. Commission on
undue advantage of the incumbent that he accumulates Elections and Jose T. Capco which involved the 1998
7

power, money, party machine or patronage. As regards what mayoralty election in Pateros. In 1989, private
Commissioner Aquino has said, politics is not won by ideals respondent Capco became mayor by operation of law
alone; it is won by solid organizing work by organizations
upon the death of the incumbent, Cesar Borja. In 1992,
that have the capacity to do so; and normally the incumbent
he was elected mayor for a term ending in 1995. In
has all the advantages . . .
xxx xxx xxx 1995, he was reelected mayor for another term of three
THE SECRETARY-GENERAL. Madam President, we years ending in June 1998. In March 1998, he filed his
have here 43 ballots cast. We will now start the counting. certificate of candidacy for the May 1998 mayoralty
Alternative No. 1—no further election after a total of election of Pateros. Petitioner Borja, Jr., another
three terms: /////-/////-/////-// candidate for mayor, sought Capco’s disqualification on
Alternative No. 2—no immediate reelection after three the ground that by June 30, 1998, Capco would have
successive terms: /////-/////-/////-/////-/////-/” (emphasis supplied)
6
already served as mayor for three consecutive terms
In several cases, this Court was guided by the and would therefore be ineligible to serve for another
proceedings of the ConCom in construing Art. X, Sec. 8 term. The COMELEC en banc declared Capco eligible
of the Constitution in relation to run for mayor, thus Borja, Jr. sought recourse in
this Court. In dismissing the petition, we considered
_______________
the historical background of Art. X, Sec. 8 of the
6
Record, vol. II, pp. 236-237, 239-240, 243. Constitution, viz.:
501 “. . . a consideration of the historical background of Article
VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 50 X, §8 of the Constitution reveals that the members of the
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections Constitutional Commission were as much concerned with
to Section 43(b) of the Local Government Code of 1991. preserving the freedom of choice of the people as they were
with preventing the monopolization of political power.
Different from the issue presented by the cases at bar,
Indeed, they rejected a proposal put forth by Commissioner
however, the question in those cases was what Edmundo F. Garcia that after serving three consecutive
constitutes a “term” for purposes of counting the three terms or nine years there should be no further reelection for
consecutive terms allowed under Art. X, Sec. 8. It is local and legislative officials. Instead, they adopted the
apropos to revisit these cases to aid us in extracting alternative proposal of Commissioner Christian Monsod
the intent behind said Constitutional provision and that such officials be simply barred from running for the
properly apply it to the unique case of private same position in the succeeding election following the
respondent Hagedorn. expiration of the third consecutive term (2 RECORD OF
THE CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION 236-243 [Session
of July 25, 1986] . . .). Monsod warned against ‘prescreening Yes, because although he has already first served as
candidates [from] whom the people will choose’ as a result mayor by succession and subsequently resigned from office
of the proposed absolute disqualification, considering that before the full term expired, he has not actually served
the draft constitution contained provisions ‘recognizing three full terms in all for the purpose of applying the term
people’s power.’ limit. Under Art. X, §8, voluntary renunciation of the office
is not considered as an interruption in the continuity of his
_______________ service for the full term only if the term is one “for which he
was elected.” Since A is only completing the service of the
7
295 SCRA 157 (1998).
term for which the deceased and not he was
502
elected, A cannot be considered to have completed one term.
502 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED His resignation constitutes an interruption of the full term.
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections xxx xxx xxx
xxx xxx xxx . . . the mayor is entitled to run for reelection because
Two ideas thus emerge from a consideration of the the two conditions for the application of the disqualification
proceedings of the Constitutional Commission. The first is provisions have not concurred, namely, that the local
the notion of service of term, derived from the concern about official concerned has been elected three consecutive times
the accumulation of power as a result of a prolonged stay in and that he has fully served three consecutive terms. In the
office. The second is the idea of election, derived from the first case, even if the local official is considered to have
concern that the right of the people to choose whom they served three full terms notwithstanding his resignation
wish to govern them be preserved. (emphasis supplied) before the end of the first term, the fact remains that he has
xxx xxx xxx not been elected three times . . .
To recapitulate, the term limit for elective local officials Case No. 3. The case of vice-mayor C who becomes
must be taken to refer to the right to be elected as well mayor by succession involves a total failure of the two
as the right to serve in the same elective conditions to concur for the purpose of applying Art. X, § 8.
position. Consequently, it is not enough that an individual Suppose he is twice elected after that term, is he qualified
has served three consecutive terms in an elective local to run again in the next election?
office, he must also have been elected to the same position 503
for the same number of times before the disqualification can VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 503
apply. This point can be made clearer by considering the Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
following cases or situations:
Yes, because he was not elected to the office of mayor in the
Case No. 1. Suppose A is a vice-mayor who becomes
first term but simply found himself thrust into it by
mayor by reason of the death of the incumbent. Six months
operation of law. Neither had he served the full term
before the next election, he resigns and is twice elected
because he only continued the service, interrupted by the
thereafter. Can he run again for mayor in the next election?
death, of the deceased mayor.
 To consider C in the third case to have served the first Lonzanida to vacate the post, and Alvez served the
term in full and therefore ineligible to run a third time for remainder of the term.
reelection would be not only to falsify reality but also to Lonzanida filed his certificate of candidacy for the
unduly restrict the right of the people to choose whom they May 11, 1998 election for mayor of San Antonio. His
wish to govern them. If the vicemayor turns out to be a bad
opponent Eufemio Muli filed with the COMELEC a
mayor, the people can remedy the situation by simply not
petition to disqualify Lonzanida on the ground that he
reelecting him for another term. But if, on the other hand,
he proves to be a good mayor, there will be no way the had already served three consecutive terms in the
people can return him to office (even if it is just the third same office and was thus prohibited from running in
time he is standing for reelection) if his service of the first the upcoming
term is counted as one for the purpose of applying the term
_______________
limit.
To consider C as eligible for reelection would be in accord 8
Id., pp. 163, 165.
with the understanding of the Constitutional Commission 9
311 SCRA 602 (1999).
that while the people should be protected from the evils that 504
a monopoly of political power may bring about, care should 504 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
be taken that their freedom of choice is not unduly Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
curtailed.” (Italics supplied)
8

election. On May 13, 1998, Lonzanida was proclaimed

We reiterated the Borja ruling in Lonzanida v.
winner. COMELEC ruled that Lonzanida was
Commission on Elections, et al. which involved the
9

disqualified as his assumption to office in 1995,

election for mayor of San Antonio, Zambales. Prior to
although he was unseated before the expiration of the
the May 8, 1995 elections, petitioner Romeo Lonzanida
term, was considered one full term for purposes of
served two consecutive terms as municipal mayor of
counting the three term limit under the Constitution
San Antonio, Zambales. In the May 1995 elections, he
and the Local Government Code of 1991.
ran for mayor, was proclaimed winner, and assumed
On appeal to this Court, we ruled, viz:
office. His proclamation was, however, contested by his
“It is not disputed that the petitioner was previously elected
opponent Juan Alvez in an election protest filed before and served two consecutive terms as mayor of San Antonio,
the Regional Trial Court of Zambales which rendered a Zambales prior to the May 1995 mayoral elections. In the
decision declaring a failure of elections. Upon appeal of May 1995 elections he again ran for mayor of San Antonio,
the decision to the COMELEC, Alvez was declared the Zambales and was proclaimed winner. He assumed office
duly elected mayor of San Antonio. In February 1998, and discharged the rights and duties of mayor until March
the COMELEC issued a writ of execution ordering 1998 when he was ordered to vacate the post by reason of
the COMELEC decision dated November 13, 1997 on the
election protest against the petitioner which declared his
opponent Juan Alvez, the duly elected mayor of San VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 505
Antonio. Alvez served the remaining portion of the Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
1995-1998 mayoral term.
Finally, in the recent case of Adormeo v. COMELEC, et
The two requisites for the application of the three term
al., we ruled that a mayor who assumed office via a
11

rule are absent. First, the petitioner cannot be considered as

having been duly elected to the post in the May 1995 recall election and served the unexpired portion of the
elections, and second, the petitioner did not fully serve the mayoralty term is not considered to have served a full
1995-1998 mayoral term by reason of voluntary term for purposes of applying the three term limit. In
relinquishment of office. After a reappreciation and revision this case, therein private respondent Ramon Talaga,
of the contested ballots the COMELEC itself declared by Jr. was elected mayor in May 1992 and served the full
final judgment that petitioner Lonzanida lost in the May term. In 1995, he was reelected and again served the
1995 mayoral elections and his previous proclamation as a full term. In 1998, he lost to Bernard G. Tagarao.
winner was declared null and void. His assumption of office About two years later, a recall election was held where
as mayor cannot be deemed to have been by reason of a Talaga, Jr. ran against Tagarao. He (Talaga, Jr.) won
valid election but by reason of a void proclamation . . .
and served the remainder of Tagarao’s term.
Second, the petitioner cannot be deemed to have served
In view of the upcoming May 2001 mayoralty
the May 1995 to 1998 term because he was ordered to
vacate his post before the expiration of the term. The election, Talaga, Jr. filed his certificate of candidacy.
respondents’ contention that the petitioner should be On March 2, 2001, therein petitioner Adormeo sought
deemed to have served one full term from May 1995-1998 the cancellation of Talaga, Jr.’s certificate of candidacy
because he served the greater portion of that term has no and/or his disqualification on the ground that he had
legal basis to support it; it disregards the second requisite been thrice elected and had served three consecutive
for the application of the disqualification, i.e., that he has terms as city mayor. Talaga, Jr., however, was declared
fully served three consecutive terms. qualified for the position of city mayor. Adormeo thus
In sum, the petitioner was not the duly elected mayor sought recourse before this Court.
and he did not hold office for the full term; hence, his Citing the Borja and Lonzanida rulings, we ruled
assumption of office from May 1995 to March 1998 cannot
that Talaga, Jr. was not disqualified as the two
be counted as a term for purposes of computing the three
conditions for disqualification, namely (1) the elective
term limit.” (Italics supplied)
10

official concerned was elected for three consecutive

_______________ terms in the same post and (2) he has fully served
three consecutive terms, were not met. We did not
10
Lonzanida v. COMELEC, et al., 311 SCRA 602 (1999), pp. consider Talaga, Jr.’s service of the unexpired portion
612-613.
505 of Tagarao’s term as service of a fullterm for purposes
of the three term limit. We also ruled that he did not
serve for three consecutive terms as there was a break perpetuated by the undue advantage of the incumbent
in his service when he lost to Tagarao in the 1998 and (2) to broaden the choice of the people by allowing
elections. We held, viz: candidates other than the incumbent to serve the
“COMELEC’s ruling that private respondent was not people. Likewise evident in the deliberations is the
elected for three (3) consecutive terms should be upheld. effort to balance between two interests, namely, the
For nearly two years, he was a private citizen. The prevention of political dynasties and broadening the
continuity of his mayorship was disrupted by his defeat in choice of the people on the one hand, and respecting
the 1998 elections.
the freedom of choice and voice of the people, on the
Patently untenable is petitioner’s contention that
other; thus, the calibration between perpetual
COMELEC in allowing respondent Talaga, Jr. to run in the
May 1998 election violates Article X, Section 8 of the 1987 disqualification after three consecutive terms as
Constitution. (footnote omitted) To bolster his case, proposed by Commissioner Garcia, and setting a limit
respondent adverts to the comment of Fr. Joaquin Bernas, a on immediate reelection and providing for a
hibernation period.
_______________ In all three cases—Borja,
11
G.R. No. 147927, February 4, 2002, 376 SCRA 90.
Lonzanida and Adormeo—we ruled that the “term”
506 referred to in the three term limit is service of
506 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED a full term of three years for elective local officials.
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections This ruling furthers the intent of the ConCom to
Constitutional Commission member, stating that in prevent political dynasties as it is the service
interpreting said provision that ‘if one is elected of consecutive full terms that makes service continuous
representative to serve the unexpired term of another, that and which opens the gates to political dynasties
unexpired (term), no matter how short, will be considered limiting the people’s choice of leaders. In the words of
one term for the purpose of computing the number of Commissioner Ople, “. . . we want to prevent future
successive terms allowed.’ situations where, as a result of continuous service and
As pointed out by the COMELEC en banc, Fr. Bernas’ frequent reelections, officials from the President down
comment is pertinent only to members of the House of to the municipal mayor tend to develop a proprietary
Representatives. Unlike local government officials, there is
interest in their positions and to accumulate those
no recall election provided for members of Congress. (Rollo,
pp. 83-84)” (Italics supplied)
12
powers and perquisites that permit them to stay on
The deliberations of the ConCom and the ruling case indefinitely or to transfer these posts to members of
law of Borja, Lonzanida and Adormeo show that there their families in a subsequent election. I think that
are two principal reasons for the three term limit for _______________
elective local officials: (1) to prevent political dynasties
 Adormeo v. COMELEC, et al., supra, p. 6.
12
service of a fourth consecutive full term. Petitioners
507
are correct in foisting the view that “term” is a fixed
VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 50 and definite period of time prescribed by law or the
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections Constitution during which the public officer may claim
is taken care of because we put a gap on the continuity to hold the office as a right. It is a fixed and definite
or unbroken service of all of these officials. (emphasis period of time to hold office, perform its functions, and
supplied)” Thus, ConCom set the limit on consecutive enjoy its privileges and emoluments until the
full terms to no more than three. Otherwise stated, it expiration of the period. In ascertaining what “term”
13

is a fourth consecutive full term that is prohibited. means for elective local officials, the Constitution itself
In the cases at bar, however, private respondent provides in Art. X, Sec. 8 that it means a fixed,
Hagedorn will not serve a prohibited fourth definite, and full period of three years, viz.: “Sec. 8.
consecutive full term as he will be serving only The term of office of elective local officials,
the unexpired portion of the 2001-2004 mayoralty except barangay officials, which shall be determined
term. Similar to Talaga, Jr. in the Adormeo by law, shall be three years . . .” Although one or more
case, Hagedorn’s service as mayor will not be persons may discharge the duties of the office during
continuous from the third to a fourth consecutive full this fixed three-year period, the term
term as it was broken when Socrates was elected in the
2001 regular mayoralty election and served for one _______________
year. In the same vein that Talaga, Jr. was elected into 13
Petition, p. 23, citing Martin and Martin, Administrative Law,
office by recall election and his service of the unexpired Law of Public Officers and Election Law, Revised Edition, p. 173.
portion of the incumbent’s term was not considered a 508
consecutive full term for purposes of applying the 508 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
three term limit, Hagedorn’s service of the unexpired Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
portion of Socrates’ term should not also be counted as is not divided into smaller terms by the number of
a prohibited fourth consecutive full term. It should not incumbents who may fill the office. It is one and
make a difference whether the recall election came indivisible, and term follows term in successive cycles
after the second consecutive full term as in the of three years each. If the incumbent or the one elected
Adormeo case or after the third consecutive term as in to the office fills a higher vacant office, refuses to
the cases at bar because the intent to create a hiatus assume office, fails to qualify, dies, is removed from
in service is satisfied in both instances. office, voluntarily resigns or is otherwise permanently
Even a textual analysis of Art. X, Sec. 8 will yield incapacitated to discharge the functions of his office,
the interpretation that what is prohibited is the thereby creating a permanent vacancy, the term 14
would remain unbroken until the recurring election for _______________
the office.15

Local Government Code of 1991, Sec. 44(d).

14

The provisions on voluntary renunciation under See Schardein v. Harrison, et al., 18 S.W. 2d 316 (1929).
15

Art. X, Sec. 8 and other articles of the Constitution 509

bolster the interpretation that for purposes of applying VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 509
the three term limit, service of a full term of three Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
years is contemplated, viz: “Sec. 43(b) . . . No local elective official shall serve for more
“Art. X, Sec. 8. The term of office of elective local officials, than three (3) consecutive terms in the same position.
except barangay officials, which shall be determined by law, Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time
shall be three years and no such official shall serve for more shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity
than three consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the of service for the full term for which the elective official
office for any length of time shall not be considered as an concerned was elected.” (Italics supplied)
interruption in the continuity of the service for the full Likewise, because “term” is understood to be a fixed,
term for which he was elected.” definite, and full period, the Constitution, in Art. VI,
“Art. VI, Sec. 4. . . . No Senator shall serve for more than Sec. 9, uses the qualifier “unexpired term” to refer to
two consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office
only a portion of a term, viz.:
for any length of time shall be considered as an interruption
“Art. VI, Sec. 9. In case of vacancy in the Senate or in the
in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he
House of Representatives, a special election may be called
was elected.
to fill such vacancy in the manner prescribed by law, but
xxx xxx xxx
the Senator or Member of the House of Representatives
Sec. 7. . . . No Member of the House of Representatives
thus elected shall serve only for the unexpired term.”
shall serve for more than three consecutive terms.
(Italics supplied)
Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time
shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity
Similarly, Sec. 44 of the Local Government Code of
of his service for the full term for which he was elected. 1991 uses the phrase “unexpired term” to mean the
xxx xxx xxx remainder of the term, viz.:
Art. VII, Sec. 4. . . . No Vice-President shall serve more “Sec. 44(d). The successors as defined herein shall serve
than two successive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the only the unexpired terms of his predecessors. . .” (Italics
office for any length of time shall not be considered as an supplied)
interruption in the continuity of the service for the full Thus, when Art. X, Sec. 8 of the Constitution states
term for which he was elected.” (Italics supplied) that “...no such (local elective) official shall serve for
Similarly, the Local Government Code of 1991 provides more than three consecutive terms,” it consistently
in Sec. 43(b), viz.: means that it allows service of a maximum of three
consecutive full termsand prohibits service of a possible service of more than three consecutive and
minimum fourth consecutive full term. continuous full terms, i.e., service of a fourth
In putting a cap on the number of consecutive full consecutive full term. We cannot overstress that it is
terms an elective local official can serve, the ConCom this continuousness that the ConCom feared would
sought to curb the undue advantage of the incumbent open the gates to the two evils sought to be avoided:
over other aspirants, which advantage makes it easier the incumbent’s use of his undue advantage to put up
to found a political dynasty. At the time of the a political dynasty and limiting the people’s choice of
September 24, 2002 recall election, however, Hagedorn leaders. It is in this context of regular elections that
was not the incumbent favored with this feared “undue our obiter dictum in the Lonzanida case, which
advantage of the incumbent.” On the contrary, he ran petitioners harp on, should be understood. In that
against the incumbent Mayor Socrates who alone case, we opined that “[a]s finally voted upon, it was
could be the subject of recall election and who, by law, agreed that an elective local government official
was automatically a candidate in the should be barred from running for the same post after
election. Hagedorn
16
three consecutive terms. After a hiatus of at least one
term, he may again run for the same office.” Indeed,
17

_______________
insofar as regular local elections are concerned, which
16
Section 71 of the Local Government Code of 1991 provides in were the elections involved in that case, there should
relevant part, viz.: be a hiatus of at least one full term of three years.
“Section 71. . . . The official or officials sought to be recalled shall On the other hand, in the case of a local official who
automatically be considered as duly registered candidate or
510 assumes office through a recall election—whether after
510 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED his first, second, or third consecutive term—there is a
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections break in his service caused by the election of the
incumbent who was recalled. Even in the case of a
did not run in the 2001 regular mayoralty election of
local official who initially assumes office via recall
Puerto Princesa City which Socrates won, precisely
election, then wins the two succeeding regular
because he was aware of the three term limit.
elections and serves two full terms in the same post,
It is my respectful submission that the Constitution
he is not prohibited from seeking another reelection
and the Local Government Code of 1991 proscribe a
and serving another full term. This is so because his
local official who has been thrice consecutively elected
service of the remainder of the incumbent’s term via
in regular elections and has served three full terms in
recall election is not, in reality and in law, a full term
the same position, from running in the regular
continuing on to his three succeeding
election succeeding his third consecutive term. It is
this situation that is prohibited because it makes
_______________ Representatives, for three consecutive terms. For example,
a special election is called for a Senator, and the Senator
candidates to the pertinent positions and, like other newly elected would have to serve the unexpired portion of
candidates, shallbe entitled to be voted upon.”
17
Petition, p. 18, citing Lonzanida v. Comelec, supra, p. 609.
the term. Would that mean that serving the unexpired
511 portion of the term is already considered one term? So, half
VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 51 a term, which is actually the correct statement, plus one
term would disqualify the Senator concerned from running?
Socrates vs. Commission on Elections Is that the meaning of this provision on disqualification,
full terms. Local officials who assume office via recall Madam President?
election serve only the unexpired portion of the MR. DAVIDE. Yes, because we speak of “term” and if
incumbent’s term and this service is not counted as a there is a special election, he will serve only for the
full term, despite the Constitutional mandate that the unexpired portion of that particular term plus one more
term of office of elective local officials is three years. term for the Senator and two terms for the Members of the
Such is the design because Art. XVIII, Secs. 2 and 5 of Lower House.” 20

the Constitution also prescribe synchronization of As we ruled in the Adormeo case, service of an
regular national and local elections beginning on the unexpired term is considered service of a full term only
second Monday of May 1992, which is accomplished if
18 with respect to Representa-
the local official who assumes office through recall
_______________
election serves only the incumbent’s unexpired term.
It is only in the case of Representatives (and 18
Osmena, et al. v. Del Mar, et al., 199 SCRA 750 (1991).
Senators) that “if one is elected Representative to 19
II J. Bernas, The Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines:
serve the unexpired term of another, that unexpired A Commentary 96 (First ed. 1988).
20
Record, vol. II, p. 592.
term will be considered one term for purposes of 512
computing the number of successive terms 512 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
allowed.” The election herein contemplated is a
19

Socrates vs. Commission on Elections

special election thus this Constitutional intent does
tives (and Senators) because unlike local government
not apply to a recall election which involves only
officials, Representatives cannot be recalled. It is
elective local officials. The Record bear this out, viz.:
continuous prolonged stay in office that breeds
“MR. SUAREZ. . . May we ask a clarificatory question
regarding the interpretation of the provisions in Sections 3
political dynasties. Understandably therefore, insofar
and 6 in relation to Section 9 regarding the disqualification as Representatives who cannot be recalled are
on the part of the Senator to run for two consecutive terms, concerned, service of an unexpired term is strictly
and in the case of the Members of the House of counted as service of a full term because the purpose of
the ConCom was to limit the right to run and be _______________
elected in Congress. 21

Borja, Jr. v. COMELEC, et al., supra, p. 167.

21

In allowing Hagedorn to participate in the Id., p. 163.

22

September 24 recall election, we are not unmindful of 513

the intent of the ConCom to broaden the people’s VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 12, 2002 513
choice of leaders. The three term limit was adopted to Socrates vs. Commission on Elections
allow the electorate to choose from other candidates in Thus, an elective local official cannot perpetually hold
the regular electionsucceeding the incumbent’s third on to his office through the mechanism of recall as at
consecutive term. This is clear in the Commissioners’ the very least, there will be a hiatus of one year after
alternatives for voting on the term limit for an unbroken service of three terms. He could not
Representatives and the outcome of their voting where simply create, in the words of Commissioner Monsod,
17 voted for “no further election after a total of three “structures that will perpetuate him (them)” in power
terms” and 26 voted for “no immediate reelectionafter with the assurance that they will not be exposed
three successive terms.” A reelection is immediate if a because after serving three consecutive full terms, he
local official wins in the election succeeding the third will certainly be replaced. Within the one-year period
consecutive term. This is not the case with Hagedorn
22
under Sec. 74, his successor could discover and begin
who did not run in the 2001 regular mayoralty election to dismantle these manipulative structures. This one
and left that political arena to other contenders, year period also provides a reasonable basis for the
thereby upholding the intent of the ConCom to electorate to judge the performance of the incumbent
broaden the choice of the electorate. successor, thus obviating fear of political maneuvering
The intent of the ConCom to create a hiatus in the through initiation of recall proceedings by a
service of elective local officials after three consecutive Preparatory Recall Assembly dominated by minions of
full terms cannot be undermined through abuse of the the previous local official. In Claudio v. COMELEC, et
23

power of recall. The Local Government Code of 1991 al., we held, viz.:
24

provides limitations on recall in Section 74, viz.:

“Section 74. Limitations on Recall.—(a) any elective local _______________
official may be the subject of a recall election only once
during his term of office for loss of confidence.
23
Section 70 of the Local Government Code provides, viz.:
“Section 70. Initiation of the Recall Process.—(a) Recall may be initiated by a
(b) No recall shall take place within one (1) year from the preparatory recall assembly or by the registered voters of the local
date of the official’s assumption to office or one (1) year government unit to which the local elective official subject to such recall
immediately preceding a regular local election.” (Italics belongs.
(b) There shall be a preparatory recall assembly in every province, city,
supplied) district, and municipality which shall be composed of the following:
 1.​ (1)Provincial level. All mayors, vice-mayors, why the electorate should not be allowed to make a
and sanggunian members of the municipalities and component
cities; Cincinnatus of their past leader.
2.​ (2)City level. All punong barangay and sanggunian The imagined fear of abuse of the power of recall
barangay members in the city;
3.​ (3)Legislative district level. In cases where sangguniang
does not suffice to disqualify private respondent
panlalawiganmembers are elected by district, all elective Hagedorn and should not prevail over the resounding
municipal officials in the district; and in cases where sangguniang voice of the people of Puerto Princesa City. They have
panglungsod members are elected by district, all
elective barangay officials in the district; and spoken and there is no mistaking that Hagedorn is
4.​ (4)Municipal level. All punong barangay and sangguniang their overwhelming choice. We cannot subscribe to the
barangay members in the municipality.
petitioners’ position and allow an overly literal reading
(c) A majority of all the preparatory recall assembly members may of the law to mute the electorate’s cry and curtail their
convene in session in a public place and initiate a recall proceeding against freedom to choose their leaders. This freedom was as
any elective official in the local government unit concerned. Recall of
provincial, city, or municipal officials shall be validly initiated through a
much a concern of the ConCom as was the prevention
resolution adopted by a majority of all the members of the preparatory recall of political dynasties and broadening the choice of the
assembly concerned during its session called for the purpose.” people. This Court has not just once admonished
331 SCRA 388 (2000).
24

514
against a too literal reading of the law as this is apt to
514 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED constrict rather than fulfill its purpose and defeat the
intention of the authors. 26

Socrates vs. Commission on Elections

In sum, private respondent Hagedorn is not
“In the Bower case (In re Bower 41 Ill. 777, 242 N.E. 2d 252
[1968]) cited by this Court in Angobung v. COMELEC (269 disqualified from running in the September 24, 2002
SCRA 245, 256 [1997]), it was held that ‘The only logical recall election as the disqualification under Art. X, Sec.
reason which we can ascribe for requiring the electors to 8 of the Constitution applies to the regular mayoralty
wait one year before petitioning for recall election is to election succeeding the third consecutive term served.
prevent premature action on their part in voting to remove Nor is he precluded from serving the unexpired portion
a newly elected official before having had sufficient time to of the 2001-2004 mayoralty term as this is not service
evaluate the soundness of his policies and decisions.’ ” 25
of a prohibited fourth consecutive full term.
If, after one year in office, the incumbent proves I vote to deny the petition, giving due consideration
himself to be worthy of his position, then his to the tenet of representative democracy that the
constituents will confirm this should a recall election people should be allowed to
be called, as in the case of Mayor Reynaldo Malonzo of
Caloocan City. If, on the other hand, the incumbent _______________
turns out to be an ineffective leader, there is no reason 25
Claudio v. COMELEC, et al., supra, p. 406.
26
Paras v. COMELEC, 264 SCRA 491 (1996).
 515
VOL. 391, NOVEMBER 13, 2002 51
Danao vs. Franco, Jr.
choose whom they wish to govern them. In the end, “.
27

. . more than judgments of courts of law, the judgment

of the tribunal of the people is final for ‘sovereignty
resides in the people and all government authority
emanates from them.’ ” 28

Petitions dismissed.
Note.—Public interest and the sovereign will of the
people expressed in their ballot must at all times be
the paramount consideration in all election
controversy. (Olondriz, Jr. vs. Commission on
Elections, 313 SCRA 128[1999])
698 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED _______________
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on *
EN BANC.
Elections 699
G.R. No. 147589. June 26, 2001.
*
VOL. 359, JUNE 6, 2001 699
ANG BAGONG BAYANI-OFW LABOR PARTY (under Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
the acronym OFW), represented herein by its Elections
secretary-general, MOHAMMAD OMAR FAJARDO, MOKRATIKONG PILIPINO (LDP); PARTIDO NG
petitioner, vs.COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS; MASANG PILIPINO (PMP); LAKAS-NUCD-UMDP;
CITIZENS DRUG WATCH; MAMAMAYAN AYAW SA LIBERAL PARTY; MAMAMAYANG AYAW SA
DROGA; GO! GO! PHILIPPINES; THE TRUE DROGA; CREBA; NATIONAL FEDERATION OF
MARCOS LOYALIST ASSOCIATION OF THE SUGARCANE PLANTERS; JEEP; and BAGONG
PHILIPPINES; PHILIPPINE LOCAL AUTONOMY; BAYANI ORGANIZATION, respondents.
CITIZENS MOVEMENT FOR JUSTICE, ECONOMY, Election Law; Actions; Certiorari; Pleadings and
ENVIRONMENT AND PEACE; CHAMBER OF REAL Practice; Under both the Constitution and the Rules of
ESTATE BUILDERS ASSOCIATION; SPORTS & Court, a challenge on the validity of a Comelec Resolution
HEALTH ADVANCEMENT FOUNDATION, INC.; for having been issued with grave abuse of discretion may be
ANG LAKAS NG OVERSEAS CONTRACT brought before the Supreme Court in a verified petition for
WORKERS (OCW); BAGONG BAYANI certiorari under Rule 65.—At bottom, petitioners attack the
ORGANIZATION and others under validity of Comelec Omnibus Resolution 3785 for having
been issued with grave abuse of discretion, insofar as it
“Organizations/Coalitions” of Omnibus Resolution No.
allowed respondents to participate in the party-list elections
3785; PARTIDO NG MASANG PILIPINO; LAKAS of 2001. Indeed, under both the Constitution and the Rules
NUCD-UMDP; NATIONALIST PEOPLE’S of Court, such challenge may be brought before this Court
COALITION; LABAN NG DEMOKRATIKONG in a verified petition for certiorari under Rule 65.
PILIPINO; AKSYON DEMOKRATIKO; PDP-LABAN; Same; Same; Same; Same; Motions for
LIBERAL PARTY; NACIONALISTA PARTY; ANG Reconsideration; No motion for reconsideration of a Comelec
BUHAY HAYAANG YUMABONG; and others under en banc resolution, order or decision is possible, the same
“Political Parties” of Omnibus Resolution No. 3785, being a prohibited pleading.—The assailed Omnibus
respondents. Resolution was promulgated by Respondent Commission en
G.R. No. 147613. June 26, 2001.
* banc; hence, no motion for reconsideration was possible, it
BAYAN MUNA, petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON being a prohibited pleading under Section 1 (d), Rule 13 of
the Comelec Rules of Procedure.
ELECTIONS; NATIONALIST PEOPLE’s COALITION
(NPC); LABAN NG DE
 Same; Same; Same; Same; Certiorari is available, Same; Party-List System; Under the Constitution and
notwithstanding the presence of other remedies, “where the Republic Act (RA) 7941, political parties cannot be
issue raised is one purely of law, where public interest is disqualified from the party-list elections merely on the
involved, and in case of urgency.”—In any event, this case ground that they are political parties.—We now rule on this
presents an exception to the rule that certiorari shall lie issue. Under the Constitution and RA 7941, private
only in the absence of any other plain, speedy and adequate respondents cannot be disqualified from the party-list
remedy. It has been held that certiorari is available, elections, merely on the ground that they are political
notwithstanding the presence of other remedies, “where the parties. Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution, provides
issue raised is one purely of law, where public interest is that members of the House of Representatives may “be
involved, and in case of urgency.” Indeed, the instant case is elected through a party-list system of registered national,
indubitably imbued with public interest and with extreme regional, and sectoral parties or organizations.”
urgency, for it potentially involves the composition of 20 Same; Same; The key words in the statutory policy set
percent of the House of Representatives. out in RA 7941 are “proportional representation,”
Same; Same; Same; Educative Function of the Supreme “marginalized and underrepresented,” and “lack [of]
Court.—Moreover, this case raises transcendental well-defined constituencies.”—The foregoing provision
constitutional issues on the party-list system, which this mandates a state policy of promoting proportional
Court must urgently resolve, consistent with its duty to representation by means of the Filipino-style party-list
“formulate guiding and controlling constitutional principles, system, which will “enable” the election to the House of
precepts, doctrines, or rules.” Representatives of Filipino citizens, 1. who belong to
700 marginalized and underrepresented sectors, organizations
700 SUPREME COURT REPORTS and parties; and 2. who lack well-defined constituencies;
ANNOTATED but 3. who could contribute to the formulation and
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission enactment of appropriate legislation that will benefit the
on Elections nation as a whole. The key words in this policy are
“proportional representation,” “marginalized and
Same; Same; Same; Procedural requirements “may be
underrepresented,” and “lack [of] well-defined
glossed over to prevent a miscarriage of justice, when the
constituencies.”
issue involves the principle of social justice x x x when the
Same; Same; Words and Phrases; “Proportional
decision sought to be set aside is a nullity, or when the need
representation” does not refer to the number of people in a
for relief is extremely urgent.”—Procedural requirements
particular district, but rather to the representation of the
“may be glossed over to prevent a miscarriage of justice,
“marginalized and underrepresented” as exemplified by the
when the issue involves the principle of social justice x x x
enumeration in Section 5 of the law—namely, “labor,
when the decision sought to be set aside is a nullity, or
peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor, indigenous cultural
when the need for relief is extremely urgent and certiorari
communities, elderly, handicapped, women, youth, veterans,
is the only adequate and speedy remedy available.”
overseas workers, and professionals.”—“Proportional
representation” here does not refer to the number of people traditionally identifiable electoral group, like voters of a
in a particular district, because the party-list election is congressional district or territorial unit of government.
national in scope. Neither does it allude to numerical Rather, it points again to those with disparate interests
strength in a distressed or oppressed group. Rather, it identified with the “marginalized or underrepresented.”
refers to the representation of the “marginalized and Same; Same; Statutory Construction; Noscitur A
underrepresented” as exemplified by the enumeration in Sociis; It is a fundamental principle of statutory
Section 5 of the construction that words employed in a statute are
701 interpreted in connection with, and their meaning is
VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 70 ascertained by reference to, the words and the phrases with
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission which they are associated or related.—While the
on Elections enumeration of marginalized and underrepresented sectors
law; namely, “labor, peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor, is not exclusive, it demonstrates the clear intent of the law
indigenous cultural communities, elderly, handicapped, that not all sectors can be represented under the party-list
women, youth, veterans, overseas workers, and system. It is a fundamental principle of statutory
professionals.” construction that words employed in a statute are
Same; Same; The party-list organization or party must interpreted in connection with, and their meaning is
factually and truly represent the marginalized and ascertained by reference to, the words and the phrases with
underrepresented constituencies mentioned in Section 5, and which they are associated or related. Thus, the meaning of
the persons nominated by the party-list a term in a statute may be limited, qualified or specialized
candidate-organization must be “Filipino citizens belonging by those in immediate association.
to marginalized and underrepresented sectors, organizations Same; Same; The party-list system seeks to enable
and parties.”—It is not enough for the candidate to claim certain Filipino citizens.—specifically those belonging to
representation of the marginalized and underrepresented, marginalized and underrepresented sectors, organizations
because representation is easy to claim and to feign. The and parties—to be elected to the House of Representatives,
partylist organization or party must factually and truly and the assertion of the Office of the Solicitor General that
represent the marginalized and underrepresented the party-list system is not exclusive to the marginalized
constituencies mentioned in Section 5. Concurrently, the and underrepre
702
persons nominated by the party-list candidate-organization
must be “Filipino citizens belonging to marginalized and 702 SUPREME COURT REPORTS
underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties.” ANNOTATED
Same; Same; Words and Phrases; “Lack of well-defined Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission
constituenc[y]” refers to the absence of a traditionally on Elections
identifiable electoral groups, like voters of a congressional sented disregards the clear statutory policy.—The
district or territorial unit of government.—“Lack of declared policy of RA 7941 contravenes the position of the
well-defined constituenc[y]” refers to the absence of a
Office of the Solicitor General (OSG). We stress that the equivocal should resort be made to extraneous aids of
party-list system seeks to enable certain Filipino construction and interpretation, such as the proceedings of
citizens—specifically those belonging to marginalized and the Constitutional Commission or Convention, in order to
underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties—to be shed light on and ascertain the true intent or purpose of the
elected to the House of Representatives. The assertion of provision being construed.
the OSG that the party-list system is not exclusive to the Same; Same; Same; The function of all judicial and
marginalized and underrepresented disregards the clear quasi-judicial instrumentalities is to apply the law as they
statutory policy. Its claim that even the super-rich and find it, not to reinvent or second-guess it.—When a lower
overrepresented can participate desecrates the spirit of the court, or a quasi-judicial agency like the Commission on
party-list system. Elections, violates or ignores the Constitution or the law, its
Same; Same; Allowing the non-matginalized and action can be struck down by this Court on the ground of
overrepresented to vie for the remaining seats under the grave abuse of discretion. Indeed, the function of all judicial
party-list system would not only dilute, but also prejudice and quasi-judicial instrumentalities is to apply the law as
the chance of the marginalized and underrepresented, they find it, not to reinvent or second-guess it.
contrary to the intention of the law to enhance it.—Verily, 703
allowing the non-marginalized and overrepresented to vie VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 703
for the remaining seats under the party-list system would Ang Bagong Bayqni-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission
not only dilute, but also prejudice the chance of the on Elections
marginalized and underrepresented, contrary to the Same; Same; Guidelines for Screening Party-List
intention of the law to enhance it. The party-list system is a Participants,—The Court, therefore, deems it proper to
tool for the benefit of the underprivileged; the law could not remand the case to the Comelec fqr the latter to determine,
have given the same tool to others, to the prejudice of the after summary evidentiary hearings, whether the 154
intended beneficiaries. parties and organizations allowed to participate in the
Same; Same; Constitutional Law; Statutory party-list elections comply with the requirements of the law.
Construction; Verba Legis; The fundamental principle in In this light, the Court finds it appropriate to lay down the
constitutional construction is that the primary source from following guidelines, culled from the law and the
which to ascertain constitutional intent or purpose is the Constitution, to assist the Comelec in its work. First, the
language of the provision itself.—The fundamental principle political party, sector, organization or coalition must
in constitutional construction, however, is that the primary represent the marginalized and underrepresented groups
source from which to ascertain constitutional intent or identified in Section 5 of RA 7941. Second, while even major
purpose is the language of the provision itself. The political parties are expressly allowed by RA 7941 and the
presumption is that the words in which the constitutional Constitution to participate in the party-list system, they
provisions are couched express the objective sought to be must comply with the declared statutory policy enabling
attained. In other words, verba legis still prevails. Only Filipino citizens belonging to marginalized and
when the meaning of the words used is unclear and underrepresented sectors to be elected to the House of
Representatives. Third, the religious sector may not be Defined; The party-list system is limited to four groups—1)
represented in the party-list system. Fourth, a party or an political parties, 2) sectoral parties, 3) sectoral
organization must not be disqualified under Section 6 of RA 704
7941. Fifth, the party or organization must not be an 704 SUPREME COURT REPORTS
adjunct of, or a project organized or an entity funded or ANNOTATED
assisted by, the government. Sixth, the party must not only Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission
comply with t)ie requirements of the law. Its nominees must on Elections
likewise do so. Seventh, not only candidate party or
organizations, and 4) coalitions.—The party-list
organization must represent marginalized and
system is limited to four groups—1) political parties, 2)
underrepresented sectors. So also must its
sectoral parties, 3) sectoral organizations, and 4) coalitions.
nominees. Eighth, while lacking a well-defined political
A political party is an organized group of citizens
constituency, the nominee must likewise be able to
advocating an ideology, or platform, principles or policies for
contribute to the formulation and enactment of appropriate
the general conduct of government and which, as the most
legislation that will benefit the nation as a whole.
immediate means of securing their adoption, regularly
nominates and supports certain of its leaders and members
VITUG, J,, Separate (Dissenting) Opinion:
as candidates for public office. A sectoral party is an
organized group of citizens belonging to identifiable sectors,
Election Law; Party-List System; Neither Article 6,
such as those enumerated in Article 6, Section 5(2), of the
Section 5(2) of the Constitution, nor R.A. 7941 intended to
1987 Constitution, which includes the labor, peasant, urban
guarantee representation to all sectors of society and, let
poor, indigenous cultural communities and women and
alone, hand it over only to underrepresented and
those added by R.A. 7941 like the fisherfolk, elderly,
marginalized sectors.—It would seem to me that, construed
handicapped, veterans, overseas workers and professionals.
along with Section 3(d) of the statute, defining a “sectoral
A sectoral organization is a group of citizens who share the
party,” the enumeration was intended to qualify only
same or similar attributes or characteristics, employment,
“sectoral parties” and not the other eligible groups (e.g.,
interests or concerns. Coalition is an aggrupation of duly
political parties, sectoral organizations and coalitions).
registered national, regional, sectoral parties or
Neither Article 6, Section 5(2), nor R,A, 7941 intended to
organizations for election purposes.
guarantee representation to all sectors of society and, let
Same; Same; A feature of the party-list system is that
alone, hand it over only to underrepresented and
political parties, sectoral groups and organizations,
marginalized sectors. The real aim, if the will of the
coalitions and aggrupation acquire the status of
majority of the Commissioners were to be respected, was to
“candidates” and their nominees relegated to mere
introduce the concept of party-list representation.
agents.—A feature of the party-list system is that political
Same; Same; Words and Phrases; “Political Party,”
parties, sectoral groups and organizations, coalitions and
“Sectoral Party,” “Sectoral Organization,” and “Coalition,”
aggrupation acquire the status of “candidates” and their
nominees relegated to mere agents. Thus, if a party-list been considered in advance and accepted as less intolerable
representative dies, becomes physically incapacitated, than those avoided, or as compensated by countervailing
removed from office by the party or the organization he advantages. The ponencia itself, in ruling as it does, may
represents, resigns, or is disqualified during his term, his unwittingly, be crossing the limits of judicial review and
party can send another person to take his place for the treading the dangerous waters of judicial legislation, and
remaining period, provided the replacement is next in more importantly, of a constitutional amendment. While,
succession in the list of nominees submitted to the the lament of herein petitioners is understandable, the
COMELEC upon registration. Furthermore, a party-list remedy lies not with this Court but with the people
representative who switches party affiliations during his themselves through an amendment of their work as and
term forfeits his seat. So, also, if a person changes his when better counsel prevails.
sectoral affiliation within 6 months before the election, he
will not be eligible for nomination in party-list MENDOZA, J., Dissenting opinion:
representative under his new party or organization.
Same; Same; Constitutional Law; Statutory Election Law; Party-List System; Constitutional
Construction; Judicial Legislation; Courts are bound to Law; Statutory Construction; The most important single
suppose that any inconveniences involved in the application factor in determining the intention of the people from whom
of constitutional provisions according to their plain terms the Constitution emanated is the language in which it is
and import have been considered in advance and accepted expressed; Textually, Art. VI, §5(1)(2) of the Constitution
as less intolerable than those avoided, or as compensated by provides no basis for petitioners’ contention that whether it
countervailing advantages; The ponencia itself, in ruling as is sectoral representation or party-list system the purpose is
it does, may unwittingly, be crossing the limits of judicial to provide exclusive representation for “marginalized
review and treading the dangerous waters of judicial sectors,” by which term petitioners mean the labor, peasant,
legislation, and more importantly, of a constitutional urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, women, and
amendment.—The polestar in the constructions of youth sectors.—“The most important single factor in
constitutions always remains—“effect determining the intention of the people from whom the
705 Constitution emanated is the language in which it is
VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 70 expressed.” The text of Art. VI, §5(1)(2) is quite clear. It
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission provides for a party-list system of “registered, regional, and
on Elections sectoral parties or organizations,” not for sectoral
representation. Only for three consecutive terms following
must be given to the intent of the framers of the
the ratification of the Constitution and only with respect to
organic law and of the people adopting it.” The law, in its
one-half of the seats allotted to party-list representatives
clear formulation cannot give this tribunal the elbow-room
does it allow sectoral representation. Textually, Art. VI,
for construction. Courts are bound to suppose that any
§5(1)(2) provides no basis for petitioners’ contention that
inconveniences involved in the application of constitutional
whether it is sectoral representation or party-list system
provisions according to their plain terms and import have
the purpose is to provide exclusive representation for district but are sufficiently numerous to give them a seat
“marginalized sectors,” by which term petitioners mean the nationwide.—The deliberations of the Constitutional
labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural Commission show that the party-list system is not limited
communities, women, and youth sectors. to the “marginalized and underrepresented” sectors
Same; Same; Same; Same; To the extent that it assures referred to by petitioners, i.e., labor, peasants, urban poor,
parties or candidates a percentage of seats in the legislature indigenous cultural communities, women, and the youth,
that reflects their public support, the party-list system but that it is a type of proportional representation intended
enables marginalized and underrepresented sectors to to give voice to those who may not have the necessary
obtain seats in the House of Representatives.—Under the number to win a seat in a district but are sufficiently
partylist system, a party or candidate need not come in first numerous to give them a seat nationwide. It, therefore,
in order to win seats in the legislature. On the other hand, misreads the debates on Art. VI, §5(1)(2) to say that
in the “winner-take-all” single “Although Commissioners Villacorta and Monsod differed in
706 their proposals as to the details of the party-list system,
706 SUPREME COURT REPORTS both proponents worked within the framework that the
ANNOTATED party-list system is for the ‘marginalized’ as termed by
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission Comm. Villacorta and the ‘underrepresented’ as termed by
on Elections Comm. Monsod, which he defined as those which are
“always third or fourth place in each of the districts.”
seat district, the votes cast for a losing candidate are
Same; Same; Same; The Supreme Court cannot hold
wasted as only those who vote for the winner are
that the partylist system is reserved for the labor, peasants,
represented. To the extent then that it assures parties or
urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, women, and
candidates a percentage of seats in the legislature that
youth without changing entirely the meaning of the
reflects their public support, the party-list system enables
Constitution which in fact mandates exactly the opposite of
marginalized and underrepresented sectors (such as, but
the reserved seats system when it provides in Art. IX, C, §6
not limited to, the labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous
that “A free and open party system shall be allowed to evolve
cultural communities, women, and youth sectors) to obtain
according to the free choice of the people, subject to the
seats in the House of Representatives. Otherwise, the
provisions of this Article.”—A problem was placed before the
party-list system does not guarantee to these sectors seats
Constitutional Commission that the existing
in the legislature.
“winner-take-all” one-seat district system of election leaves
Same; Same; Same; Same; The deliberations of the
blocks of voters underrepresented. To this problem of
Constitutional Commission show that the party-list system
underrepresentation two solutions were proposed: sectoral
is not limited to the “marginalized and underrepresented”
representation and party-list system or proportional
sectors referred to by petitioners, but that it is a type of
representation. The Constitutional Commission chose the
proportional representation intended to give voice to those
party-list system, This Court cannot hold that the party-list
who may not have the necessary number to win a seat in a
system is reserved for the labor,
 707 Yap, Crisanto, Salvador & Calderon and Fornier
VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 70 & Fornier Law Office for Chamber of Real Estate
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission Builders Association.
on Elections McAskell, Equilla, & Associates for Ang Lakas
peasants, urban poor, indigenous cultural ng Overseas Contract Workers.
communities, women, and youth as petitioners contend Juan Carlos T. Cuna and Antonio Dollete
without changing entirely the meaning of the Constitution &Associates for Partido ng Masang Pilipino.
which in fact mandates exactly the Opposite of the reserved Buhag, Kapunan, Migallos & Perez for Aksyon
seats system when it provides in Art. IX, C, §6 that “A free
Demokratiko.
and open party system shall be allowed to evolve according
to the free choice of the people, subject to the provisions of
Tonisito M.C. Umali for Liberal Party.
this Article.” Thus, neither textual nor historical Yulo and Bello Law Offices for
consideration yields support for the view that the party-list LAKAS-NUCD-UMDP.
system is designed exclusively for labor, peasant, urban Ceferino Padua Law Office, Gerardo A. Del
poor, indigenous cultural communities, women, and youth Afundo Law Office and Antonio R. Bautista &
sectors. Partners for Bagong Bayani Organization.
708
SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS in the Supreme Court. 708 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Certiorari. Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
Elections
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
Neri, Javier, Colmenares for petitioner Bayan PANGANIBAN, J.:
Muna.
The Solicitor General for COMELEC. The party-list system is a social justice tool designed
Chan, Robles and Associates for Citizens Drug not only to give more law to the great masses of our
Watch Foundation, Inc. people who have less in life, but also to enable them to
Cruz, Cruz & Navarro III for Mamamayan Ayaw become veritable lawmakers themselves, empowered
sa Droga. to participate directly in the enactment of laws
Brillantes, Navarro, Jumamil, Arcilla, Escolin & designed to benefit them. It intends to make the
Martinez Law Offices for The True Marcos Loyalist marginalized and the underrepresented not merely
Association of the Philippines. passive recipients of the State’s benevolence, but active
Fracis A, Ver for Phil. Local Autonomy participants in the mainstream of representative
Movement. democracy. Thus, allowing all individuals and groups,
including those which now dominate district elections, 709
to have the same opportunity to participate in VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 709
party-list elections would desecrate this lofty objective Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
and mongrelize the social justice mechanism into an Elections
atrocious veneer for traditional politics. observance of the legal and procedural requirements,
The Case review of these petitions as well as deliberations takes
Before us are two Petitions under Rule 65 of the Rales a longer process in order to arrive at a decision and as
of Court, challenging Omnibus Resolution No. a result the two (2) divisions promulgated a separate
3785 issued by the Commission on Elections (Comelec)
1
Omnibus Resolution and individual resolution on
on March 26, 2001. This Resolution approved the political parties. These numerous petitions and
participation of 154 organizations and parties, processes observed in the disposition of these petition
including those herein impleaded, in the 2001 [s] hinder the early release of the Omnibus Resolutions
party-list elections. Petitioners seek the of the Divisions which were promulgated only on 10
disqualification of private respondents, arguing mainly February 2001.” 2

that the party-list system was intended to benefit the Thereafter, before the February 12, 2001 deadline
marginalized and underrepresented; not the prescribed under Comelec Resolution No. 3426 dated
mainstream political parties, the non-marginalized or December 22, 2000, the registered parties and
overrepresented. organizations filed their respective Manifestations,
The Factual Antecedents stating their intention to participate in the party-list
With the onset of the 2001 elections, the Comelec elections. Other sectoral and political parties and
received several Petitions for registration filed by organizations whose registrations were denied also
sectoral parties, organizations and political parties. filed Motions for Reconsideration, together with
According to the Comelec, “[verifications were made as Manifestations of their intent to participate in the
to the status and capacity of these parties and party list elections. Still other registered parties filed
organizations and hearings were scheduled day and their Manifestations beyond the deadline.
night until the last party w[as] heard. With the The Comelec gave due course or approved the
number of these petitions and the Manifestations (or accreditations) of 151 parties and
organizations, but denied those of several others in its
_______________
assailed March 26, 2001 Omnibus Resolution No.
1
Signed by Chairman Alfredo L. Benipayo and Commissioners 3785, which we quote:
Luzviminda G. Tancangco, Rufino S.B. Javier, Ralph C. Lantion, “We carefully deliberated the foregoing matters, having in
Mehol K. Sadain, Resurrecion Z. Borra and Florentino A. Tuason, Jr. mind that this system of proportional representation
scheme will encourage multi-partisan [sic] and enhance the that the latter’s nominees not be proclaimed. On April
4

inability of small, new or sectoral parties or organization to 11, 2001, Bayan Muna and Bayan Muna-Youth also
directly participate in this electoral window. filed a Petition for Cancellation of Registration and
“It will be noted that as defined, the ‘party-list system’ is Nomination against some of herein respondents. 5

a ‘mechanism of proportional representation’ in the election

On April 18, 2001, the Comelec required the
of representatives to the House of Representatives from
respondents in the two disqualification cases to file
national, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations or
coalitions thereof registered with the Commission on Comments within three days from notice. It also set
Elections. the date for hearing on April 26, 2001, but 6

“However, in the course of our review of the matters at subsequently reset it to May 3, 2001. During the7

bar, we must recognize the fact that there is a need to keep hearing, however, Commissioner Ralph C. Lantion
the number of sectoral parties, organizations and coalitions, merely directed the parties to submit their respective
down to a manageable level, keeping only those who memoranda. 8

substantially comply with the rules and regulations and Meanwhile, dissatisfied with the pace of the
Comelec, Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party filed a
_______________
Petition before this Court on April 16, 2001. This
9

2
Omnibus Resolution No. 3785, p. 13; rollo (GR No. 147589), p. 40. Petition, docketed as GR No. 147589, assailed Comelec
710 Omnibus Resolution No. 3785. In its Resolution dated
710 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED April 17, 2001, the Court directed respondents to
10

Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on comment on the Petition within a non-extendible
Elections period of five days from notice. 11

more importantly the sufficiency of the Manifestations or

evidence on the Motions for Reconsiderations or _______________
Oppositions.” 3

3
Ibid., pp. 21-22; rollo, pp. 48-49.
On April 10, 2001, Akbayan Citizens Action Party filed 4
Rollo (GR No. 147589), pp. 272-273.
before the Comelec a Petition praying that “the names 5
Rollo (GR No. 147589), pp. 250-263.
of [some of herein respondents] be deleted from the 6
Rollo (GR No. 147589), pp. 282-283.
‘Certified List of Political Parties/Sectoral
7
See rollo (GR No. 147613), p. 223.
8
TSN (GR No. 147589 and 147613), May 17, 2001, p. 49.
Parties/Organizations/Coalitions Participating in the 9
Rollo (GR No. 147589), pp. 4-73.
Party List System for the May 14, 2001 Elections’ and 10
Rollo (GR No. 147589), p. 74.
that said certified list be accordingly amended.” It also 11
Comments were filed by MAD, Bagong Bayani, The True
Marcos Loyalists, the Comelec, Partido ng Masang Pilipino, the
asked, as an alternative, that the votes cast for the
Liberal Party, the Office of the Solicitor General, CREBA,
said respondents not be counted or canvassed, and Lakas-NUCD-UMDP, the Philip
 711 pine Local Autonomy Movement, Aksyon Demokratiko, Citizens
VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 71 Drug Watch Foundation, Ang Buhay Hayaang Yumabong, Ang Lakas
ng OCW, and Sports and Health Foundation.
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on 12
Rollo (GR No. 147613), pp. 3-45.
Elections 13
Rollo (GR No. 147613), p. 46.
On April 17, 2001, Petitioner Bayan Muna also filed 14
These were filed by the Office of the Solicitor General, the
Comelec, The Bagong Bayani Organization, Mamamayan Ayaw sa
before this Court a Petition, docketed as GR No.
12

Droga, and the Philippine Local Autonomy Movement.

147613, also challenging Comelec Omnibus Resolution 15
Memoranda were filed by Petitioners Bayan Muna and Ang
No. 3785. In its Resolution dated May 9, 2001, the 13 Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party; and Respondents Mamamayan
Court ordered the consolidation of the two Petitions Ayaw sa Droga, CREBA, the Bagong Bayani Organization, the Office
of the Solicitor General, and Aksyon Demokratiko. Manifestations
before it; directed respondents named in the second instead of memoranda were filed by Lakas-NUCD and OCW.
Petition to file their respective Comments on or before 712
noon of May 15, 2001; and called the parties to an Oral 712 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Argument on May 17, 2001. It added that the Comelec Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
may proceed with the counting and canvassing of votes Elections
cast for the party-list elections, but barred the
proclamation of any winner therein, until further 1.​ “2.Whether or not political parties may participate
orders of the Court. in the partylist elections.
Thereafter, Comments on the second Petition were
14
2.​ “3.Whether or not the party-list system is exclusive
received by the Court and, on May 17, 2001, the Oral to ‘marginalized and underrepresented’ sectors and
Argument was conducted as scheduled. In an Order organizations.
given in open court, the parties were directed to 3.​ “4.Whether or not the Comelec committed grave
submit their respective Memoranda simultaneously abuse of discretion in promulgating Omnibus
within a non-extendible period of five days. 15
Resolution No. 3785.” 16

Issues:
During the hearing on May 17, 2001, the Court The Court’s Ruling
directed the parties to address the following issues: The Petitions are partly meritorious. These cases
should be remanded to the Comelec which will
1.​ “1.Whether or not recourse under Rule 65 is proper determine, after summary evidentiary hearings,
under the premises. More specifically, is there no whether the 154 parties and organizations
other plain, speedy or adequate remedy in the enumerated in the assailed Omnibus Resolution
ordinary course of law? satisfy the requirements of the Constitution and RA
7941, as specified in this Decision.
_______________
First Issue: ​ challenge may be brought before this Court in a
Recourse Under Rule 65 verified petition for certiorari under Rule 65.
Respondents contend that the recourse of both Moreover, the assailed Omnibus Resolution was
petitioners under Rule 65 is improper because there promulgated by Respondent Commission en banc;
are other plain, speedy and adequate remedies in the hence, no motion for reconsideration was possible, it
ordinary course of law. The Office of the Solicitor
17
being a prohibited pleading under Section 1 (d), Rule
General argues that petitioners should have filed 13 of the Comelec Rules of Procedure. 21

before the Comelec a petition either for The Court also notes that Petitioner Bayan Muna
disqualification or for cancellation of registration, had filed before the Comelec a Petition for
pursuant to Sections 19, 20, 21 and 22 of Comelec Cancellation of Registration and Nomination against
Resolution No. 3307-A dated November 9, 2000.
18 19
some of herein respondents. The Comelec, however,
22

We disagree. At bottom, petitioners attack the did not act on that Petition. In view of the pendency of
validity of Comelec Omnibus Resolution 3785 for the elections, Petitioner Bayan Muna sought succor
having been issued with grave abuse of discretion, from this Court, for there was no other adequate
insofar as it allowed respondents to participate recourse at the time. Subsequent events have proven
the urgency of petitioner’s action; to this date, the
_______________
Comelec has not yet formally resolved the Petition
16
See the May 17, 2001 Resolution, p. 2; rollo (GR No. 147613), p. before it. But a resolution may just be a formality
88. because the Comelec, through the Office of the
17
See, e.g., the Bagong Bayani Organization’s Memorandum, pp. Solicitor General, has made its position on the matter
3-4; Aksyon Demokratiko’s Memorandum, pp. 2-3; and MAD’s
quite clear.
Memorandum, pp. 3-6.
18
Rules and regulations governing the filing of a petition for In any event, this case presents an exception to the
registration, a manifestation to participate, and the names of rule that certiorari shall lie only in the absence of any
nominees under the party-list system of representation in connection other plain, speedy
with the May 14, 2001 national and local elections.
19
OSG’s Memorandum, pp. 6-14; rollo (GR No. 147613), pp. _______________
151-159.
713 20
Section 1, Article VIII of the Constitution, provides: “Judicial
VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 71 power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and
enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a grave
Elections abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the
in the party-list elections of 2001. Indeed, under both part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government.”
the Constitution and the Rules of Court, such
20
 21
SECTION 1. What pleadings are not allowed.—The following Second Issue: ​
pleadings are not allowed:
xxx xxx xxx
Participation of Political Parties
d) motion for reconsideration of an en banc ruling, resolution, In its Petition, Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party
order or decision except in election offense cases; contends that “the inclusion of political parties in the
xxx xxx xxx party-list system is the most objectionable portion of
22
Docketed as SPA 01-113. As earlier noted, Akbayan also filed
before the Comelec a similar Petition, docketed as SPA-01-109. See
the questioned Resolution.” For its
27

Annexes 1 and 2, Comment of the Office of the Solicitor General; rollo

(GR No. 147589), pp. 250 et seq. and 266 et seq. _______________
714
23
Section 1, Rule 65. See Filoteo v. Sandiganbayan, 263 SCRA
714 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 222, October 16, 1996; BF Corporation v. CA, 288 SCRA 267, March
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on 27, 1998; GSIS v. Olisa, 304 SCRA 421, March 10, 1999; National
Elections Steel Corporation v. CA, GR No. 134437, January 31, 2000, 324
SCRA 208; Sahali v. Comelec, GR No. 134169, February 2, 2000, 324
and adequate remedy. It has been held that certiorari
23
SCRA 510.
is available, notwithstanding the presence of other 24
Republic v. Sandiganbayan, 269 SCRA 316, March 7, 1997, per
remedies, “where the issue raised is one purely of law, Panganiban, J. See also ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corporation v.
where public interest is involved, and in case of Commission on Elections, GR No. 133486, January 28, 2000, 323
SCRA 811; Central Bank v. Cloribel, 44 SCRA 307, April 11, 1972.
urgency.” Indeed, the instant case is indubitably
24
25
Salonga v. Cruz Paño, 134 SCRA 438, February 18, 1985, per
imbued with public interest and with extreme urgency, Gutierrez, Jr., J. See also Tañada v. Angara, 272 SCRA 18, May 2,
for it potentially involves the composition of 20 percent 1997; Guingona v. Gonzales, 219 SCRA 326, March 1, 1993.
ABS-CBN v. Comelec, GR No. 133486, January 28, 2000, 323
of the House of Representatives.
26

SCRA 811, per Panganiban, J.

Moreover, this case raises transcendental 27
Petition of Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party, p. 15; rollo
constitutional issues on the party-list system, which (GR No, 147589), p. 18.
this Court must urgently resolve, consistent with its 715
duty to “formulate guiding and controlling VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 715
constitutional principles, precepts, doctrines, or Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
rules.” 25 Elections
Finally, procedural requirements “may be glossed part, Petitioner Bayan Muna objects to the
over to prevent a miscarriage of justice, when the issue participation of “major political parties.” On the other
28

involves the principle of social justice x x x when the hand, the Office of the Solicitor General, like the
decision sought to be set aside is a nullity, or when the impleaded political parties, submits that the
need for relief is extremely urgent and certiorari is the Constitution and RA No. 7941 allow political parties to
only adequate and speedy remedy available.” 26
participate in the party-list elections. It argues that
the party-list system is, in fact, open to all “registered 30
Emphasis supplied. See also §§17 and 18, Article VI of the
Constitution.
national, regional and sectoral parties or 31
It may be noted that when the Constitution was being drafted
organizations.” 29
in the early days of the post-Marcos era, UNIDO was the dominant
We now rule on this issue. Under the Constitution political party.
and RA 7941, private respondents cannot be 716
disqualified from the party-list elections, merely on the 716 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
ground that they are political parties. Section 5, Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
Article VI of the Constitution, provides that members Elections
of the House of Representatives may “be elected danao.” This was also clear from the following
32

through a party-list system of registered national, exchange between Comms. Jaime Tadeo and Blas
regional, and sectoral parties or organizations.” Ople: 33

Furthermore, under Sections 7 and 8, Article IX (C) “MR. TADEO. Naniniwala ba kayo na ang party list ay
of the Constitution, political parties may be registered pwedeng paghati-hatian ng UNIDO, PDP-Laban,
under the party-list system. PNP, Liberal at Nacionalista?
“Sec. 7. No votes cast in favor of a political MR. OPLE. Maaari yan sapagkat bukas ang party-list
party, organization, or coalition shall be valid, except for system sa lahat ng mga partido.”
those registered under the party-list system as provided in Indeed, Commissioner Monsod stated that the purpose
this Constitution. of the party-list provision was to open up the system,
“Sec. 8. Political parties, or organizations or in order to give a chance to parties that consistently
coalitions registered under the party-list system, shall not be
place third or fourth in congressional district elections
represented in the voter’s registration boards, boards of
election inspectors, boards of canvassers, or other similar to win a seat in Congress. He explained: The purpose
34

bodies. However, they shall be entitled to appoint poll of this is to open the system. In the past elections, we
watchers in accordance with law.” 30 found out that there were certain groups or parties
During the deliberations in the Constitutional that, if we count their votes nationwide, have about
Commission, Comm. Christian S. Monsod pointed out 1,000,000 or 1,500,000 votes. But they were always
that the participants in the party-list system may “be third or fourth place in each of the districts. So, they
a regional party, a sectoral party, a national party, have no voice in the Assembly. But this way, they
UNIDO, Magsasaka, or a regional party in Min-
31 would have five or six representatives in the Assembly
even if they would not win individually in legislative
_______________ districts. So, that is essentially the mechanics, the
purpose and objectives of the partylist system.”
28
Petition of Bayan Muna, p. 18; rollo (GR No. 147613), p. 20.
29
OSG Comment, p. 18; rollo (GR No. 147589), p. 244.
 For its part, Section 2 of RA 7941 also provides for Indubitably, therefore, political parties—even the
“a party-list system of registered national, regional major ones—may participate in the party-list
and sectoral parties or organizations or coalitions elections.
thereof, x x x.” Section 3 expressly states that a “party” Third Issue: ​
is “either a political party or a sectoral party or a Marginalized and Underrepresented
coalition of parties.” More to the point, the law defines That political parties may participate in the party-list
“political party” as “an organized group of citizens elections does not mean, however, that any political
advocating an ideology or platform, principles and party—or any organization or group for that
policies for the general conduct of government and matter—may do so. The requisite character of these
which, as the most immediate means of securing their parties or organizations must be consistent with the
adoption, regularly nominates and supports certain of purpose of the party-list system, as laid down in the
its leaders and members as candidates for public Constitution and RA 7941. Section 5, Article VI of the
office.” Constitution, provides as follows:
Furthermore, Section 11 of RA 7941 leaves no doubt
as to the participation of political parties in the 1.​ “(1)The House of Representatives shall be
party-list system. We quote the pertinent provision composed of not more than two hundred and fifty
below: members, unless otherwise fixed by law, who shall
be elected from legislative districts apportioned
_______________ among the provinces, cities, and the Metropolitan
Manila area in accordance with the number of their
32
Record of the Constitutional Commission, Vol. II, p. 86. respective inhabitants, and on the basis of a
33
Record of the Constitutional Commission, Vol. II, p. 570. uniform and progressive ratio, and those who, as
34
Record of the Constitutional Commission, Vol. II, p. 86.
provided by law, shall be elected through a
717
party-list system of registered national, regional,
VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 71 and sectoral parties or organizations.
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on 2.​ (2)The party-list representatives shall constitute
Elections twenty per centum of the total number of
“x x x x x x x x x representatives including those under the party
“For purposes of the May 1998 elections, the first five (5) list. For three consecutive terms after the
major political parties on the basis of party representation ratification of this Constitution, one-half of the
in the House of Representatives at the start of the Tenth seats allocated to party-list representatives shall be
Congress of the Philippines shall not be entitled to filled, as provided by law, by selection or election
participate in the party-list system. from the labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous
“x x x x x x x x x cultural communities, women, youth, and such
 other sectors as may be provided by law, except the members of the House of Representatives. Towards this
religious sector.” (Emphasis supplied.) end, the State shall develop and guarantee a full, free and
open party system in order to attain the broadest possible
Notwithstanding the sparse language of the provision, representation of party, sectoral or group interests in the
a distinguished member of the Constitutional House of Representatives by enhancing their chances to
Commission declared that the purpose of the party-list compete for and win seats in the legislature, and shall
provision was to give “genuine power provide the simplest scheme possible.”
718 The Marginalized and Underrepresented ​
718 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED to Become Lawmakers Themselves
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on The foregoing provision mandates a state policy of
Elections promoting proportional representation by means of the
to our people” in Congress. Hence, when the provision Filipino-style partylist system, which will “enable” the
was discussed, he exultantly announced: “On this first election to the House of Representatives of Filipino
day of August 1986, we shall, hopefully, usher in a new citizens.
chapter to our national history, by giving genuine
power to our people in the legislature.” 35
1.​ 1.who belong to marginalized and
underrepresented sectors, organizations and
The foregoing provision on the party-list system is
parties; and
not self-executory. It is, in fact, interspersed with 2.​ 2.who lack well-defined constituencies; but
phrases like “in accordance with law” or “as may be
provided by law”; it was thus up to Congress to sculpt _______________
in granite the lofty objective of the
Constitution. Hence, RA 7941 was enacted. It laid out Record of the Constitutional Commission, Vol. II, p. 561.
35

719
the statutory policy in this wise:
“SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy.—The State shall promote VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 719
proportional representation in the election of Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
representatives to the House of Representatives through a Elections
party-list system of registered national, regional and
sectoral parties or organizations or coalitions thereof, which 1.​ 3.who could contribute to the formulation and
will enable Filipino citizens belonging to marginalized and enactment of appropriate legislation that will
underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties, and benefit the nation as a whole.
who lack well-defined political constituencies but who could
contribute to the formulation and enactment of appropriate
legislation that will benefit the nation as a whole, to become
The key words in this policy are “proportional underrepresented” become members of Congress under
representation,” “marginalized and underrepresented,” the party-list system, Filipino-style.
and “lack [of] well-defined constituencies.” The intent of the Constitution is clear: to give
“Proportional representation” here does not refer to genuine power to the people, not only by giving more
the number of people in a particular district, because law to those who have less in life, but more so by
the party-list election is national in scope. Neither enabling them to become veritable lawmakers
does it allude to numerical strength in a distressed or themselves. Consistent with this intent, the policy of
oppressed group. Rather, it refers to the representation the imple-
of the “marginalized and underrepresented” as
_______________
exemplified by the enumeration in Section 5 of the
law; namely, “labor, peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor, Infra.
36

indigenous cultural communities, elderly, 720

handicapped, women, youth, veterans, overseas 720 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
workers, and professionals.” Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
However, it is not enough for the candidate to claim Elections
representation of the marginalized and menting law, we repeat, is likewise clear: “to enable
underrepresented, because representation is easy to Filipino citizens belonging to marginalized and
claim and to feign. The party-list organization or party underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties, x
must factually and truly represent the marginalized x x, to become members of the House of
and underrepresented constituencies mentioned in Representatives.”Where the language of the law is
Section 5. Concurrently, the persons nominated by the
36
clear, it must be applied according to its express
party-list candidate-organization must be “Filipino terms. 37

citizens belonging to marginalized and The marginalized and underrepresented sectors to

underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties.” be represented under the party-list system are
Finally, “lack of well-defined constituency]” refers to enumerated in Section 5 of RA 7941, which states:
the absence of a traditionally identifiable electoral “SEC. 5. Registration.—Any organized group of persons
group, like voters of a congressional district or may register as a party, organization or coalition for
territorial unit of government. Rather, it points again purposes of the party-list system by filing with the
to those with disparate interests identified with the COMELEC not later than ninety (90) days before the
“marginalized or underrepresented.” election a petition verified by its president or secretary
In the end, the role of the Comelec is to see to it stating its desire to participate in the party-list system as a
that only those Filipinos who are “marginalized and national, regional or sectoral party or organization or a
coalition of such parties or organizations, attaching thereto system to the marginalized and underrepresented
its constitution, by-laws, platform or program of sectors of society.” In fact, it contends that any party
39

government, list of officers, coalition agreement and other or group that is not disqualified under Section 6 of RA
40

relevant information as the COMELEC may 7941 may participate in the elections. Hence, it
require: Provided, that the sector shall include labor,
admitted during the Oral Argument that even an
peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor, indigenous cultural
organization representing the super rich of Forbes
communities, elderly, handicapped, women, youth, veterans,
overseas workers, and professionals.” Park or Dasmarinas Village could participate in the
While the enumeration of marginalized and party-list elections. 41

underrepresented sectors is not exclusive, it The declared policy of RA 7941 contravenes the
demonstrates the clear intent of the law that not all position of the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG).
sectors can be represented under the party-list system. We stress that the party-list system seeks to enable
It is a fundamental principle of statutory construction certain Filipino citizens—specifically those belonging
that words employed in a statute are interpreted in to marginalized and underrepresented sectors,
connection with, and their meaning is ascertained by organizations and parties—to be elected to the House
reference to, the words and the phrases with which of Representatives. The assertion of the OSG that the
they are associated or related. Thus, the meaning of a party-list system is not exclusive to the marginalized
term in a statute may be limited, qualified or and underrepresented disregards the clear statutory
specialized by those in immediate association. 38
policy. Its claim that even the super-rich and
overrepresented can participate desecrates the spirit of
_______________ the party-list system.
Indeed, the law grafted to address the peculiar
37
Azarcon v. Sandiganbayan, 268 SCRA 747, February 26,
1997; Ramirez v. CA, 248 SCRA 590, September 28, 1995.
disadvantages of Payatas hovel dwellers cannot be
38
82 C.J.S. Statutes §331. appropriated by the mansion owners of Forbes Park.
721 The interests of these two sectors are manifestly
VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 72 disparate; hence, the OSG’s position to treat them
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on similarly defies reason and common sense. In contrast,
Elections and with admirable candor, Atty. Lorna
The Party-List System Desecrated ​ Patajo-Kapunan admitted during the Oral Argument
42

by the OSG Contentions that a group of bankers, industrialists and sugar

Notwithstanding the unmistakable statutory policy, planters could not join the party-list system as
the Office of the Solicitor General submits that RA No. representatives of their respective sectors.
43

7941 “does not limit the participation in the party-list

 While the business moguls and the mega-rich are, past—the farm hands, the fisher folk, the urban poor,
numerically speaking, a tiny minority, they are neither even those in the underground movement—to come
marginalized nor un- out and participate, as indeed many of them came out
and participated during the last elections. The State
_______________
cannot now disappoint and frustrate them by disabling
39
OSG Comment, p. 18; rollo (GR No. 147589), p. 244. and desecrating this social justice vehicle.
40
Infra. Because the marginalized and underrepresented
41
TSN, May 17, 2001, pp. 147-148. had not been able to win in the congressional district
Counsel of Aksyon Demokratiko.
elections normally dominated by traditional politicians
42

43
TSN, May 17, 2001, pp. 178-180.
722 and vested groups, 20 percent of the seats in the
722 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED House of Representatives were set aside for the
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on party-list system. In arguing that even those sectors
Elections who normally controlled 80 percent of the seats in the
House could participate in the party-list elections for
derrepresented, for the stark reality is that their
the remaining 20 percent, the OSG and the Comelec
economic clout engenders political power more
disregard the fundamental difference between the
awesome than their numerical limitation.
congressional district elections and the party-list
Traditionally, political power does not necessarily
elections.
emanate from the size of one’s constituency; indeed, it
As earlier noted, the purpose of the party-list
is likely to arise more directly from the number and
provision was to open up the system, in order to 44

amount of one’s bank accounts.

enhance the chance of sectoral groups and
It is ironic, therefore, that the marginalized and
organizations to gain representation in the House of
underrepresented in our midst are the majority who
wallow in poverty, destitution and infirmity. It was for _______________
them that the party-list system was enacted—to give
them not only genuine hope, but genuine power; to 44
Supra. See also §6, Article IX (C) of the Constitution, which
reads: “A free and open party system shall be allowed to evolve
give them the opportunity to be elected and to
according to the free choice of the people, subject to the provisions of
represent the specific concerns of their constituencies; this Article.”
and simply to give them a direct voice in Congress and 723
in the larger affairs of the State. In its noblest sense, VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 723
the party-list system truly empowers the masses and Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
ushers a new hope for genuine change. Verily, it invites Elections
those marginalized and underrepresented in the
Representatives through the simplest scheme let that flicker of hope be snuffed out. The clear state
possible. Logic shows that the system has been opened
45
policy must permeate every discussion of the
to those who have never gotten a foothold within qualification of political parties and other
it—those who cannot otherwise win in regular organizations under the party-list system.
elections and who therefore need the “simplest scheme
_______________
possible” to do so. Conversely, it would be illogical to
open the system to those who have long been within 45
Section 2 of RA 7941 states in part as follows: “x x x. Towards
it—those privileged sectors that have long dominated this end, the State shall develop and guarantee a full, free and open
the congressional district elections. party system in order to attain the broadest possible representation
of party, sectoral or group interests in the House of Representatives
The import of the open party-list system may be
by enhancing their chances to compete for and win seats in the
more vividly understood when compared to a student legislature, and shall provide the simplest scheme possible.”
dormitory “open house,” which by its nature 724
allows outsiders to enter the facilities. Obviously, the 724 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
“open house” is for the benefit of outsiders only, not the Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
dormers themselves who can enter the dormitory even Elections
without such special privilege. In the same vein, the Refutation of the ​
open party-list system is only for the “outsiders” who Separate Opinions
cannot get elected through regular elections otherwise; The Separate Opinions of our distinguished colleagues,
it is not for the non-marginalized or overrepresented Justices Jose C. Vitug and Vicente V. Mendoza, are
who already fill the ranks of Congress. anchored mainly on the supposed intent of the framers
Verily, allowing the non-marginalized and of the Constitution as culled from their deliberations.
overrepresented to vie for the remaining seats under The fundamental principle in constitutional
the party-list system would not only dilute, but construction, however, is that the primary source from
also prejudicethe chance of the marginalized and which to ascertain constitutional intent or purpose is
underrepresented, contrary to the intention of the law the language of the provision itself. The presumption
to enhance it. The party-list system is a tool for the is that the words in which the constitutional
benefit of the underprivileged; the law could not have provisions are couched express the objective sought to
given the same tool to others, to the prejudice of the be attained. In other words, verba legis still prevails.
46

intended beneficiaries. Only when the meaning of the words used is unclear
This Court, therefore, cannot allow the party-list and equivocal should resort be made to extraneous
system to be sullied and prostituted by those who are aids of construction and interpretation, such as the
neither marginalized nor underrepresented. It cannot proceedings of the Constitutional Commission or
Convention, in order to shed light on and ascertain the proper interpretation therefore depends more on how
true intent or purpose of the provision being it was understood by the people adopting it than in the
construed. 47
framers’ understanding thereof.”
Indeed, as cited in the Separate Opinion of Justice Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution, relative to
Mendoza, this Court stated in Civil Liberties Union v. the party-list system, is couched in clear terms: the
Executive Secretary that “the debates and proceedings
48
mechanics of the system shall be provided by
of the constitutional convention [may be consulted] in law. Pursuant thereto, Congress enacted RA 7941. In
order to arrive at the reason and purpose of the understanding and implementing party-list
resulting Constitution x x x only when other guides representation, we should therefore look at the law
fail as said proceedings are powerless to vary the first. Only when we find its provisions ambiguous
terms of the Constitution when the meaning is clear. should the use of extraneous aids of construction be
Debates in the constitutional convention ‘are of value resorted to.
as showing the views of the individual members, and But, as discussed earlier, the intent of the law is
as indicating the reason for their votes, but they give obvious and clear from its plain words. Section 2
us no light as to the views of the large majority who thereof unequivocally states that the party-list system
did not talk, much less of the mass or our fellow of electing congressional representatives was designed
citizens whose votes at the polls gave that instrument to “enable underrepresented sectors, organizations and
the force of fundamental law. We think it safer to parties, and who lack well-defined political
construe the constitution from what appears upon its constituencies but who could contribute to the
face’ The formulation and enactment of appropriate legislation
that will benefit the nation as a whole x x x.” The
_______________
criteria for participation is well defined. Thus, there is
46
JM Tuason & Co., Inc. v. Land Tenure Administration, 31 SCRA no need for recourse to constitutional deliberations,
413, February 18, 1970; cited in Ruben C. Agpalo, Statutory not even to the proceedings of Congress. In any event,
Construction, 1990 ed., p. 311. See also Gold Creek Mining Corp. v. the framers’ deliberations merely express their
Rodriguez, 66 Phil. 259,264(1938).
individual opinions and are, at best, only persuasive in
47
See Agpalo, ibid., p. 313.
48
194 SCRA 317, February 22, 1991, per Fernan, C.J.; construing the meaning and purpose of the
quoting Commonwealth v. Ralph, 111 Pa 365, 3 Atl. 220. constitution or statute.
725 Be it remembered that the constitutionality or
VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 72 validity of Sections 2 and 5 of RA 7941 is not an issue
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on here. Hence, they remain parts of the law, which must
Elections be applied plainly and simply.
Fourth Issue: ​ accreditation does not refer to the partylist election,
Grave Abuse of Discretion but, inter alia, to the election of district
From its assailed Omnibus Resolution, it is manifest representatives for the purpose of determining which
that the Comelec failed to appreciate fully the clear parties would be entitled to watchers under Section 26
policy of the law and the Constitution. On the contrary, of Republic Act No. 7166.
it seems to have ignored the facet of the party-list What is needed under the present circumstances,
system discussed above. The OSG as its counsel however, is a factual determination of whether
admitted before the Court that any group, even the respondents herein and, for that matter, all the 154
non-marginalized and overrepresented, could field previously approved groups, have the necessary
candidates in the party-list elections. qualifications to participate in the party-list elections,
726 pursuant to the Constitution and the law.
726 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED Bayan Muna also urges us to immediately rule out
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on Respondent Mamamayan Ayaw sa Droga (MAD),
Elections because “it is a government entity using government
When a lower court, or a quasi-judicial agency like the resources and privileges.” This Court, however, is not a
Commission on Elections, violates or ignores the trier of facts, It is not equipped to receive evidence
51

Constitution or the law, its action can be struck down and determine the truth of such factual allegations.
by this Court on the ground of grave abuse of
_______________
discretion. Indeed, the function of all judicial and
49

quasijudicial instrumentalities is to apply the law as 49

Tañada v. Angara, 272 SCRA 18, May 2, 1997. See
they find it, not to reinvent or second-guess it.
50
also Santiago v. Guingona, 298 SCRA 756, November 18,
In its Memorandum, Petitioner Bayan Muna 1998; Miranda v. Aguirre, 314 SCRA 603, September 16,
1999; Garcia v. HRET, 312 SCRA 353, August 12, 1999.
passionately pleads for the outright disqualification of 50
Veterans Federation Party, et al v. Comelec, et al., GR No.
the major political parties—Respondents 136781, October 6, 2000, 342 SCRA 244.
Lakas-NUCD, LDP, NPC, LP and PMP—on the 51
See Valmonte v. Court of Appeals, 303 SCRA 278, February 18,
ground that under Comelec Resolution No. 4073, they 1999; Inciong, Jr. v. CA, 257 SCRA 578, June 26, 1996; Palomado v.
NLRC, 257 SCRA 680, June 28, 1996; Heirs of the Late Teodoro
have been accredited as the five (six, including Guaring,
PDP-Laban) major political parties in the May 14, 727
2001 elections. It argues that because of this, they VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 727
have the “advantage of getting official Comelec Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
Election Returns, Certificates of Canvass, preferred Elections
poll watchers x x x.” We note, however, that this
Basic rudiments of due process require that citizens belonging to marginalized and
respondents should first be given an opportunity to underrepresented sectors x x x to be elected to the
show that they qualify under the guidelines House of Representatives.” In other words, while they
promulgated in this Decision, before they can be are not disqualified merely on the ground that they are
deprived of their right to participate in and be elected political parties, they must show, however, that they
under the party-list system. represent the interests of the marginalized and
Guidelines for Screening ​ underrepresented. The counsel of Aksyon Demokratiko
Party-List Participants and other simi-
The Court, therefore, deems it proper to remand the
_______________
case to the Comelec for the latter to determine, after
summary evidentiary hearings, whether the 154 Jr. v. CA, 269 SCRA 283, March 7, 1997; Sebreño v. Central Board
parties and organizations allowed to participate in the of Assessment Appeals, 270 SCRA 360, March 24, 1997; PCGG v.
party-list elections comply with the requirements of Cojuangco, Jr., 302 SCRA 217, January 27, 1999.
728
the law. In this light, the Court finds it appropriate to
728 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
lay down the following guidelines, culled from the law
and the Constitution, to assist the Comelec in its work.
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
First, the political party, sector, organization or Elections
coalition must represent the marginalized and larly situated political parties admitted as much
underrepresented groups identified in Section 5 of RA during the Oral Argument, as the following quote
7941. In other words, it must show—through its shows:
constitution, articles of incorporation, bylaws, history, “JUSTICE PANGANIBAN: I am not disputing that in
platform of government and track record—that it my question. All I am saying is, the political party
represents and seeks to uplift marginalized and must claim to represent the marginalized and
underrepresented sectors. Verily, majority of its underrepresented sectors?
membership should belong to the marginalized and ATTY. KAPUNAN: Yes, Your Honor, the answer is
underrepresented. And it must demonstrate that in a yes.” 52

conflict of interests, it has chosen or is likely to choose Third, in view of the objections directed against the
53

the interest of such sectors. registration of Ang Buhay Hayaang Yumabong, which
Second, while even major political parties are is allegedly a religious group, the Court notes the
expressly allowed by RA 7941 and the Constitution to express constitutional provision that the religious
participate in the party-list system, they must comply sector may not be represented in the party-list system.
with the declared statutory policy of enabling “Filipino The extent of the constitutional proscription is
demonstrated by the following discussion during the REV. RIGOS. Not at all, but I am objecting to anybody
deliberations of the Constitutional Commission: who represents the Iglesia ni Kristo, the Catholic
“MR. OPLE. x x x In the event that a certain religious Church, the Protestant Church et cetera.” 55

sect with nationwide and even international Furthermore, the Constitution provides that “religious
networks of members and supporters, in order to denominations and sects shall not be registered.” The 56

circumvent this prohibition, decides to form its own prohibition was explained by a member of the 57

political party in emulation of those parties I had Constitutional Commission in this wise: “[T]he
mentioned earlier as deriving their inspiration and prohibition is on any religious organization registering
philosophies from well-established religious faiths, as a political party. I do not see any prohibition here
will that also not fall within this prohibition? against a priest running as a candidate. That is not
MR. MONSOD. If the evidence shows that the prohibited here; it is the registration of a religious sect
intention is to go around the prohibition, then as a political party.”58

certainly the Comelec can pierce through the legal Fourth, a party or an organization must not be
fiction.”54
disqualified under Section 6 of RA 7941, which
The following discussion is also pertinent: enumerates the grounds for disqualification as follows:
“MR. VILLACORTA. When the Commissioner
proposed “EXCEPT RELIGIOUS GROUPS,” he is 1.​ “(1)It is a religious sect or denomination,
not, of course, prohibiting priests, imams or pastors organization or association organized for religious
who may be elected by, say, the indigenous purposes;
community sector to represent their group. 2.​ 2.It advocates violence or unlawful means to seek
its goal;
_______________ 3.​ 3.It is a foreign party or organization;
4.​ 4.It is receiving support from any foreign
52
TSN, May 17, 2001, p. 180. government, foreign political party, foundation,
53
Petition of Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party, p. 16; rollo organization, whether directly or through any of its
(GR No. 147589), p. 19. officers or members or indirectly through third
54
Record of the Constitutional Commission, Vol. I, p. 636.
parties for partisan election purposes;
729
5.​ 5.It violates or fails to comply with laws, rules or
VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 72
regulations relating to elections;
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on 6.​ 6.It declares untruthful statements in its petition;
Elections 7.​ 7.It has ceased to exist for at least one (1) year; or
8.​ 8.It fails to participate in the last two (2) preceding
elections or fails to obtain at least two per
 centum(2%) of the votes cast under the party-list deleterious to the objective of the law: to enable
system in the two (2) preceding elections for the citizens belonging to marginalized and
constituency in which it has registered.” 59
underrepresented sectors and organizations to be
elected to the House of Representatives.
_______________
Sixth, the party must not only comply with the
55
Record of the Constitutional Commission, Vol. II, p. 589. requirements of the law; its nominees must likewise do
56
§2 (5), Article IX (C). so. Section 9 of RA 7941 reads as follows:
57
Christian S. Monsod. “SEC. 9. Qualifications of Party-List Nominees.—No person
58
Record of the Constitutional Commission. Vol. I, p. 634. shall be nominated as party-list representative unless he is
59
See also §11, Comelec Resolution No. 3307-A.
730
a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, a registered voter,
a resident of the Philippines for a period of not less than
730 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
one (1) year immediately preceding the day of the election,
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on able to read and write, a bona fide member of the party or
Elections organization which he seeks to represent for at least ninety
Note should be taken of paragraph 5, which (90) days preceding the day of the election, and is at least
disqualifies a party or group for violation of or failure twenty-five (25) years of age on the day of the election.
to comply with election laws and regulations. These In case of a nominee of the youth sector, he must at least
laws include Section 2 of RA 7941, which states that be twenty-five (25) but not more than thirty (30) years of
the party-list system seeks to “enable Filipino citizens age on the day of the election. Any youth sectoral
representative who attains the age of thirty (30) during his
belonging to marginalized and underrepresented
term shall be allowed to continue in office until the
sectors, organizations and parties x x x to become
expiration of his term.”
members of the House of Representatives.” A party or
an organization, therefore, that does not comply with _______________
this policy must be disqualified.
Fifth, the party or organization must not be an
60
See §2 (4), Article IX (B) of the Constitution. See also Article 261
(o), BP 881.
adjunct of, or a project organized or an entity funded 731
or assisted by, the government. By the very nature of VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 731
the party-list system, the party or organization must Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
be a group of citizens, organized by citizens and
Elections
operated by citizens. It must be independent of the
Seventh, not only the candidate party or organization
government. The participation of the government or its
must represent marginalized and underrepresented
officials in the affairs, of a party-list candidate is not
sectors; so also must its nominees. To repeat, under
only illegal and unfair to other parties, but also
60
Section 2 of RA 7941, the nominees must be Filipino message to the destitute and the prejudiced, and even
citizens “who belong to marginalized and to those in the underground, that change is possible. It
underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties.” is an invitation for them to come out of their limbo and
Surely, the interests of the youth cannot be fully seize the opportunity.
represented by a retiree; neither can those of the
_______________
urban poor or the working class, by an industrialist. To
allow otherwise is to betray the State policy to give 61
The bicameral conference committee on the disagreeing
genuine representation to the marginalized and provision of Senate Bill No. 1913 and House Bill No. 3040, January
underrepresented. 31, 1994, p. 4.
Eighth, as previously discussed, while lacking a 732

well-defined political constituency, the nominee must 732 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
likewise be able to contribute to the formulation and Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
enactment of appropriate legislation that will benefit Elections
the nation as a whole. Senator Jose Lina explained Clearly, therefore, the Court cannot accept the
during the bicameral committee proceedings that “the submissions of the Comelec and the other respondents
nominee of a party, national or regional, is not going to that the party-list system is, without any qualification,
represent a particular district x x x.”
61 open to all. Such position does not only weaken the
Epilogue electoral chances of the marginalized and
The linchpin of this case is the clear and plain policy of underrepresented; it also prejudices them. It would gut
the law: “to enable Filipino citizens belonging to the substance of the party-list system. Instead of
marginalized and underrepresented sectors, generating hope, it would create a mirage. Instead of
organizations and parties, and who lack well-defined enabling the marginalized, it would further weaken
political constituencies but who could contribute to the them and aggravate their marginalization.
formulation and enactment of appropriate legislation In effect, the Comelec would have us believe that
that will benefit the nation as a whole, to become the party-list provisions of the Constitution and RA
members of the House of Representatives.” 7941 are nothing more than a play on dubious words, a
Crucial to the resolution of this case is the mockery of noble intentions, and an empty offering on
fundamental social justice principle that those who the altar of people empowerment. Surely, this could
have less in life should have more in law. The not have been the intention of the framers of the
party-list system is one such tool intended to benefit Constitution and the makers of RA 7941.
those who have less in life. It gives the great masses of WHEREFORE, this case is REMANDED to the
our people genuine hope and genuine power. It is a Comelec, which is hereby DIRECTED to immediately
conduct summary evidentiary hearings on the Quisumbing, De Leon,
qualifications of the party-list participants in the light Jr. and Sandoval-Gutierrez, JJ., Join the dissenting
of the guidelines enunciated in this Decision. opinion of Justice V. Mendoza.
Considering the extreme urgency of determining the Ynares-Santiago, J., Abroad on Official
winners in the last partylist elections, the Comelec is Business.
directed to begin its hearings for the parties and SEPARATE (DISSENTING) OPINION
organizations that appear to have garnered such
number of votes as to qualify for seats in the House of VITUG, J.:
Representatives. The Comelec is further DIRECTED
to submit to this Court its compliance report within 30 The 1987 Constitution, crafted at a time when the
days from notice hereof. euphoria of the 1986 People Power had barely
The Resolution of this Court dated May 9, 2001, subsided, recognized the vigor infused by civilian
directing the Comelec “to refrain from proclaiming any society in a cleansing political reform and focused
winner” during the last party-list election, shall itself on institutionalizing civilian participation in
remain in force until after the Comelec itself will have daily governance. A cause for concern was the
complied and reported its compliance with the not-too-unlikely perpetuation of a single party in
foregoing disposition. power—a convenient contrivance for authoritarian
This Decision is immediately executory upon the rule. Article VI, Section 5, subsection 2, of the 1987
Commission on Elections’ receipt thereof. No Charter—
THE PARTY-LIST REPRESENTATIVES SHALL
pronouncement as to costs.
CONSTITUTE TWENTY PER CENTUM OF THE TOTAL
SO ORDERED.
NUMBER OF REPRESENTATIVES INCLUDING THOSE
Melo, Puno, Kapunan, Pardo, Buena and Gonz UNDER THE PARTY LIST FOR THREE CONSECUTIVE
aga-Reyes, JJ., concur. TERMS. AFTER THE RATIFICATION OF THIS
Davide, Jr. (C.J.) and Bellosillo, J., In the CONSTITUTION, ONE-HALF OF THE SEATS
result. ALLOCATED TO PARTYLIST REPRESENTATIVE SHALL
Vitug, J., Please see dissenting opinion. BE FILLED, AS PROVIDED BY LAW, BY SELECTION OR
733 ELECTION FROM THE LABOR, PEASANT, URBAN
VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 73 POOR, INDIGENOUS CULTURAL COMMUNITIES,
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission WOMEN, YOUTH, AND SUCH OTHER SECTORS AS
on Elections MAY BE PROVIDED BY LAW, EXCEPT THE RELIGIOUS
SECTOR.—
Mendoza, J., See dissenting opinion.
was the result of long-drawn deliberations and Representatives Through the Party-List System, and
compromises. Appropriating Funds Therefor,” was enacted. The
Immediately, after the resumption of the next enabling law laid the basis for COMELEC Resolution
Congress, then president Corazon C. Aquino, No. 2847, issued on July 1996, prescribing the “Rules
exercising her transitory appointing powers, assigned and Regulations Governing the Elections of the
to the reserved seats in the Lower House, Party-List Representatives through the Party-List
representatives of the labor, peasant, urban poor, System.” In the May 1998 first party-list elections, the
indigenous cultural communities, women and youth sectors were required, to test, for the first time, their
sector. The assignment was made from a selected list political mettle in an open electoral contest with other
of names submitted by the sectors themselves. The parties, groups and organizations under a party-list
sectors would continue to enjoy these reserved seats system. While the elections had a low-voter turnout,
for the next three terms; thenceforth, they would have seen largely as a result of public unawareness of an
to participate in an electoral contest to secure their electoral innovation, the recent 2001 multiparty list
representation in Congress. elections, however, were different. This time, a huge
734 number of parties, groups and coalitions applied for
734 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED registration with, and subsequently obtained
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on accreditation from, the COMELEC. Six of these groups
Elections were established political parties, namely PARTIDO
Article 6, Section 5(2), however, not being NG MASANG PILIPINO, LAKAS NUCD-UMDP,
self-executing, would wait for the legislature to ordain NATIONALIST PEOPLE’S COALITION, LABAN NG
the enabling law. Congress was to be circumscribed by DEMOKRATIKONG PILIPINO, AKSYON
the terms expressed in Article 6, Section DEMOKRATIKO, LIBERAL PARTY, NACIONALISTA
5(2).—First, the system should only apply to the PARTY and PDP-LABAN.
election of 20% of the total composition of the House of The instant petition prays for the exclusion of these
Representatives, second, it would prescribe a major parties on the ground that their participation
mandatory proportional representation scheme, does not level the playing field for less known and less
and, third,it would allow participating parties and organized sectoral groups still in dire need of election
organizations to be represented in voter’s registration logistics and machinery. Arguing that the system is
boards, board of election inspectors, parties and open to the underrepresented and marginalized
organizations or similar entities. sectors, as well as other parties but only on the
On 03 March 1995, Republic Act 7941, also known condition that the latter field sectoral candidates
as “An Act Providing for the Election of Party-List themselves, herein petitioner sought the
disqualification of the large major political parties and The draft provisions on what was to become Article VI,
groups which do not represent any “genuine” sectoral Section 5, subsection (2), of the 1987 Constitution took
interest. off from two staunch positions—the first headed by
735 Commissioner Villacorta, advocating that of the 20 per
VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 73 centum of the total seats in Congress to be allocated to
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on party-list representatives half were to be reserved to
Elections appointees from the marginalized and
A perusal of the novel electoral engineering, underrepresented sectors. The proposal was opposed
introduced by the Constitution into the electoral by some Commissioners. Mr. Monsod expressed the
system, would show the pertinent provisions to be difficulty in delimiting the sectors that needed
stoically quiet on the qualifications of a party, group or representation. He was of the view that reserving
coalition to participate under the party-list system. seats for the marginalized and underrepresented
Instead, it has opted to rely on a subsequent statutory sectors would stunt their development into
enactment to provide for the system’s focal particulars, full-pledged parties equipped with electoral machinery
which now lead us to the enabling law itself. Section 2 potent enough to further the sectoral interests to be
of R.A. 7941 reads— represented. The Villacorta group, on the other hand,
“The State shall promote proportional representation in the was apprehensive that pitting the unorganized and
election of representatives to the House of Representatives less-moneyed sectoral groups in an electoral contest
through a party-list system of registered national, regional would be like placing babes in the lion’s den, so to
and sectoral parties or organizations or coalitions thereof, speak, with the bigger and more established political
which will enable the Filipino citizens belonging to the
parties ultimately gobbling them up. R.A. 7941
marginalized and underrepresented sectors, organizations
recognized this concern when it banned the first five
and parties, and who lacked well-defined political
constituencies but who could contribute to the formulation major political parties on the basis of party
736
and enactment of appropriate legislation that will benefit
the nation as a whole, to become members of the House of 736 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Representatives. Towards this end, the State shall develop Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
and guarantee a full, free and open party system in order to Elections
attain the broadest possible representation of party, sectoral representation in the House of Representatives from
or group interests in the House of Representatives, by participating in the party-list system for the first
enhancing their chances to compete for and win seats in the party-list elections held in 1998 (and to be
legislature, and shall provide the simplest scheme possible.” automatically lifted starting with the 2001 elections).
The advocates for permanent seats for sectoral
representatives made an effort towards a Perhaps the present controversy stems from a
compromise—that the party-list system be open only confusion of the actual character of the party-list
to underrepresented and marginalized sectors. This system. At first glance, it gives the impression of being
proposal was further whittled down by allocating only a combination of proportional representation for
half of the seats under the party-list system to non-traditional parties and sectoral representation.
candidates from the sectors which would garner the The first, proportional representation, on one end, is
required number of votes. The majority was intended for no other reason than to open up the
unyielding. Voting 19-22, the proposal for permanent electoral process for broader participation and
seats, and in the alternative the reservation of the representation. Sectoral representation on the other,
party-list system to the sectoral groups, was voted
_______________
down. The only concession the Villacorta group was
able to muster was an assurance of reserved seats for 1
Section 11(b), R.A. 7941.
selected sectors for three consecutive terms after the 737
enactment of the 1987 Constitution, by which time VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 737
they would be expected to gather and solidify their Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
electoral base and brace themselves in the multi-party Elections
electoral contest with the more veteran political presupposes that every underrepresented sector be
groups. represented in Congress. This impression of
The system, designed to accommodate as many sectoral-based representation stems from the
groups as possible, abhors the monopoly of provisions of Article 6, Section 5(2), of the
representation in the Lower House. This intent is Constitution, as well as R.A. 7941, in enumerating
evident in the statutory imposition of the three-seat specific sectors to be represented. In holding that the
cap, which prescribes the limit to the number of seats party list system is open only to the underrepresented
that may be gained by a party or organization. Votes
1
and marginalized sectors, the ponenciaplaces much
garnered in excess of 6% of the total votes cast do not reliance on Section 5 of R.A. 7941:
entitle the party to more than three seats. “SEC. 5. Registration.—Any organized group of persons
There is no express provision of the Constitution or may register as a party, organization or coalition for
in the enabling law that disallows major political purposes of the party-list system by filing with the
parties from participating in the party-list system and, COMELEC not later than ninety (90) days before the
at the same time, from fielding candidates for election a petition verified by its president or secretary
legislative district representatives. stating its desire to participate in the party-list system as a
national, regional or sectoral party or organization or a
coalition of such parties or organizations, attaching thereto 738
its constitution, bylaws, platform or program of 738 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
government, list of officers, coalition agreement and other Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
relevant information as the COMELEC may Elections
require: Provided,That the sectors shall include labor
ing their adoption, regularly nominates and supports
peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor, indigenous cultural
certain of its leaders and members as candidates for
communities, elderly, handicapped, women, youth, veterans,
overseas workers, and professionals. public office. A sectoral party is an organized group of
“The COMELEC shall publish the petition in at least citizens belonging to identifiable sectors, such as those
two (2) national newspapers of general circulation. enumerated in Article 6, Section 5(2), of the 1987
“The COMELEC shall, after due notice and hearing, Constitution, which includes the labor, peasant, urban
resolve the petition within fifteen (15) days from the date it poor, indigenous cultural communities and women and
was submitted for decision but in no case not later than those added by R.A. 7941 like the fisherfolk, elderly,
sixty (60) days before election.” handicapped, veterans, overseas workers and
It would seem to me that, construed along with Section professionals. A sectoral organization is a group of
3(d) of the statute, defining a “sectoral party,” the citizens who share the same or similar attributes or
enumeration was intended to qualify only “sectoral characteristics, employment, interests or concerns.
parties” and not the other eligible groups (e.g., political Coalition is an aggrupation of duly registered national,
parties, sectoral organizations and coalitions). Neither regional, sectoral parties or organizations for election
Article 6, Section 5(2), nor R.A. 7941 intended to purposes.
guarantee representation to all sectors of society and, A party or organization desiring to join the
let alone, hand it over only to underrepresented and party-list system is required to register with the
marginalized sectors. The real aim, if the will of the COMELEC, together with a list of its five nominees for
majority of the Commissioners were to be respected, party-list representatives, arranged according to the
was to introduce the concept of party-list group’s order of preference. In every election for the
representation. House of Representatives, each voter casts two
The party-list system is limited to four groups—1) votes—one for the district representative of his choice
political parties, 2) sectoral parties, 3) sectoral and another for the party or organization of his choice.
organizations, and 4) coalitions. A political party is an The votes cast for the parties and organizations are
organized group of citizens advocating an ideology, or totaled nationwide. In contrast to the election of all
platform, principles or policies for the general conduct other officials where the rule of plurality (i.e., the
of government and which, as the most immediate candidate with the highest number of votes wins) is
means of secur- adopted, the number of seats under the party-list
system depends on the number of votes received in representation broadens the composition of the House
proportion to the total number of votes cast of Representatives to accommodate sectors and
nationwide. On the basis of the number of registered organizations that do not have well-defined political
voters in the recent elections, a group under the constituencies and to facilitate access to minority or
party-list system, should get approximately half a small parties.
million votes to be entitled to one seat. A party-list nominee is subject to basically the same
At the center stage of this controversy are the qualifications applicable to legislative districts
political parties themselves. Undeniably, political candidates, with the exception of the additional
3

parties are an important feature in both democratic requirement that he be nominated in one list only, and
and authoritarian regimes. By legitimizing the provided, further, that he is not a candidate for any
individuals and institutions that control political elective office or has lost his bid for an elective office in
power, parties add an important element of stability to the immediately preceding election. A nominee must 4

a political system and also help organize the actually belong to the sector which they purport to
government and electorate by recruiting candidates, represent, otherwise, there can be no true
conducting campaigns, encouraging partisan representation. A nominee of the youth sector is
5

attachments and generally educating the public, further required to be at least 25 but not more than 30
stimulating voter participation and providing varying years of age on the day of the election. Should he, 6

degrees of policy direction to government. The idea however, attain the age of 30 during his term, he is
could also be seen as a good training and recruiting allowed to continue until the expiration thereof. Once 7

ground for potential leaders. Advocates commend the elected, party-list representatives also enjoy the same
multi-party term, rights and privileges as do district
739 representatives, except that
VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 73
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on _______________
Elections Bernas, pp. 355-358.
2

as allowing the expression and the compromise of the The Constitutional qualifications for
3
legislative districts
many interests of a complex society, including a range representatives apply to party-list nominees—
Section 6, Article 6, 1987 Constitution. No person shall be a member of the
of ideological differences, conflicting political values House of Representatives unless he is a natural-born citizen of the
and philosophies. Section 6 of the 1987 Constitution is Philippines, and on the day of the election, at least twenty-five years of age,
able to read and write, and except the party-list representative, a registered
explicit—“A free and open party system shall be voter in the district in which he shall be elected, and a resident thereof for a
allowed to evolve according to the free choice of the period not less than one year immediately preceding the day of the elections.
people.” The multi-party system of proportional
2 4
Sections 8, R.A. 7941.
 5
Supangan, Jr. vs. Santos, 189 SCRA 56 (1990). the intent of the framers of the organic law and of the
6
Section 9, R.A. 7941.
7
Ibid.
people adopting it.” The law, in its clear formulation
11

740 cannot give this tribunal the elbow-room for

740 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED construction. Courts are bound to suppose that any
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on inconveniences involved in the application of
Elections constitutional provisions according to their plain terms
they are not entitled to the Country-wide Development and import have been considered in advance and
Fund (CDF). 8
accepted as less intolerable than those avoided, or as
A feature of the party-list system is that political compensated by countervailing
parties, sectoral groups and organizations, coalitions advantages. The ponenciaitself, in ruling as it does,
12

and aggrupation acquire the status of “candidates” and may unwittingly, be crossing the limits of judicial
their nominees relegated to mere agents. Thus, if a review and
party-list representative dies, becomes physically _______________
incapacitated, removed from office by the party or the
organization he represents, resigns, or is disqualified 8
See the plenary deliberations (2nd reading) of House Bill No.
during his term, his party can send another person to 3043.
9
Section 15, R.A. 7941.
take his place for the remaining period, provided the 10
Ibid.
replacement is next in succession in the list of 11
Whitman vs. Oxford National Bank, 176 US 559, 44 L. Ed. 587,
nominees submitted to the COMELEC upon 20 Set. 477.
People ex rel. Snowball vs. Pendegast, 96 Cal. 289 St. 126, 110
registration. Furthermore, a party-list representative
12

NE 485.
who switches party affiliations during his term forfeits 741
his seat. So, also, if a person changes his sectoral
9
VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 741
affiliation within 6 months before the election, he will Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
not be eligible for nomination in party-list Elections
representative under his new party or organization. 10

treading the dangerous waters of judicial legislation,

The argument raised by petitioners could not be and more importantly, of a constitutional amendment.
said to have been overlooked as they precisely were While, the lament of herein petitioners is
the same points subjected to intense and prolonged understandable, the remedy lies not with this Court
deliberations by the members of the Constitutional but with the people themselves through an
Commission. amendment of their work as and when better counsel
And, the polestar in the constructions of prevails.
constitutions always remains—“effect must be given to
 WHEREFORE, I regret my inability to concur with Nationalist Peoples’ Coalition (NPC),
my colleagues in their judgment. I am thus Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino (LDP),
constrained to vote for the dismissal of the petitions. Aksyon Demokratiko (AKSYON),
SEPARATE OPINION Partido Demokratiko Pilipino Lakas ng Bayan
(PDP-LABAN),
MENDOZA, J., dissenting: 742
742 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
I vote to dismiss the petitions in these cases. I will
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
presently explain my vote, but before I do so it seems
Elections
to me necessary to state briefly the facts and the
issues.
Liberal Party (LP),
The Facts Nacionalista Party (NP),
Ang Buhay Hayaang Yumabong
Petitioner Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party
(OFW for short) is the political agency of the Overseas Organizations/Coalitions:
Filipino Workers Movement, a non-stock and
non-profit organization. On the other hand, petitioner Citizens Drug Watch Foundation, Inc. (DRUG
Bayan Muna is a political party representing peasants, WATCH),
workers, women, the youth, and other marginalized Mamamayan Ayaw sa Droga (MAD),
sectors. Both were accredited by the Commission on Go! Go! Philippines Movement (GO, GO
Elections in connection with the election for party-list PHILIPPINES),
representatives on May 14, 2001. The True Marcos Loyalist (MARCOS
Petitioners brought these suits—in G.R. No. LOYALIST),
147589, for certiorari and, in G.R. No. 147613, for Philippine Local Autonomy Movement, Inc.
certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus—for the
(PLAM),
purpose of seeking the annulment of the registration of
Citizens Movement for Justice, Economy
the following parties classified as “political parties”
Environment and Peace
and “organizations/coalitions” by the Commission on
Elections: (JEEP),
Political Parties: Chamber of Real Estate Builders Association
Partido ng Masang Pilipino (PMP), (CREBA),
Lakas NUCD-UMDP (LAKAS NUCD-UMDP),
 Sports and Health Advancement Foundation, that seven of the respondent political parties (PMP,
Inc.(SHAF), Lakas NUCD-UMDP, NPC, LDP, AKSYON,
Ang Lakas ng Overseas Contract Workers PDP-LABAN, and LP) are actually the major po-
(OCW), 743

Bagong Bayani Organization (BAGONG VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 743
BAYANI), Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
National Federation of Sugar Planters (NFSP) Elections
R.A. No. 7941, §5 provides that any party, litical parties in the country today as determined by
organization, or coalition desiring to participate in the the COMELEC in its Resolution No. 4073, dated May
party-list system must apply to the COMELEC for 3, 2001, and charges that the rest of private
registration not later than 90 days before the election. respondents are “pseudo party-list organizations”
On the other hand, §4 of the same law requires that which are actually satellites of the major political
any party, organization, or coalition which is already parties and of big businesses.
registered with the COMELEC should declare its Bayan Muna argues that the party-list system is
intention to participate in the party-list system 90 intended to address the problem of ineffective
days before the election. representation of underprivileged sectors of society
In its Resolution No. 3785, dated March 26, 2001, and enhance direct people’s action and participation in
the COMELEC passed upon the applications for the decision-making process to counter-balance the
registration or manifestations of intention of several territorial representation of 80% of the House of
parties, organizations, and coalitions. On March 28, Representatives, and that to allow participation in the
2001, it issued a certified list of parties, organizations, party-list system of respondent political parties and
or coalitions entitled to participate in the May 14, 2001 parties/coalitions would be to defeat this purpose
elections. All in all, 148 parties, organizations, and because these parties do not represent “marginalized
“coalitions were accredited, including private and underrepresented” sectors. For this reason, Bayan
1

respondents herein. Muna prays that R.A. No. 7941, §11, par. 2 be declared
Petitioners OFW and Bayan Muna contend that the unconstitutional on the ground that, by banning the
party-list system is exclusively for the “marginalized five major political parties from participating in the
and underrepresented” sectors of the Philippine party-list system only in the May 1998 elections, it
society and that there is no way by which other sectors leaves them free to participate in subsequent elections.
not so identified, much less the major political parties, On the other hand, the COMELEC argues:
can participate in the party-list elections. Petitioner [B]oth the Constitution and the Party-List System Act
clearly allow, and they do not prohibit, the participation of
Bayan Muna in particular calls attention to the fact
“registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or LP, MAD, CREBA, NFSP, JEEP, and BAGONG
organizations” to participate in the party-list system, BAYANI.
whether or not said parties or organizations represent the The Issues
marginalized and underrepresented sectors of society.
The issues in these cases actually come down to the
2

It cites the proviso of Art. VI, §5(2) of the Constitution following:

that
For three consecutive terms after the ratification of this
1.​ (1)Whether the petitions filed in these cases should
Constitution, one-half of the seats allocated to party-list
be dismissed for failure of petitioners to exhaust
representatives shall be filled, as provided by law, by
administrative remedies in the COMELEC; and
selection or election from the labor peasant, urban poor,
2.​ (2)Whether the party-list system is exclusively for
indigenous cultural communities, women, youth, and such
“marginalized and underrepresented” sectors of
other sectors as may be provided by law, except the
society.
religious sector,
as proof that ““marginalized” sectors are not entitled to
We shall deal with these issues in the order they are
permanent seats in the House of Representatives. In
stated.
any event, it is contended
Discussion
_______________ I.
While it is true that petitioner Bayan Muna has filed
1
Memorandum for Petitioner Bayan Muna, 17-18. petitions for the disqualification of respondents, the
2
Memorandum for the COMELEC, 23-24.
744
fact is that when the petitions in these cases were filed
744 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED on April 16 and 17, 2001, the elections were just a
month away, and there was doubt whether a resolution
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
of the petitions for disqualifications was forthcoming.
Elections
In fact, up to the time of the elections on May 14, 2001,
that petitioners’ recourse is not to this Court but to the
the cases were still unresolved. Petitioners, therefore,
COMELEC because whether a party, organization, or
had no other “plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in
coalition represents “marginalized and
the ordinary course of law” within the meaning of Rule
underrepresented” sectors is a question of fact, and
65, §§1-2 of the Code of Civil Procedure and were
this Court is not a trier of facts. The COMELEC states
justified in resorting to the extraordinary remedies of
that, as a matter of fact, petitioner Bayan Muna has
certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus.
pending petitions to disqualify, based on this ground,
From another point of view, there is no need for
respondents NPC, LDP, PMP, LAKAS NUCD-UMDP,
petitioners to await formal resolution of their petitions
as the COMELEC had already indicated in press (2) The party-list representatives shall constitute
statements its stand that parties, organizations, or twenty per centum of the total number of representatives
coalitions, whether or not representing “marginalized including those under the party-list. For three consecutive
and underrepresented” sectors, could participate in the terms after the ratification of this Constitution, one-half of
the seats allocated to party-list representatives shall be
elec-
745 filled, as provided by law, by selection or election from the
labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural
VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 74
communities, women, youth, and such other sectors as may
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on be provided by law except the religious sector.
Elections To carry out this provision of the Constitution,
tion for the party-list system—a fact confirmed by it in Congress enacted the Party-List System Act (R.A. No.
its comment and memorandum in these cases. There is 7941), the pertinent provisions of which read:
thus no basis for insisting that petitioners should have SEC. 2. Declaration of Party.—The State shall promote
exhausted administrative remedies before coming to proportional representation in the election of
this Court. representatives to the House of Representatives through a
Nor are the issues raised in these cases factual as party-list system of registered national, regional and
the statement of the second issue above plainly shows. sectoral parties or organizations or coalitions thereof, which
It is only if the question whether the party-list system will enable Filipinp citizens belonging to marginalized and
is limited to, “marginalized and underrepresented” underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties, and
who lack well-defined po-
sectors is answered in the affirmative will it be 746
necessary to determine the status of respondents. 746 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
II.
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
At the core of the controversy in these cases is the
Elections
following provision of the Constitution:
litical constituencies but who could contribute to the
ART. VI, §5(1) The House of Representatives shall be
formulation and enactment of appropriate legislation that
composed of not more than two hundred fifty members,
will benefit the nation as a whole, to become members of
unless Otherwise fixed by law, who shall be elected from
the House of Representatives. Towards this end, the State
legislative districts apportioned among the provinces, cities,
shall develop and guarantee a full, free and open party
and the Metropolitan Manila area in accordance with the
system in order to attain the broadest possible
number of their respective inhabitants, and on the basis of
representation of party, bsectoral or group interests in the
a uniform and progressive ratio, and those who, as provided
House of Representatives by enhancing their chances to
by law, shall be elected through a party-list system of
compete for and win seats in the legislature, and shall
registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or
provide the simplest scheme possible.
organizations.
 SEC. 11. Number of Party-List Representatives.—The terms following the ratification of the Constitution and
party-list representatives shall constitute twenty per only with respect to one-half of the seats allotted to
centum (20%) of the total number of the members of the party-list representatives does it allow sectoral
House of Representatives including those under the representation. Textually, Art. VI, §5(1X2) provides no
party-list.
basis for
For purposes of the May 1998 elections, the first five (5)
major political parties on the basis of party representation _______________
in the House of Representatives at the start of the Tenth
Congress of the Philippines shall not be entitled to 3
Roman Catholic Apostolic Administrator of Davao v. Land
participate in the party-list system. Registration Commission, 102 Phil. 596, 627 (1957).
In determining the allocation of seats for the second 747
vote, the following procedure shall be observed: VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 747
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
1.​ (a)The parties, organizations, and coalitions shall Elections
be ranked from the highest to the lowest based on petitioners’ contention that whether it is sectoral
the number of votes they garnered during the representation or party-list system the purpose is to
elections.
provide exclusive representation for “marginalized
2.​ (b)The parties, organizations, and coalitions
sectors,” by which term petitioners mean the labor,
receiving at least two percent (2%) of the total votes
cast for the party-list system shall be entitled to peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities,
one seat each; Provided,That those garnering more women, and youth sectors.
than two percent (2%) of the votes shall be entitled Indeed, the two systems of representation are not
to additional seats in proportion to their total identical. Party-list representation is a type of
number of votes: Provided, finally, That each party, proportional representation designed to give those who
organization, or coalition shall be entitled to otherwise cannot win a seat in the House of
not more than three (3) seats. Representatives in district elections a chance to win if
they have sufficient strength on a nationwide basis.
The most important single factor in determining the (In this sense, these groups are considered
intention of the people from whom the Constitution “marginalized and underrepresented.”) Under the
emanated is the language in which it is party-list system, representatives are elected from
expressed.” The text of Art. VI, §5(1)(2) is quite clear.
3
multi-seat districts in proportion to the number of
It provides for a party-list system of “registered, votes received in contrast to the “winner-take-all”
regional, and sectoral parties or organizations,” not for single-seat district in which, even if a candidate
sectoral representation. Only for three consecutive garners 49.9% of the votes, he gets no seat.
 Thus, under the party-list system, a party or While it is permissible in this jurisdiction to consult the
candidate need not come in first in order to win seats debates and proceedings of the constitutional convention in
in the legislature. On the other hand, in the order to arrive at the reason and purpose of the resulting
“winner-take-all” single-seat district, the votes cast for Constitution, resort thereto may be had only when other
guides fail as said proceedings are powerless to vary the
a losing candidate are wasted as only those who vote
terms of the Constitution when the meaning is clear.
for the winner are represented. To the extent then that
Debates in the constitutional convention “are of value as
it assures parties or candidates a percentage of seats showing the views of the individual members, and as
in the legislature that reflects their public support, the indicating the reason for their votes, but they give Us no
party-list system enables marginalized and light as to the views of the large majority who did not talk,
underrepresented sectors (such as, but not limited to, much less of the mass or our fellow citizens whose votes at
the labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural the polls gave that instrument the force of fundamental law.
communities, women, and youth sectors) to obtain We think it safer to construe the constitution from what
seats in the House of Representatives. Otherwise, the appears upon its face.” The proper interpretation therefore
party-list system does not guarantee to these sectors depends more on how it was understood by the people
seats in the legislature. adopting it than in the framers’ understanding thereof.
This is the method of representation adopted in the It is worth recalling the celebrated comment of Charles
Constitution as answer to the problem of P. Curtis, Jr. on the role of history in constitutional
underrepresentation. exegesis:
The intention of the framers of the Constitution, even
In arguing that the party-list system is exclusively
assuming we could discover what it was, when it is not
for the “marginalized and underrepresented sectors,”
adequately expressed in the Constitution, that is to say,
petitioner Bayan Muna argues that the constitutional what they meant when they did not say it, surely that has
intent in adopting the party-list system must be no binding force upon us. If we look behind or beyond what
searched for in the deliberations of the Constitutional they set down in the document, prying into what else they
Commission. wrote and what they said, anything we may find is only
748 advisory. They may sit in at our councils. There is no reason
748 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED why we should eavesdrop on theirs. 5

Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on Be that as it may, the Record of the Constitutional
Elections Commission speaks clearly against petitioners’ reading
The polestar of constitutional interpretation has been of Art. VI, §5(1)(2). It shows clearly that the
stated by this Court in Civil Liberties Union v. Constitutional Commission rejected sectoral
Executive Secretary, as follows:
4 representation in preference to proportional
representation.
 As originally written, §5 of the Draft Article on the representation, advocated by Commissioner Villacorta,
Legislative Department read: and another one for party-list system, advocated by
Commissioner Monsod. The two are not the same. As
_______________
Commissioner Monsod said in explaining his proposal:
4
194 SCRA 317, 337-338 (1991), quoting Commonwealth v. Ralph,
MR. MONSOD. . . .
111 Pa. 365, 3 Atl. 220 (1886). I would like to make a distinction from the beginning
5
LIONS UNDER THE THRONE 2 (1947) (emphasis in the that the proposal for the party list system is not
original). synonymous with that of the sectoral representation.
749 Precisely, the party list system seeks to avoid the dilemma
VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 74 of choice of sectors and who constitute the members of the
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on sectors. . . . In effect, a sectoral representation in the
Elections Assembly would mean that certain sectors would have
SEC. 5. The House of Representatives shall be composed of reserved seats; that they will choose among themselves who
not more than two hundred and fifty members who shall be would sit in those reserved seats. And then, we have the
elected from legislative districts apportioned among the problem of which sector because as we will notice in
provinces and cities in accordance with the number of their Proclamation No. 9, the sectors cited were the farmers,
respective inhabitants, and on the basis of a uniform and fishermen, workers, students, professionals, business,
progressive ratio, and those who, as provided by law, shall military, academic, ethnic and other similar groups. So
be elected from the sectors and party list. The sectoral or these are the nine sectors that were identified here as
party list representatives shall in no case exceed twenty “sectoral representatives” to be represented in this
percent of the entire membership of the House of Commission. The problem we had in
Representatives.
_______________
Each legislative district shall comprise, as far as
practicable, contiguous, compact and adjacent territory, 6
Committee on Legislative Power, Committee Report No. 22
provided, however, that each city with a population of more (emphasis added).
than two hundred thousand, or each province, shall have at 750
least one representative. 750 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Within three years following the return of every census, Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
the Congress shall make a reapportionment of legislative Elections
districts based on the standards provided in this section. trying to approach sectoral representation in the Assembly
As petitioner Bayan Muna states, two proposals for was whether to stop at these nine sectors or include other
additional representation in the House of sectors . . . . Second, we had the problem of who comprise
Representatives were submitted by the Committee on the farmers. . . . A doctor may be a farmer; a lawyer may
Legislative Department: one for sectoral also be a farmer. And so, it is up to the discretion of the
person to say “I am a farmer” so he would be included in Commissioner Monsod, therefore, proposed to amend
that sector. the phrase “shall be elected from the sectors and party
. . .Under the party-list system, there are no reserved list” in §5 by replacing it with the following
seats for sectors . . . .This can be a regional party, a sectoral
party, a national party, UNIDO, Magsasaka or a regional _______________
party in Mindanao. One need not be a farmer to say that he
wants the farmers’ party to be represented in the Assembly. 7
2 RECORD OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION 85-86,
Any citizen can vote for any party. At the end of the day, the session of Tuesday, July 22, 1986 (emphasis added).
751
COMELEC will then tabulate the votes that had been
garnered by each party or each organization—one does not VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 751
have to be a political party and register in order to Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
participate as a party—and count the votes and from there Elections
derive the percentage of the votes that had been cast in THROUGH A PARTY LIST SYSTEM OF REGISTERED
favor of a party, organization or coalition. NATIONAL, REGIONAL OR SECTORAL PARTIES OR
.... ORGANIZATIONS. 8

We feel that this approach gets around the mechanics of Attention should be paid to this proposal because with
sectoral representation while at the same time making sure slight modification it later became the basis of the present
that those who really have a national constituency or Art. VI, §5(1)(2).
sectoral constituency will get a chance to have a seat in the The following exchange took place on the Monsod
National Assembly. These sectors or these groups may not amendment:
have the constituency to win a seat on a legislative district MR. DAVIDE: Madam President, before accepting the
basis. They may not be able to win a seat on a district basis proposed amendment, the Committee would like to
but surely, they will have votes on a nationwide basis. get some clarifications.
The purpose of this is to open the system. In the past When the proponent speaks of “OR SECTORAL PARTIES
elections, we found out that there were certain groups or OR ORGANIZATIONS,” is he referring to any sector which
parties that, if we count their votes nationwide, have about the law may subsequently define?
1,000,000 or 1,500,000 votes. But they were always third MR. MONSOD: . . . The party list system that is being
place or fourth place in each of the districts. So, they have
advocated by this amendment is a system that
no voice in the Assembly. But this way, they would have five
or six representatives in the Assembly even if they would opens up the list to any regional, national or
not win individually in legislative districts. So, that is sectoral party. . . .
essentially the mechanics, the purpose and objectives of the
party list system. ....
MS. AQUINO: The Committee would like to be Philippines. In other words, the representative of labor
clarified on this. Do we understand the proponent will be chosen-by all the electors of the Philippines,
correctly that this party list system is not and that is not correct. My contention is that the
necessarily synonymous to sectoral representation? sectoral representative must be selected by his own
MR. MONSOD: No, it is not necessarily synonymous, constituents, and for that reason, I am objecting to this
but it does include the right of sectoral parties or amendment. 10

organizations to register, but it is not exclusive to On the other hand, Tadeo objected on the ground that
sectoral parties or organizations. if allowed to participate in the party-list system, the
MS. AQUINO: And that it does not likewise reserve major political parties could gobble up the sectoral
any institutional seat for any sector? In other parties. He said:
words, it only enables it to be a part of the party list MR. TADEO. . . . .Kapag inilagay natin ang party list,
if it has the capacity to do so, but it does not reserve papasukin ng political parties. Mangigibabaw at
any seat for the sectors. kakainin din niyan hanggang mawala ang sektor. 11

MR. MONSOD: Yes, Madam President, this is not a MR. TADEO. Ang punto lamang namin, pag
reserve seat system. 9
pinayagan mo ang UNIDO na isang political party,
The proposed amendment was opposed by a group it will dominate the party list at mawawalang
headed by Commissioner Villacorta, which included saysay din iyong sector. Lalamunin mismo ng
Commissioners Tadeo, Lerum, and Bernas. Lerum political parties ang party list system. Gusto ko
said: lamang bigyan ng diin ang “reserve.” Hindi ito
MR. LERUM. Madam President, in view of the reserve seat sa marginalized sectors. Kung
explanation, I am objecting to this amendment titingnan natin itong 198 seats, reserved din ito sa
because it is possible that the la political parties.
Villacorta said he was objecting to the party-list
_______________
system because it would not solve the problem of
8
Id. at 252-253, session of Friday, July 25, 1986. ineffective representation of the underprivileged
9
Id. at 253 (emphasis added). sectors. He said:
752 For too long since our people attained a semblance of
752 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED self-government at the start of this century, our legislators
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on were elected based on their promise that they would
Elections represent the little people of our land. With the exception of
a few patriotic legislators, some of whom are in our
bor sector will not be represented considering that
Commission today, members of the National Assemblies,
those who will vote are all the voters of the the Congresses, and the Batasans of the past did not devote
themselves enough to the alleviation of the dismal condition “shall be elected from the sectors and the party list,” it
of our country’s poor and lower classes. was proposed that the following be inserted in §5 of
.... the Draft Article:
THROUGH A PARTY LIST SYSTEM OF REGISTERED
_______________
NATIONAL, REGIONAL AND SECTORAL PARTIES OR
10
Id. at 254, session of Friday, July 25, 1986. ORGANIZATIONS AS PROVIDED BY LAW. THE PARTY
11
Id. at 254. LIST REPRESENTATIVES SHALL CONSTITUTE
12
Id. at 257. TWENTY PERCENT OF THE TOTAL MEMBERS OF THE
753 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES PROVIDED THAT FOR
VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 75 THE FIRST TWO TERMS AFTER THE RATIFICATION
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on OF THIS CONSTITUTION TWENTY-FIVE OF THE
Elections SEATS ALLOCATED TO PARTY LIST
These realities convince us that there are no spokesmen REPRESENTATIVES SHALL BE FILLED BY
and legislators who can best represent the poor, the SELECTION OR ELECTION, AS PROVIDED BY LAW
underprivileged, the marginalized than those coming from FROM THE LABOR, PEASANT, URBAN POOR AND
within their ranks. 13
YOUTH SECTORS.
To Commissioner Villacorta, only reserved seats for the However, although an agreement had apparently been
sectors would give them effective representation: reached, the advocates of sectoral representation were
MR. MONSOD. My amendment merely says that it is not satisfied that it
THROUGH A PARTY LIST SYSTEM OF _______________
REGISTERED NATIONAL, RE GIONAL OR
SECTORAL PARTIES OR ORGANIZATIONS. Id. at 255.
13

My question is: Does the Honorable Commissioner Id. at 258.

14

754
object to this amendment?
754 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
MR. VILLACORTA. Yes, because it does not guarantee
that the seats reserved for the party list Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
representatives will be reserved for the sectors. 14
Elections
Because of the impasse, the discussion on Friday, July would be allowed only for two terms and only with
25, 1986, on §5 was suspended to allow the respect to one-half of the seats allocated for party-list
commissioners to come to an agreement. After one representatives. Commissioner Aquino proposed
week, a compromise formula was reached by the two instead the following amendment of §5:
groups and presented to the plenary session of the ELECTED THROUGH A PARTY LIST SYSTEM OF
REGISTERED NATIONAL, REGIONAL AND SECTORAL
Commission on August 1, 1986. In lieu of the phrase
PARTIES OR ORGANIZATIONS, AS PROVIDED BY LAW Art. VI, §5(1) (2) to say that “Although Commissioners
THE PARTY LIST REPRESENTATIVES SHALL Villacorta and Monsod differed in their proposals as to
CONSTITUTE TWENTY PERCENT OF THE TOTAL the details of the
MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
TWENTY-FIVE OF THE SEATS ALLOCATED TO PARTY _______________
LIST REPRESENTATIVES SHALL BE FILLED BY
ELECTION, AS PROVIDED BY LAW, FROM THE LABOR, Id. at 584, session of Friday, Aug. 1, 1986.
15

PEASANT, URBAN POOR, WOMEN AND YOUTH Id. at 589.

16

755
SECTORS
When put to vote, however, Aquino’s proposal was VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 755
defeated with-nineteen (19) voting in favor, and Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
twenty-two (22) voting against. 15 Elections
The Commission then voted on the proposed party-list system, both proponents worked within the
amendment of Commissioner Monsod. With only a few framework that the party-list system is for the
minor changes, it was approved by a vote of thirty-two ‘marginalized’ as termed by Comm. Villacorta and the
(32) commissioners against none. As finally worded,
16 ‘underrepresented’ as termed by Comm. Monsod,
the amendment reads: which he defined as those which are ‘always third or
SHALL BE FILLED AS PROVIDED BY LAW, BY fourth place in each of the districts.’ ” 17

SELECTION OR ELECTION, FROM THE LABOR, Indeed, the two proposals put forth by them are
PEASANT, URBAN POOR, INDIGENOUS CULTURAL basically different, and they do not have the same
COMMUNITIES, WOMEN, YOUTH, AND SUCH OTHER basis. What the advocates of sectoral representation
SECTORS AS MAY BE PROVIDED BY LAW, EXCEPT wanted was permanent reserved seats for
THE RELIGIOUS SECTOR “marginalized sectors” by which they mean the labor,
Thus, the deliberations of the Constitutional peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities,
Commission show that the party-list system is not women, and youth sectors. Under Art. VI, §5(2), these
limited to the “marginalized and underrepresented” sectors were given only one-half of the seats in the
sectors referred to by petitioners, i.e., labor, peasants, House of Representatives and only for three terms. On
urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, women, the other hand, the “third or fourth place(rs)” in
and the youth, but that it is a type of proportional district elections, for whom the party-list system was
representation intended to give voice to those who may intended, refer to those who may not win seats in the
not have the necessary number to win a seat in a districts but nationwide may be sufficiently strong to
district but are sufficiently numerous to give them a enable them to be represented in the House. They may
seat nationwide. It, therefore, misreads the debates on include Villacorta’s “marginalized” or
“underprivileged” sectors, but they are not limited to leaves blocks of voters underrepresented. To this
them. There would have been no need to give the problem of underrepresentation two solutions were
“marginalized sectors” one-half of the seats for the proposed: sectoral representation and party-list
party-list system for three terms if the two systems are system or proportional representation. The
identical. Constitutional Commission chose the party-list
The objections raised against the accreditation of system. This Court cannot hold that the party-list
private respondents are the same ones raised by system is reserved for the labor, peasants, urban poor,
Commissioners Villacorta, Tadeo, and Lerum, among indigenous cultural communities, women, and youth
others, to the Monsod proposal which became the as petitioners contend without changing entirely the
present Art. VI, §5(1)(2), namely, that certain sectors, meaning of the Constitution which in fact mandates
like labor, may not win seats in the House under the exactly the opposite of the reserved seats system when
party-list system; that the big parties might gobble up it provides in Art. IX, C, §6 that “A free and open party
the sectoral parties; that the party-list system will not system shall be allowed to evolve according to the free
solve the problem of ineffective representation of the choice of the people, subject to the provisions of this
“underprivileged sectors.” These objections, however, Article.”
did not carry the day, as the members of the Thus, neither textual nor historical consideration
Constitutional Commission voted 32-0 in favor of the yields support for the view that the party-list system is
Monsod proposal. It is noteworthy that even those who designed exclusively for labor, peasant, urban poor,
spoke against the Monsod proposal did not vote indigenous cultural communities, women, and youth
against it. To uphold these objections now would be to sectors. As Commissioners Ople said in supporting the
overrule the Constitutional Commission and in effect Monsod proposal:
amend the Constitution. In my opinion, this will also create the stimulus for political
parties and mass organizations to seek common ground. For
_______________ example, we have the PDP-Laban and the UNIDO. I see no
reason why they should not be able to make common goals
Memorandum for petitioner Bayan Muna 13.
17
with mass organizations so that the very leadership of these
756
parties can be transformed through the participation of
756 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED mass organizations. And if this is true of the administration
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on parties, this will be true of others like the Partido ng Bayan
Elections which is now being formed. There is no question that they
In sum, a problem was placed before the will be attractive to many mass organizations. In the
Constitutional Commission that the existing opposition parties to which we belong, there will be a
“winner-take-all” one-seat district system of election stimulus for us to contact mass organizations so that with
their participation, the policies of such parties can be 3.​ (3)It is a foreign party or organization;
radically transformed because this amendment will create 4.​ (4)It is receiving support from any foreign
conditions that will challenge both the mass organizations government, foreign political party, foundation,
and the political parties to come together. And the party list organization, whether directly or through any of its
system is certainly available, although it is open to all the officers or members or indirectly through third
parties. It is understood that the parties will enter in the parties for partisan election purposes;
roll of the COMELEC the names of representatives of mass 5.​ (5)It violates or fails to comply with laws, rules or
organizations affiliated with them. So that we may, in time, regulations relating to elections;
develop this excellent system that they have in Europe 6.​ (6)It declares untruthful statements in its petition;
where labor organizations and cooperatives, for example, 7.​ (7)It has ceased to exist for at least one (1) year; or
distribute themselves either in the Social Democratic Party 8.​ (8)It fails to participate in the last two (2) preceding
and the Christian elections or fails to obtain at least two per
757 centum (2%) of the votes cast under the party-list
VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 75 system in the two (2) preceding elections for the
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on constituency in which it has registered.
Elections
Democratic Party in Germany, and their very presence Petitioners’ allegations that certain parties or
there has a transforming effect upon the philosophies and organizations, such as private respondents MAD and
the leadership of those parties.
18 Ang Buhay Hayaang Yumabong, are disqualified
With respect to the cancellation of any party registered under this provision are for the COMELEC to
under the party-list system, §6 of the Party-List determine after due notice and hearing. They are unfit
System Act provides: for resolution in these proceedings.
SEC. 6. Refusal and/or Cancellation of Registration.—The III.
COMELEC may, motu proprio or upon verified complaint of On the other hand, the majority states:
any interested party, refuse or cancel, after due notice and
hearing, the registration of any national, regional or _______________
sectoral party, organization or coalition on any of the
following grounds: II RECORD 568, session of Friday, Aug. 1, 1986.
18

758

1.​ (1)It is a religious sect or denomination, 758 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
organization or association organized for religious Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
purposes; Elections
2.​ (2)It advocates violence or unlawful means to seek The presumption is that the words in which the
its goal; constitutional provisions are couched express the objective
sought to be attained. In other words, verba legis still House of Representatives by enhancing their chances to
prevails. Only when the meaning of the words used is compete for and win seats in the legislature, and shall
unclear and equivocal should resort be made to extraneous provide the simplest scheme possible.
aids of construction and interpretation, such as the What this provision simply states is that the purpose
proceedings of the Constitutional Commission or of the party-list system is to promote proportional
Convention, in order to shed light on and ascertain the true representation in the election of representatives to the
intent or purpose of the provision being construed. House of Representatives and, that to achieve this end,
....
“a full, free and open party system in order to attain
Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution, relative to the
the broadest possible representation of party, sectoral
party-list system, is couched in clear terms: the mechanics
of the system shall be provided by law. Pursuant thereto, or group interests in the House of Representatives”
Congress enacted RA 7941. . . . Section 2 thereof shall be guar-
759
unequivocally states that the party-list system of electing
congressional representatives was designed to “enable VOL. 359, JUNE 26, 2001 759
underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties, and Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
who lack well-defined political constituencies but who could Elections
contribute to the formulation and enactment of appropriate anteed. Contrary to what the majority claims, §2 does
legislation that will benefit the nation as a whole . . .” not say that the party-list system is intended “to
With due respect, I think the majority misapprehends enableFilipino citizens belonging to marginalized and
the meaning of §2 of R.A. No. 7941. The provision underrepresented sectors, organizations, and parties,
reads: and who lack well-defined political constituencies but
SEC. 2. Declaration of Party.—The State shall promote who could contribute to the formulation and
proportional representation in the election of
enactment of appropriate legislation” to win seats in
representatives to the House of Representatives through a
the House of Representatives. What it says is that the
party-list system of registered national, regional and
sectoral parties or organizations or coalitions thereof, which policy of the law is “to promote proportional
will enable Filipino citizens belonging to marginalized and representation through a party-list system of
underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties, and registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or
who lack well-defined political constituencies but who could organizations or coalitions thereof, which will
contribute to the formulation and enactment of appropriate enableFilipino citizens belonging to marginalized and
legislation that will benefit the nation as a whole, to become underrepresented sectors, organizations, and parties,
members of the House of Representatives. Towards this and who lack well-defined political constituencies but
end, the State shall develop and guarantee a full, free and who could contribute to the formulation and
open party system in order to attain the broadest possible enactment of appropriate legislation” to win seats in
representation of party, sectoral or group interests in the
the House. For while the representation of Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
“marginalized and underrepresented” sectors is a basic Elections
purpose of the law, it is not its only purpose. As sectoral party or organization or a coalition of such parties
already explained, the aim of proportional or organiza tions, attaching thereto its constitution, bylaws,
representation is to enable those who cannot win in platform or program of government, list of officers, coalition
the “winner-take-air district elections a chance of agreement and other relevant information as the
winning. These groups are not necessarily limited to COMELEC may require: Provided, That the sectors shall
the sectors mentioned in §5, i.e., labor, peasants, include labor, peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor, indigenous
cultural communities, elderly, handicapped, women, youth,
fisherfolk, urban poor, indigenous cultural
veterans, overseas work ers, and professionals.
communities, the elderly, the handicapped, women, the
There would be no need to provide specifically for the
youth, veterans, overseas workers, and professionals.
sectors if the party-list system is reserved for them.
These groups can possibly include other sectors.
FOR THE FOREGOING REASONS, the petitions
Indeed, how can there be a “full, free and open
in these cases should be dismissed.
party system” if the election for the party list system is
Case remanded to COMELEC for further
to be limited to the sectors which are enumerated in §5
proceedings.
of the law, i.e., labor, peasants, fisherfolk, urban poor,
Notes.—Courts will decide a question otherwise
indigenous cultural communities, the elderly,
moot and academic if it is “capable of repetition, yet
handicapped, women, the youth, veterans, overseas
evading review.” (Alunan III vs. Mirasol, 276 SCRA
workers, and professionals? After all, what is provided
501 [1997])
for is “a party-list system of registered national,
To have meaningful representation, the elected
regional, and sectoral parties or organizations” each of
persons must have the mandate of a sufficient number
which is separately defined in §3 of the law.
of people. Otherwise, in a legislature that features the
That the party-list system is not limited to these
party-list system, the result might be the proliferation
groups is also clear from §5 of the law:
of small groups which are incapable of contributing
SEC. 5. Registration.—Any organized group of persons may
register as a party, organization or coalition for purposes of significant legislation, and which might even pose a
the party-list system by filing with the COMELEC not later threat to the stability of Congress. (Veterans
than ninety (90) days before the election a petition verified Federation Party vs. Commission on Elections, 342
by its president or secretary stating its desire to participate SCRA 244 [2000])
in the party-list system as a national, regional or
760 ——o0o——
760 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
761
© Copyright 2019 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights
reserved.
 VOL. 423, FEBRUARY 24, 2004 66 he or his representative, to the exclusion of the Secretary
Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on General, has the authority to endorse and sign, party
Elections nominations. The Secretary General vigorously disputes
this claim and maintains his own authority. Clearly, the
G.R. No. 161265. February 24, 2004. *

question of party identity or leadership has to be resolved if

LABAN NG DEMOKRATIKONG PILIPINO, the COMELEC is to ascertain whether the candidates are
represented by its Chairman EDGARDO J. ANGARA, legitimate party standard bearers or not. The repercussions
petitioner, vs. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS of the question of party identity and leadership do not end
and AGAPITO A. AQUINO, respondents. at the validity of the endorsement of the
Election Law; Political Parties; Commission on
Elections (COME-LEC); The ascertainment of the identity of _______________
a political party and its legitimate officers is a matter that is *
EN BANC.
well within the authority of the Commission on 666
Elections.–The COMELEC correctly stated that “the
666 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
ascertainment of the identity of [a] political party and its
legitimate officers” is a matter that is well within its Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on
authority. The source of this authority is no other than the Elections
fundamental law itself, which vests upon the COMELEC certificates of candidacy of persons claiming to be the
the power and function to enforce and administer all laws party’s standard bearer. The law grants a registered
and regulations relative to the conduct of an election. In the political party certain rights and privileges, which,
exercise of such power and in the discharge of such naturally, redound to the benefit of its candidates. It is also
function, the Commission is endowed with ample for this significant dimension that Sinaca is not applicable
“wherewithal” and “considerable latitude in adopting means in this case. As conceded in Sinacaitself, the Court will
and methods that will ensure the accomplishment of the have to assume jurisdiction to determine factional
great objectives for which it was created to promote free, controversies within a political party where a controlling
orderly and honest elections.” statute or clear legal right is involved. Verily, there is more
Same; Same; The repercussions of the question of party than one law, as well as a number of clear legal rights, that
identity and leadership do not end at the validity of the are at stake in the case at bar.
endorsement of the certificates of candidacy of persons Same; Same; Certificates of Candidacy; Corollary to the
claiming to be the party’s standard bearer; The Supreme right of a political party “to identify the people who
Court will have to assume jurisdiction to determine constitute the association and to select a standard bearer
factional controversies within a political party where a who best represents the party’s ideologies and preference” is
controlling statute or clear legal right is involved.–In the the right to exclude persons in its association and to not lend
case at bar, the Party Chairman, purporting to represent its name and prestige to those which it deems undeserving to
the LDP, contends that under the Party Constitution only represent its ideals; A certificate of candidacy makes known
to the COMELEC that the person therein mentioned has defined by the COMELEC itself, is who as between the
been nominated by a duly authorized political group Party Chairman and the Secretary General has the
empowered to act and that it reflects accurately the authority to
sentiment of the nominating body.–It is, therefore, in the 667
interest of every political party not to allow persons it had VOL. 423, FEBRUARY 24, 2004 667
not chosen to hold themselves out as representatives of the Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on
party. Corollary to the right of a political party “to identify Elections
the people who constitute the association and to select a sign certificates of candidacy of the official candidates
standard bearer who best represents the party’s ideologies of the party. Indeed, the
and preference” is the right to exclude persons in its petitioners’ Manifestation and Petition before the
association and to not lend its name and prestige to those COMELEC merely asked the Commission to recognize only
which it deems undeserving to represent its ideals. A those certificates of candidacy signed by petitioner Sen.
certificate of candidacy makes known to the COMELEC Angara or his authorized representative, and no other. To
that the person therein mentioned has been nominated by a resolve this simple issue, the COMELEC need only to turn
duly authorized political group empowered to act and that it to the Party Constitution. It need not go so far as to resolve
reflects accurately the sentiment of the nominating body. A the root of the conflict between the party officials. It need
candidate’s political party affiliation is also printed followed only resolve such questions as may be necessary in the
by his or her name in the certified list of candidates. A exercise of its enforcement powers.
candidate misrepresenting himself or herself to be a party’s Same; Same; Same; The COMELEC cannot grant a
candidate, therefore, not only misappropriates the party’s party official greater authority than what the party itself
name and prestige but foists a deception upon the grants, lest the same amount to a violation of the party’s
electorate, who may unwittingly cast its ballot for him or freedom of association.–Clearly, however, the above
her on the mistaken belief that he or she stands for the provision presupposes that the party president, chairman or
party’s principles. To prevent this occurrence, the secretary-general has been “duly authorized” by the party
COMELEC has the power and the duty to step in and to sign the certificate of candidacy. COMELEC Resolution
enforce the law not only to protect the party but, more No. 6453 cannot grant a party official greater authority
importantly, the electorate, in line with the Commission’s than what the party itself grants, lest such Resolution
broad constitutional mandate to ensure orderly elections. amount to a violation of the party’s freedom of association.
Same; Same; Same; To resolve the simple issue of Same; Same; Same; The lack of a political party’s
determining who as between the Party Chairman and the Secretary General of authority to sign documents or to
Secretary General has the authority to sign certificates of nominate candidates for the party would not result in the
candidacy of the official candidates of the party, the denial of due course to or the cancellation of the certificates
COMELEC need only to turn to the Party Constitution–it of candidacy he may have signed on behalf of the party–the
need not go so far as to resolve the root of the conflict candidates are simply deemed as not nominated by the party
between the party officials.–The only issue in this case, as and are considered independent candidates.–The lack of
Rep. Aquino’s authority to sign documents or to nominate of its irrational fear of treading, as respondent Aquino put
candidates for the LDP would not result in the denial of due it, on “unchartered” territories. But, as shown above, these
course to or the cancellation of the certificates of candidacyterritories have long been charted by jurisprudence and, in
he may have signed on behalf of the LDP. The exclusive any case, the COMELEC need not have sailed far from the
ground for the denial of due course to or the cancellation of shore to arrive at the correct conclusion. In truth, the
a certificate of candidacy for any elective office is that anyCOMELEC Resolution is indecision in the guise of equity.
material representation contained therein as required by Same; Same; The COMELEC, by dividing a political
law is false. Since the signature of Rep. Aquino was affixed party into “wings,” effectively diffused the party’s strength
either prior to, or on the basis of, theand undeniably emasculated its chance of obtaining the
challenged Resolution recognizing his authority to sign on Commission’s nod as the dominant minority party, and by
behalf of the LDP, the same would not constitute material allowing each wing to nominate different candidates, the
representation that is false. In such case, the candidates areCOMELEC planted the seeds of confusion among the
simply deemed as not nominated by the LDP and are electorate, who are apt to be confounded by two candidates
considered independent candidates pursuant to Section 7 of from a single political party.– Worse, the COMELEC
COMELEC Resolution No. 6453: SEC. 7. Effect of filing divided the LDP into “wings,” each of which may nominate
certificate of nomination.–A candidate who has not been candidates for every elective position. Both wings are also
nominated by a registered political party or its duly entitled to representatives in the election committees that
authorized representative, or whose nomination has not the Commission may create. In the event that the LDP is
been submitted by a registered political party . . . shall be accorded dominant minority party election status, election
considered as an independent candidate. returns of odd-numbered precincts shall be furnished the
Same; Same; Equity; For all its conceded merits, equity Angara wing and those of even-numbered precincts, the
is available only in the absence of law and not as its Aquino wing. By creating the two wings, the COMELEC
replacement.–From the foregoing, it is plain that the effectively diffused the LDP’s strength and undeniably
COMELEC misapplied equity in the present case. For all emasculated its chance of obtaining the Commission’s nod
its conceded merits, equity is available only in the absence as the dominant minority party. By allowing each wing to
of law and not as its replacement. Equity is described as nominate different candidates, the COMELEC planted the
justice without legality, seeds of confusion among the electorate, who are apt to be
668 confounded by two candidates from a single political party.
668 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED In Recabo, Jr. v. Commission on Elections, this Court
Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on declared that the electoral process envisions one candidate
Elections from a political party for each position, and disunity and
which simply means that it cannot supplant, although discord amongst members of a political party should not be
it may, as often happens, supplement the law. The allowed to create a mockery thereof. The admonition
COMELEC should have decided the case on the basis of the against mocking the electoral process not only applies to
party constitution and election laws. It chose not to because political parties but with greater force to the COMELEC.
 Same; Same; By according both wings representatives Same; Same; Political parties constitute a basic element
in the election committees, the COMELEC has eroded the of the democratic institutional apparatus–in modern times,
significance of political parties and effectively divided the the political party has become the instrument for the
opposition, and by splitting copies of the election returns organization of societies, performing an essential function in
between the two factions, the COMELEC has fractured both the management of succession to power, as well as in the
wings.–By according both wings representatives in the process of obtaining popular consent to the course of public
election committees, the COMELEC has eroded the policy.–It bears reminding respondent Commission of this
significance of political parties and effectively divided the Court’s pronouncement in Peralta v. Commission on
opposition. The COMELEC has lost sight of the unique Elections, which, while made in the backdrop of a
political situation of the Philippines where, to paraphrase parliamentary form of government, holds equally true
Justice Perfecto’s concurring opinion in Sotto, supra, the under the present government structure: . . . political
administration party has always been unnecessarily and parties constitute a basic element of the democratic
dangerously too big and the opposition party too small to be institutional apparatus. Government derives its strength
an effective check on the administration. The purpose of from the support, active or passive, of a coalition of
according dominant status and representation to a minority elements of society. In modern times, the political party has
party is become the instrument for the organization of societies.
669 This is predicated on the doctrine that government exists
VOL. 423, FEBRUARY 24, 2004 66 with the consent of the governed. Political parties perform
Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on an “essential function in the management of succession to
Elections power, as well as in the process of obtaining popular
precisely to serve as an effective check on the majority. consent to the course of public policy. They amass sufficient
The COMELEC performed a disservice to the opposition support to buttress the authority of governments; or, on the
and, ultimately, to the voting public, as contrary, they attract or organize discontent and
its Resolution facilitated, rather than forestalled, the dissatisfaction sufficient to oust the government. In either
division of the minority party. By splitting copies of the case they perform the function of the articulation of the
election returns between the two factions, the COMELEC interests and aspirations of a substantial segment of the
has fractured both wings. The practical purpose of citizenry, usually in ways contended to be promotive of the
furnishing a party with a copy of the election returns is to national weal.” The assailed COMELEC Resolution does not
allow it to tally the results of the elections at the precinct advance, but subverts, this philosophy behind political
level. Ultimately, it is a guard against fraud. Thus, resort to parties.
copies thereof may be had when the election returns are Same; Same; The constitutional policy towards a free
delayed, lost or destroyed, or when they appear to be and open party system envisions a system that shall “evolve
tampered or falsified. A split party without a complete set according to the free choice of the people,” not one molded
of election returns cannot successfully help preserve the and whittled by the COMELEC.–As if to rationalize its folly,
sanctity of the ballot. the COMELEC invokes the constitutional policy towards a
free and open party system. This policy, however, envisions established before any decision can conclusively be arrived
a system that shall “evolve according to the free choice of at. The absence of factual determination by the COMELEC
the people,” not one molded and whittled by the on the matters now being disputed by the parties hardly
COMELEC. When the Constitution speaks of a multi-party makes it feasible for this Court to rightly and decisively
system, it does not contemplate the COMELEC splitting rule on the case. Once again, I submit, the Supreme Court
parties into two. For doing just that, this pretender to the is being tasked to exercise its judicial power on something
throne where it should not as yet be asked.
670
670 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J., Dissenting Opinion:
Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on
Elections Election Law; Political Parties; The issue as to who
between the party Chairman and the Secretary General
of King Solomon acted whimsically and
shall nominate its official candidates is a purely internal
capriciously. Certiorarilies against it, indeed.
party concern, in the absence of statutes giving the courts
VITUG, J., Separate Opinion: jurisdiction over the same.–The contending parties raise the
issue as who between the petitioner, as LDP Chairman, and
Election Law; Political Parties; It does not appear that the respondent, as LDP Secretary General, shall nominate
the matter involved in this controversy is an internal matter its official candidates in the coming national elections.
that the political party itself should resolve–the Supreme Undoubtedly, this is to me a purely internal party concern,
Court is being tasked to exercise its judicial power on the determination of which rests solely within the party
something where it should not as yet be asked.–It does itself, in the absence of statutes giving the courts
appear to me that the matter involved in this controversy is jurisdiction over the same. The party has its own machinery
an internal matter that the political party itself should to govern such conflict. Consequently, this Court cannot
resolve. More importantly, the petition is replete with step into such private turf and dictate on the LDP party
factual problems which this Court cannot take on. The members who should be their official candidate for
conflicting claims of the parties, such as the alleged president.
intentional inaction of Senator Angara to convene the
National Congress of the party, the disputed membership of SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION in the Supreme Court.
the National Executive Council which passed the resolution Certiorari.
supporting the questioned actions of petitioner Angara, the
determination of an “extraordinary and emergency” The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
situation that would entitle the party chairman to act, the Demaree J.B. Raval for LDP.
validity of the actions taken at the behest of respondent 671
Aquino in the National Congress on 04 December 2003, are VOL. 423, FEBRUARY 24, 2004 671
but a few of the factual issues which need to be first
 Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on 1.​ A.The Honorable Commission recognizes [sic] only
Elections those Certificates of Candidacy to which are
attached Certificates of Nomination executed by
Felix D. Carao, Jr. and Mendoza & Mendoza Law
LDP Party Chairman Edgardo J. Angara or by such
Officefor private respondent.
other officers of the LDP whom he may authorize in
writing, and whose written authorizations shall be
TINGA, J.:
deposited with the Honorable Commission by the
LDP General Counsel.
The Bible tells the story of how two women came to
2.​ B.The Honorable Commission declares [sic] as a
King Solomon to decide who among them is the baby’s nullity, denies [sic] due course or cancels [sic] all
true mother. King Solomon, in his legendary wisdom, Certificates of Candidacy not endorsed by LDP
awarded the baby to the woman who gave up her claim Party Chairman Angara or by such other LDP
after he threatened to split the baby into two. officials as may be authorized by him.
It is fortunate that the two women did not ask the 3.​ C.The Honorable Commission takes [sic] note of the
Commission on Elections (COMELEC) to decide the designation of Ambassador Enrique “Ike” A.
baby’s fate; otherwise, it would have cut the baby in Zaldivar as Acting Secretary General of the LDP,
half. For that is what the COMELEC exactly did in and for the Honorable Commission to honor and
this case. recognize the official acts, to the exclusion of
everyone, of Ambassador Zaldivar for and in behalf
On December 8, 2003, the General Counsel of the
of the LDP as Secretary General. 1

Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino (LDP), a registered

political party, informed the COMELEC by way _______________
of Manifestationthat only the Party Chairman,
Senator Edgardo J. Angara, or his authorized 1
Rollo, p. 58.
representative may endorse the certificate of 672
candidacy of the party’s official candidates. The 672 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
same Manifestation stated that Sen. Angara had Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on
placed the LDP Secretary General, Representative Elections
Agapito A. Aquino, on “indefinite forced leave.” In the On December 16, 2003, Rep. Aquino filed
meantime, Ambassador Enrique A. Zaldivar was his Comment, contending that the Party-Chairman
designated Acting Secretary General. does not have the authority to impose disciplinary
The Manifestation concluded with this prayer: sanctions on the Secretary General. As
the Manifestation filed by the LDP General Counsel
has no basis, Rep. Aquino asked the COMELEC to _______________
disregard the same. 2
Resolution Ratifying and Confirming the Covenant of National
On December 17, 2003, the parties agreed to file a Unity, the Declaration of Unity entered into by Party Chairman Edgardo
joint manifestation pending which the proceedings J. Angara, and All Acts and Decisions taken by him to Enforce and
Implement the same; Ratifying and Confirming All other Acts and
were deemed suspended. On December 22, 2003, Decisions of Chairman Angara and other Governing Bodies to Preserve
however, only the LDP General Counsel filed the Integrity, Credibility, Unity and Solidarity of the Party; and, further
an Urgent Manifestation reiterating the contents of the Reiterating the Vote of Confidence of the National Executive Council in,
and support to, the continued efforts of Chairman Angara to Unite the
December 8, 2003 Manifestation. The COMELEC also Political Opposition.
received a Letter from Rep. Aquino stating that the 673
parties were unable to arrive at a joint manifestation. VOL. 423, FEBRUARY 24, 2004 673
The next day, the LDP General Counsel filed Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on
a Second Urgent Manifestation disputing newspaper Elections
accounts that Rep. Aquino had suspended Sen. Angara Pilipinas–LABAN (PDP-LABAN) forged a coalition to form
as Party Chairman. the Koalisyon ng Nagkakaisang Pilipino (KNP);
On December 26, 2003, the COMELEC issued WHEREAS, the Executive Committee of the KNP
an Orderrequiring the parties to file a verified petition. subsequently adopted its resolution entitled: “Resolution
It turned out that, two days before, Sen. Angara had Choosing Mr. Fernando Poe, Jr. as the Standard Bearer of
submitted a verified Petition, in essence, reiterating the Koalisyon ng Nagkakaisang Pilipino (KNP) for
the contents of its previous Manifestations. Attached President of the Republic of the Philippines in the May 10,
to the Petition was a Resolution adopted by the LDP
2
2004 National Elections”;
....
National Executive Council, stating:
WHEREAS, the process of unification of the political
WHEREAS, on September 25, 2003, the National Executive
opposition and the actions taken in connection therewith by
Council of the Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino (LDP)
Chairman Angara and by other governing bodies of the
convened and unanimously passed a resolution granting
LDP required the taking of immediate and forceful action
full authority to Party Chairman Edgardo J. Angara to
by them to preserve and protect the integrity, credibility,
enter, negotiate and conclude a coalition agreement with
unity and solidarity of the LDP, and ensure the attainment
other like-minded opposition parties, aggrupations and
of unification of the political opposition;
interest groups with the sole purpose of uniting the political
WHEREAS, such immediate and forceful action include
opposition and fielding a unity ticket for the May 10, 2004
those that have to do with pre-emptive efforts to diffuse the
elections;
chaos, confusion and disunity projected by the
WHEREAS, on December 3, 2003, the LDP, together
pronouncements and acts of some officers and members to
with the Puwersa ng Masang Pilipino (PMP) and the
the general membership of the LDP and the electorate, such
Partido Demokratiko ng
as the one taken by the Regional Committee for Region VI Rep. Aquino filed his Answer to the Petition on
(Western Visayas) on December 6, 2003; the enforcement of December 30, 2003. The COMELEC heard the parties
order in the LDP through the voice of a central leadership on oral arguments on the same day, after which the
in command in an otherwise extraordinary and emergency case was submitted for resolution.
situation, such as the one taken by Party Chairman Angara
Pending resolution, a Certificate of Nomination of
on December 6, 2003; the filing of the Manifestation with
Sen. Panfilo Lacson as LDP candidate for President
the COMELEC on the matter of the authored signatories
for the nominations and, the adoption of resolutions by the was filed with the COMELEC. The Certificate of
regional committees affirming their trust and confidence in Nomination was signed by Rep. Aquino as LDP
Chairman Angara, and authoring him to choose the Secretary General.
presidential standard bearer for the May 10, 2004 elections; On January 6, 2004, the COMELEC came to a
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT decision.
RESOLVED, AS IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, By the The Commission identified the sole issue as “who
National Executive Council, to ratify and confirm the among the [LDP] officers [are] authored to
Covenant of National Unity, the Declaration of Unity authenticate before the Commission that the person
entered into by Party Chairman Edgardo J. Angara, and all filing the certificate of candidacy as party nominee for
acts and decisions taken by him to enforce and implement
a certain position is the official candidate of the party
the same;
chosen in accordance with its Constitution.” 4

RESOLVED, FURTHER, To ratify and confirm all other

acts and decisions of Chairman Angara and other governing The COMELEC recognized that it “has the
bodies to preserve the integrity, credibility, unity and authority to act on matters pertaining to ‘the
solidarity of the LDP; and, ascertainment of the identity of [a] political party and
RESOLVED, FINALLY, To reiterate the vote of its legitimate officers . . .’ ” In the same breath,
5

confidence of the National Executive Council in, and however, it held that “internal party matters and
support to, the continued efforts of Chairman Angara to wranglings [sic] are purely for the party members to
unite the political opposition.
3
settle among themselves and any unsettled
controversy should be brought to the proper forum
_______________
with jurisdiction.” The “question of who was suspended
3
Rollo, pp. 63-65. by whom” was thus left for such proper forum to
674 resolve. Noting that “the intramurals in the LDP as an
6

674 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED internal party matter seems to be irreconcilable for the
Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on present when the filing of Certificate of Candidacy and
Elections Certificate of Nomination are about to reach the
deadline,” the COMELEC disposed of the Petition in further entitled to and be accorded the rights and privileges
the following fashion: with corresponding legal obligations under Election Laws.” 7

“WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is Commissioners Luzviminda G. Tancangco, Ralph C.

GRANTED with LEGAL EQUITY for both Petitioner and Lantion, Resurreccion Z. Borra and Florentino A.
Oppositor. The candidates for President down to the last Tuason, Jr. concurred in the Resolution authored by
Sangguniang Bayan Kagawad nominated and endorsed by Commissioner Rufino S.B. Javier. Chair Benjamin S.
LDP Chairman Edgardo J. Angara are recognized the Abalos, Sr., joined by Commissioner Mehol K. Sadain,
Commission as official candidates of LDP “Angara Wing.” submitted dissenting opinions.
The candidates from President down to the last
Sen. Angara thus filed the present petition
Sangguniang Bayan Kagawad as nominated and endorsed
for Certiorari assailing the COMELEC Resolution for
8

by LDP Secretary General Agapito “Butz” Aquino are

recognized as official candidates of LDP “Aquino Wing.” having been issued with grave abuse of discretion.
“Consequently, each faction or “Wing” is entitled to a Thereafter, Rep. Aquino filed his Comment.
representative to any election committee to which it may be The Office of the Solicitor General submitted
entitled as created by the a Manifestation and Motion praying for the granting of
the Petition. The COMELEC thus filed a
_______________ separate Comment to the Petition.
4
Id., at p. 44. The COMELEC correctly stated that “the
5
Id., at p. 46. ascertainment of the identity of [a] political party and
6
Id., at p. 43. its legitimate officers” is a matter that is well within
675
its authority. The source of this authority is no other
VOL. 423, FEBRUARY 24, 2004 67 than the fundamental law itself, which vests upon the
Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on COMELEC the power and function to enforce and
Elections administer all laws and regulations relative to the
Commission for the May 10, 2004 elections. For the copies conduct of an election. In the 9

of the election returns, the “Angara Wing” will be entitled

to the copies corresponding to odd number of precincts, _______________
that is, Precinct Nos. 1, 3, 5, etc., and for the “Aquino
Wing” to the even number of precincts, that is Precinct Id., at pp. 47-48. Emphasis in the original.
7

Nos. 2, 4, 6, etc. This is on the assumption that the LDP or Sen. Angara was authorized to file the Petition pursuant to a
8

as a party within a registered Political Coalition becomes a Resolution of the LDP National Executive Council issued adopted
and confirmed on January 8, 2004, and stating:
recognized and denominated as a Dormant [sic] Minority “RESOLVED, That Senator Edgardo J. Angara, LDP Party Chairman, be as
Party under the Election Laws. The two LDP “Wings” are he is hereby, authorized to sign, verify, and cause the filing with the Supreme
Court, of the Petition for Certiorari from the Resolution dated January 6,
2004 of the Commission on Elections in Election Matter No. 03-018 entitled:
“In Re[:] Certificates of Candidacy of Official Candidates of the Laban ng or not a political party shall retain its registration on the
Demokratikong Pilipino for the May 10, 2004 Elections, Laban ng
Demokratikong Pilipino, Petitioner.” [Rollo, p. 38.]
basis of its showing in the preceding elections, etc. These
9
CONSTITUTION, art. IX-C, sec. 2 (1). matters include the ascertainment of the identity of the
676 political party and its legitimate officers responsible for its
676 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED acts and the resolution of such controversies as the one now
Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on before it where one party appears to be divided into two
wings under separate leaders each claiming to be the
Elections
president of the entire party . . . . [Emphasis supplied.]
exercise of such power and in the discharge of such Likewise in Palmares v. Commission on Elections, to 12

function, the Commission is endowed with ample which the assailed Resolution made reference and
“wherewithal” and “considerable latitude in adopting which involved the Nacionalista Party, this Court 13

means and methods that will ensure the ruled:

accomplishment of the great objectives for which it . . . that the COMELEC has jurisdiction over the issue of
was created to promote free, orderly and honest leadership in a political party. Under the Constitution, the
elections.” 10
COMELEC is empowered to register political parties [Sec.
Thus, in Kalaw v. Commission on Elections which 2(5), Article IX-C]. Necessarily, the power to act on behalf of
involved the leadership fight in the Liberal Party, this 11
a party and the responsibility for the acts of such political
Court held: party must be fixed in certain persons acting as its officers.
. . . that the respondent [COMELEC] has jurisdiction to In the
hear and decide SP Case No. 85-021 [involving a petition to
_______________
prohibit Eva Estrada Kalaw “from usurping or using the
title or position of President of the Liberal Party”] in view of 10
Sanchez v. Commission on Elections, 199 Phil. 617; 114 SCRA
its powers under Article IX-C, Section 2, of the Constitution 454 (1982), citing Cauton v. Commission on Elections, L-25467, April 27,
to, among others, enforce and administer all laws relative to 1967, 19 SCRA 911(1967).
the conduct of elections, decide all questions affecting 11
G.R. No. 80218, November 5, 1987.
12
G.R. Nos. 86177-78, August 31, 1989.
elections, register and regulate political parties, and insure 13
Rollo, p. 46, at note 12.
orderly elections. These powers include the determination 677
of the conflicting claims made in SP Case No. 85-021, which VOL. 423, FEBRUARY 24, 2004 677
are likely to cause confusion among the electorate if not
resolved. Additionally, the COMELEC is mandated by the Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on
Election Code to inter alia require candidates to specify Elections
their political party affiliation in their certificates of exercise of the power to register political parties, the
candidacy, allow political parties to appoint watchers, limit COMELEC must determine who these officers are.
the expenditures of each political party, determine whether Consequently, if there is any controversy as to leadership,
the COMELEC may, in a proper case brought before it,
resolve the issue incidental to its power to register political by the proper tribunals of the party itself or by the electors
parties. at the polls. Similarly, in the absence of specific
This Court then proceeded to quote from Kalaw, supra. constitutional or legislative regulations defining how
The two cited decisions find support in Sumulong v. nominations are to be made, or prohibiting nominations
Commission on Elections and Sotto v. Commission on
14 from being made in certain ways, political parties may
Elections where this Court, in resolving the issue as to
15
handle such affairs, including nominations, in such manner
as party rules may establish. [Emphasis supplied.]
who between the factions of a political party was
entitled to nominate election inspectors, necessarily _______________
settled claims to the party’s leadership. Both cases
were decided without question on the COMELEC’s 14
70 Phil. 703 (1940).
76 Phil. 516 (1946).
power to determine such claims. In conformity with
15

16
373 Phil. 896; 315 SCRA 266 (1999).
jurisprudence, this Court did not identify the 678
COMELEC’s jurisdiction as an issue when this case 678 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
was heard on oral argument. Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on
There is no inconsistency between the above cases Elections
on the one hand and this Court’s more recent ruling
Sinaca, unlike previous cases, did not involve the
in Sinaca v. Mula on the other. In the latter case, this
16

question of party identity or leadership; hence, it was

Court held:
not necessary for the COMELEC to delve therein.
A political party has the right to identify the people who
None of the candidates involved in that case were
constitute the association and to select a standard bearer
who best represents the party’s ideologies and preference. claiming to be the political party’s sole candidate.
Political parties are generally free to conduct their internal In the case at bar, the Party Chairman, purporting
affairs free from judicial supervision; this common law to represent the LDP, contends that under the Party
principle of judicial restraint, rooted in the constitutionally Constitution only he or his representative, to the
protected right of free association, serves the public interest exclusion of the Secretary General, has the authority
by allowing the political processes to operate without undue to endorse and sign, party nominations. The Secretary
interference. Thus, the rule is that the determination of General vigorously disputes this claim and maintains
disputes as to party nominations rests with the party, in the his own authority. Clearly, the question of party
absence of statutes giving the court’s [sic] jurisdiction. identity or leadership has to be resolved if the
Quintessentially, where there is no controlling statute or
COMELEC is to ascertain whether the candidates are
clear legal right involved, the court will not assume
legitimate party standard bearers or not.
jurisdiction to determine factional controversies within a
political party, but will leave the matter for determination The repercussions of the question of party identity
and leadership do not end at the validity of the
endorsement of the certificates of candidacy of persons 679
claiming to be the party’s standard bearer. The law VOL. 423, FEBRUARY 24, 2004 679
grants a registered political party certain rights and Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on
privileges, which, naturally, redound to the benefit of
17 Elections
its candidates. It is also for this significant dimension Registered political parties whose candidates obtained
that Sinaca is not applicable in this case. As conceded at least ten percent (10%) of the total votes cast in the
in Sinaca itself, the Court will have to assume next preceding senatorial election shall each have a
jurisdiction to determine factional controversies within watcher and/or representative in the procurement and
a political party where a controlling statute or clear watermarking of papers to be used in the printing of
legal right is involved. Verily, there is more than one
18
election returns and official ballots and in the printing,
law, as well as a number of clear legal rights, that are numbering, storage, and distribution thereof. Finally,
23

at stake in the case at bar. a candidate and his political party are authorized to
The law accords special treatment to political spend more per voter than a candidate without a
parties. The dominant majority party, the dominant political party.24

minority party as determined by the COMELEC, for It is, therefore, in the interest of every political
instance, is entitled to a copy of the election party not to allow persons it had not chosen to hold
returns. The six (6) accredited major political parties
19
themselves out as representatives of the party.
may nominate the principal watchers to be designated Corollary to the right of a political party “to identify
by the Commission. The two principal watchers
20
the people who constitute the association and to select
representing the ruling coalition and the dominant a standard bearer who best represents the party’s
opposition coalition in a precinct shall, if available, ideologies and preference” is the right to exclude
25

affix their signatures and thumbmarks on the election persons in its association and to not lend its name and
returns for that precinct. Three (3) of the six
21
prestige to those which it deems undeserving to
accredited major political parties are entitled to represent its ideals. A certificate of candidacy makes
receive copies of the certificate of canvass. 22
known to the COMELEC that the person therein
mentioned has been nominated by a duly authorized
_______________
political group empowered to act and that it reflects
17
OMNIBUS ELECTION CODE, sec. 60. accurately the sentiment of the nominating body. A 26

18
Note 13, supra. candidate’s political party affiliation is also printed
19
Rep. Act No. 7166, sec. 27, as amended by Rep. Act No. 8173. followed by his or her name in the certified list of
Id., sec. 26.
candidates. A candidate misrepresenting himself or
20
27
21
Rep. Act No. 6646, sec. 12.
22
Rep. Act No. 7166, sec. 29. herself to be a party’s candidate, therefore, not only
misappropriates the party’s name and prestige but authority to sign certificates of candidacy of the official
foists a deception upon the electorate, who may candidates of the party. Indeed, the
unwittingly cast its ballot for him or her on the petitioners’ Manifestation and Petition before the
mistaken belief that he or she stands for the party’s COMELEC merely asked the Commission to recognize
principles. To prevent this occurrence, the COMELEC only those certificates of candidacy signed by
has the power and the duty to step in and enforce the petitioner Sen. Angara or his authorized
law not only to protect the party but, more representative, and no other.
importantly, the electorate, in line with the To resolve this simple issue, the COMELEC need
Commission’s broad constitutional mandate to ensure only to turn to the Party Constitution. It need not go
orderly elections. so far as to resolve the root of the conflict between the
Having revisited and clarified the jurisdiction of party officials. It need only resolve such questions as
COMELEC to rule upon questions of party identity may be necessary in the exercise of its enforcement
and leadership as an incident to its enforcement powers.
powers, this Court cannot help but be baffled by the The LDP has a set of national officers composed of,
COMELEC’s ruling declining to inquire into which among others, the Party Chairman and the Secretary
party officer General. The Party Chairman is the Chief Executive
28

Officer of the Party, whose powers and functions

_______________
include:
23
Rep. Act No. 6646, sec. 8.
(1) To represent the Party in all external affairs and
24
Rep. Act No. 7166, sec. 13. concerns, sign documents for and on its behalf, and call the
25
Sinaca v. Mula, supra. meetings and be the presiding officer of the National
26
Alialy v. Commission on Elections, L-16165, July 31, 1961, 2 Congress and the National Executive Council . . . .
29

SCRA 957. The Secretary General, on the other hand, assists the
27 Rep. Act. No. 6646, sec. 4.
680
Party Chairman in overseeing the day-to-day
680 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED operations of the Party. Among his powers and
functions is:
Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on
(1) When empowered by the Party Chairman, to sign
Elections documents for and on behalf of the Party . . . .
30

has the authority to sign and endorse certificates of The Secretary General’s authority to sign documents,
candidacy of the party’s nominees. therefore, is only a delegated power, which originally
The only issue in this case, as defined by the pertains to the Party Chairman.
COMELEC itself, is who as between the Party
Chairman and the Secretary General has the
 Rep. Aquino claims that he was authorized to COMELEC, through which he informed the
exercise to sign the party candidates’ certificates of Commission that Rep. Aquino’s had been placed on
candidacy in the previous elections. Indeed, the indefinite forced leave and that Ambassador Zaldivar
COMELEC found that: has been designated Acting Secretary General, who
“shall henceforth exercise all the powers and functions
_______________
of the Secretary General under the Constitution and
28
LDP Constitution, art. VI, sec. 1 (1) and (4). By-Laws of the LDP.” As the prerogative to empower
32

29
Id., sec. 5. Emphasis supplied. Rep. Aquino to sign documents devolves upon Sen.
30
Id., sec. 9. Emphasis supplied. Angara, so he may choose, at his discretion, to
681 withhold or revoke such power.
VOL. 423, FEBRUARY 24, 2004 68 Both respondents Rep. Aquino and COMELEC also
Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on cited Section 6 of COMELEC Resolution No. 6453 as 33

Elections basis for the Party Secretary General’s authority to

In fact, during the May 14, 2001 elections, oppositor sign certificates of candidacy. Said Section 6 states:
Agapito “Butz” Aquino, as LDP Secretary General, was SEC. 6. Certificate of nomination of official candidates by
authorized by the LDP to sign for the Certificates of political party.–The certificate of nomination of registered
Nomination of the LDP Senatorial Candidates, including political parties or coalitions of political parties of their
the Certificate of Nomination for Senatorial Candidate official candidates shall be filed not later than the last day
Edgardo J. Angara, a copy of said Certificate of Nomination for filing of certificates of candidacy, which is January 2,
and a copy of the Certificate for Senator Edgardo J. Angara 2004 duly signed and attested under oath by the party
are attached as Annexes “A” and “B”, respectively. This president, chairman, secretary-general or any other duly
action by Secretary General Aquino is in accordance with authorized officer and shall bear the acceptance of the
the Constitution and By-laws of LDP, not questioned by the nominee by affixing his signature in the space provided
LDP signed by its Secretary General. This revocation has therein. [Emphasis and underscoring supplied.]
not been revoked or recalled by the National Congress of
the LDP which is the one authorized to nominate _______________
candidates for President and Vice-President, respectively.
31

Assuming that Rep. Aquino previously had such 31

Rollo, p. 45.
32
Id., at pp. 57, 85.
authority, this Court cannot share the COMELEC’s 33
Guidelines on the Filing of Certificates of Candidacy and
finding that the same “has not been revoked or Nomination of Official Candidates of Registered Political Parties in
recalled.” No revocation of such authority can be more Connection with the May 10, 2004 National and Local Elections.
explicit that the totality of Sen. 682
Angara’s Manifestations and Petition before the 682 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
 Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on Party, gross violation of the Party Constitution, and
Elections other divisive acts inimical to the interest of the party
Clearly, however, the above provision presupposes that and its members. Rep. Aquino, as Secretary General,
the party president, chairman or secretary-general has created a committee composed of three (3) members of
been “duly authorized” by the party to sign the the LDP National
certificate of candidacy. COMELEC Resolution No.
_______________
6453 cannot grant a party official greater authority
than what the party itself grants, lest such Resolution 34
The governing bodies of the Party are: (1) the Municipal
amount to a violation of the party’s freedom of Committee, (2) the City Committee, (3) the Congressional District
association. Committee, (4) the Provincial Committee, (5) the Regional
Committee, for each region, including the National Capital Region
Neither does the Party Secretary General have the and Autonomous Regions, and (6) the National Congress. [LDP
power to nominate the official candidates of the LDP. Constitution, art. V, sec. 1.] The first four Committees and the
That power resides in the governing bodies of the Autonomous Region Regional Committee also act as conventions to
choose the official candidates of the Party for the elective offices in
Party. In particular, the National Congress, which is
34

their corresponding political units. [LDP Constitution, art. V, sec.

the highest policy-making and governing body of the 3(7), sec. 5 in relation to sec. 3(7), sec. 7 (2), sec. 9 (5) and sec. 13.]
Party, has the power 35
LDP Constitution, art. V, sec. 1.
(6) To nominate the official candidates of the Party for 683
President, Vice President, and Senators, and, whenever the VOL. 423, FEBRUARY 24, 2004 683
corresponding conventions fail to meet or to make the Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on
requisite nominations, to nominate the official candidates Elections
for municipal city, congressional district, provincial and
Executive Council to investigate the complaint and
regional elective offices . . . .
35

recommend appropriate action thereon. On December

Not only does Rep. Aquino insist on his power to sign
12, 2003, the investigating committee issued a
Certificates of Candidacy on behalf of the LDP but he
resolution placing Sen. Angara under preventive
would also deny Sen. Angara that power on account of
suspension effective immediately and directing him to
the latter’s preventive suspension. It seems, however,
refrain from performing acts in behalf of the party
that respondent has abandoned this tack by the
until the committee finishes its investigation and
silence of his Memorandum on the matter.
submits its final recommendations.
In any case, it appears that on November 28, 2003,
The authority to create the investigating committee
Representative Rolex Suplico, LDP Region VI Regional
supposedly rests on Section 9 (4), Article VI of the LDP
Chairman, filed a complaint with Rep. Aquino against
Constitution, which enumerates the powers and
Party Chairman Sen. Angara for disloyalty to the
functions of the Secretary General:
(4) With the concurrence of the Party Chairman, to enforce OMNIBUS ELECTION CODE, sec. 78.
37

Party discipline . . . . [Emphasis supplied.] 684

Evidently, just as Rep. Aquino has no power to sign 684 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
and nominate candidates in behalf of the LDP, neither Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on
does he have the power to enforce Party discipline or, Elections
as an incident thereto, to create an investigating SEC. 7. Effect of filing certificate of nomination.–A
committee, without the Party Chairman’s concurrence. candidate who has not been nominated by a registered
Much less does the investigating committee so created political party or its duly authorized representative, or
have the power to place the Party Chairman under whose nomination has not been submitted by a registered
political party . . . shall be considered as an independent
preventive suspension since its authority stems from a
candidate.
nullity. Simply put, the spring has no source.
COMELEC Commissioner Sadain referred to the
The lack of Rep. Aquino’s authority to sign
above provision in his Dissenting Opinion, and this
documents or to nominate candidates for the LDP
Court finds refreshing wisdom–so sorely wanting in
would not result in the denial of due course to or the
the majority opinion–in his suggestion that:
cancellation of the certificates of candidacy he may All other party members representing themselves to be
have signed on behalf of the LDP. The exclusive 36
candidates of the party shall not be deprived of their right
ground for the denial of due course to or the to file their respective certificates of candidacy and run for
cancellation of a certificate of candidacy for any office, if so qualified, but that they shall not be accorded the
elective office is that any material representation rights and privileges reserved by election laws for official
contained therein as required by law is false. Since 37
nominees of registered political parties. Instead, they shall
the signature of Rep. Aquino was affixed either prior be treated as independent candidates. 38

to, or on the basis of, the From the foregoing, it is plain that the COMELEC
challenged Resolution recognizing his authority to sign misapplied equity in the present case. For all its
on behalf of the LDP, the same would not constitute conceded merits, equity is available only in the
material representation that is false. In such case, the absence of law and not as its replacement. Equity is 39

candidates are simply deemed as not nominated by the described as justice without legality, which simply
LDP and are considered independent candidates means that it cannot supplant, although it may, as
pursuant to Section 7 of COMELEC Resolution No. often happens, supplement the law. The COMELEC
40

6453: should have decided the case on the basis of the party
constitution and election laws. It chose not to because
_______________ of its irrational fear of treading, as respondent Aquino
36
See Alialy v. Commission on Elections, supra.
put it, on “unchartered” territories. But, as shown
41
above, these territories have long been charted by confusion among the electorate, who are apt to be
jurisprudence and, in any case, the COMELEC need confounded by two candidates from a single political
not have sailed far from the shore to arrive at the party. In Recabo, Jr. v. Commission on Elections, this
42

correct conclusion. In truth, the Court declared that the electoral process envisions one
COMELEC Resolution is indecision in the guise of candidate from a political party for each position, and
equity. disunity and discord amongst members of a political
Worse, the COMELEC divided the LDP into party should not be allowed to create a mockery
“wings,” each of which may nominate candidates for thereof. The admonition against mocking the electoral
every elective position. Both wings are also entitled to process not only applies to political parties but with
representatives in the election committees that the greater force to the COMELEC.
Commission may create. In the event that the LDP is By according both wings representatives in the
accorded dominant minority party election status, election committees, the COMELEC has eroded the
election returns significance of political parties and effectively divided
the opposition. The COMELEC has lost sight of the
_______________
unique political situation of the Philippines where, to
38
Rollo, p. 50. paraphrase Justice Perfecto’s concurring opinion
39
Tankiko v. Cezar, G.R. No. 131277, 362 Phil. 184; 302 SCRA in Sotto, supra, the administration party has always
559(1999). been unnecessarily and dangerously too big and the
Ibid.
opposition party too small to be an effective check on
40

41
Comment, p. 20.
685 the administration. The purpose of according
VOL. 423, FEBRUARY 24, 2004 68 dominant status and representation to a minority
Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on party is precisely to serve as an effective check on the
Elections majority. The COMELEC performed a disservice to the
opposition and, ultimately, to the voting public, as
of odd-numbered precincts shall be furnished the
its Resolutionfacilitated, rather than forestalled, the
Angara wing and those of even-numbered precincts,
division of the minority party.
the Aquino wing.
By splitting copies of the election returns between
By creating the two wings, the COMELEC
the two factions, the COMELEC has fractured both
effectively diffused the LDP’s strength and undeniably
wings. The practical purpose of furnishing a party
emasculated its chance of obtaining the Commission’s
with a copy of the election returns is to allow it to tally
nod as the dominant minority party.
the results of the elections at the precinct level.
By allowing each wing to nominate different
Ultimately, it is a guard against fraud. Thus, resort to
candidates, the COMELEC planted the seeds of
copies thereof may be had when the election returns case, they perform the function of the articulation of the
are delayed, lost or destroyed, or when they appear to
43 interests and aspirations of a substantial segment of the
be tampered or falsified. A 44 citizenry, usually in ways contended to be promotive of the
national weal.”
_______________ The assailed COMELEC Resolution does not advance,
but subverts, this philosophy behind political parties.
42
G.R. No. 134293, June 21, 1999, 308 SCRA 793.
43
Omnibus Election Code, sec. 233.
As if to rationalize its folly, the COMELEC invokes
44
Id., sec. 235. the constitutional policy towards a free and open party
686 system. This policy, however, envisions a system that
46

686 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED shall “evolve according to the free choice of the
Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on people,” not one molded and whittled by the
47

Elections COMELEC. When the Constitution speaks of a

split party without a complete set of election returns multi-party system, it does not contemplate the
cannot successfully help preserve the sanctity of the COMELEC splitting parties into two. For doing just
ballot. that, this pretender to the throne of King Solomon
It bears reminding respondent Commission of this acted whimsically and capriciously. Certiorari lies
Court’s pronouncement in Peralta v. Commission on against it, indeed.
Elections, which, while made in the backdrop of a
45 WHEREFORE, the assailed
parliamentary form of government, holds equally true COMELEC Resolution is ANNULLED and
under the present government structure: the Petition is GRANTED IN PART. Respondent
. . . political parties constitute a basic element of the Commission on Elections is directed to recognize as
democratic institutional apparatus. Government derives its official candidates of the Laban ng Demokratikong
strength from the support, active or passive, of a coalition of Pilipino only those whose Certificates of Candidacy are
elements of society. In modern times the political party has signed by LDP Party Chairman Senator Edgardo J.
become the instrument for the organization of societies. Angara or his duly authorized representative/s.
This is predicated on the doctrine that government exists
with the consent of the governed. Political parties perform _______________
an “essential function in the management of succession to
power, as well as in the process of obtaining popular 45
L-47771, March 11, 1978, 82 SCRA 30.
consent to the course of public policy. They amass sufficient
46
Comment, p. 6.
47
CONSTITUTION, art. IX-C, sec. 6.
support to buttress the authority of governments; or, on the
687
contrary, they attract or organize discontent and
VOL. 423, FEBRUARY 24, 2004 687
dissatisfaction sufficient to oust the government. In either
 Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on the LDP for president and vice-president in the event
Elections that its LDP National Congress does not, or fails to,
SO ORDERED. convene. He states that the National Executive
Panganiban, Quisumbing, Ynares-Santiago, Ca Council has met on 22 December 2003, where
rpio, Austria-Martinez, Carpio-Morales, Callejo, thirty-six (36) cut of forty (40) members of the Council
Sr. and Azcuna, JJ., concur. attended, during which a resolution “ratifying and
Davide, Jr. (C.J.), In the result.
_______________
Puno, J., On Leave.
Vitug, J., Please see separate opinion. 1
To act on such extraordinary or emergency matters, especially
Sandoval-Gutierrez, J., Please see those not envisioned or foreseen by this Constitution, which cannot
my dissenting opinion. await the call and holding of a meeting of the National Congress or
the National Executive Council, upon consultation, whenever
Corona, J., I join in the dissenting opinion of practicable with other Party leaders; Provided, that he shall
Justice Gutierrez. thereafter report any such action taken by him to the Congress or the
SEPARATE OPINION Council, whichever meets first.
688
VITUG, J.: 688 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on
The instant petition fundamentally calls on the Court Elections
to determine who between Senator Edgardo J. Angara, confirming the covenant of national unity, the
the Chairman and Representative Agapito A. Aquino, declaration of unity entered into by party Chairman
the Secretary General, of the Laban ng Edgardo J. Angara, and all acts and decisions taken by
Demokratikong Pilipino (LDP), has the power and the him to enforce and implement the same; ratifying and
authority under the LDP Constitution to nominate confirming likewise all other acts and decisions of
official candidates of the party and to correspondingly Chairman Angara, and other governing bodies to
sign and endorse the certificate of nomination. The preserve the integrity, credibility, unity and solidarity
contending parties have performed acts which they, of the party; and, further reiterating the vote of
respectively, claim to be within the mandate of the confidence of the national executive council in, and
LDP Constitution. support to, the continued efforts of Chairman Angara
Petitioner Angara asserts that long-standing LDP to unite the political opposition,” has been adopted.
practice, as well as the provision of Section 5.5, Article Respondent Aquino assails the resolution of the
VI, of the LDP Constitution, empowers him as the
1
National Executive Council in that, allegedly, no
party Chairman to nominate the official candidates of proper notices have been sent for the holding of the
meeting held on 22 December 2003 and that, on the Congress on 04 December 2003, are but a few of the
basis of LDP records, only thirteen (13) members of factual issues which need to be first established before
the council have signed and approved the resolution. any decision can conclusively be arrived at. The
He claims that Senator Angara has deliberately absence of factual determination by the COMELEC on
refused to call a National Congress of the party. the
Representative Aquino relies on his authority in past 689
elections to sign certificates of nomination of official VOL. 423, FEBRUARY 24, 2004 689
candidates of LDP which, according to him, has not Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on
been revoked or recalled by the National Congress of Elections
the LDP. He also asseverates that on 04 December matters now being disputed by the parties hardly
2003, during the national meeting at Club Filipino makes it feasible for this Court to rightly and
attended by hundreds of members of the LDP, Senator decisively rule on the case.
Panfilo Lacson has been nominated unanimously as Once again, I submit, the Supreme Court is being
the party’s candidate for president in the national tasked to exercise its judicial power on something
elections scheduled on 10 May 2004, and that it has where it should not as yet be asked.
become ministerial for him, being the authorized To the above extent, I therefore, take exceptions
signatory of the party, to issue the certificate of from the ruling of the majority.
nomination in favor of Senator Lacson. DISSENTING OPINION
It does appear to me that the matter involved in
this controversy is an internal matter that the political SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.:
party itself should resolve. More importantly, the
petition is replete with factual problems which this The instant case arose from an internal squabble
Court cannot take on. The conflicting claims of the between two (2) factions of the Laban ng
parties, such as the alleged intentional inaction of Demokratikong Pilipino(LDP), a registered national
Senator Angara to convene the National Congress of political party, which put up their respective
the party, the disputed membership of the National presidential candidates in the May 2004 national
Executive Council which passed the resolution elections.
supporting the questioned actions of petitioner I find it necessary to state the following important
Angara, the determination of an “extraordinary and antecedent facts culled from the parties’ pleadings,
emergency” situation that would entitle the party some of which were not mentioned in the ponencia of
chairman to act, the validity of the actions taken at Justice Dante O. Tinga.
the behest of respondent Aquino in the National
 On November 28, 2003, Representative Rolex authorized to endorse, by way of a Certificate of
Suplico (5th District, Iloilo), LDP Region VI Chairman, Nomination, the Certificate of Candidacy of an LDP
filed with the Office of Representative Agapito A. candidate.” The Manifestation prays that the
Aquino, LDP Secretary General, herein respondent, COMELEC: (a) recognize only those Certificates of
a complaint1 against Senator Edgardo J. Angara, LDP Candidacy endorsed by petitioner Angara or his
Chairman, herein petitioner. The complaint charges authorized representative; (b) deny due course all
petitioner with “acts of disloyalty to the party, culpable Certificates of Candidacy not endorsed by petitioner
violation of the LDP Constitution and By-Laws, Angara or his representative; and (c) note the
disregard of duly approved Resolution of the LDP designation of Ambassador Enrique A. Zaldivar as
Executive Council, and other divisive acts inimical to LDP Acting Secretary General, “in place of Rep.
the interest of the party.” Agapito A. Aquino” who was “placed on indefinite
On December 4, 2003, a National Consultative forced leave as LDP Secretary General effective
Meeting of the LDP was held at the Club Filipino, December 6, 2003” by virtue of an Advisory dated 4

Greenhills, San Juan, Metro Manila wherein Senator December 7, 2003 issued by petitioner.
Panfilo Lacson was unanimously nominated as the Going back to the Suplico complaint, respondent
party’s official candidate for president in the May 10, Aquino, claiming to have authority as Secretary
2004 national elections. 2
General under the LDP Constitution and By-Laws,
On December 8, 2003, LDP General Counsel issued an Order dated December 10, 2003, creating a
5

Demaree J.B. Raval filed with the Commission on committee composed of three (3) members of the
Elections (COMELEC) a Manifes- National Executive Council (the LDP governing body)
to investigate and recommend appropriate action
_______________
thereon. He likewise sent petitioner Angara a letter of
6

1
Annex “A” of respondent Aquino’s Answer (to Petition of even date informing him of the complaint and
petitioner Angara) filed with the COMELEC. requesting him to respond thereto within five (5) days
2
Paragraph 3 of respondent Aquino’s Answer. from receipt.
690 On December 12, 2003, the 3-member Investigating
690 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED Committee of the National Executive Council issued a
Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on Resolution placing petitioner on preventive suspension
7

Elections as party Chairman effective immediately and directing

tation stating that “only its Party Chairman
3
him to refrain from exercising official acts in behalf of
(petitioner Sen. Edgardo J. Angara) and only those the party until and after the Committee finishes its
whomsoever he may authorize in writing x x x are investigation and submits its final recommendation to
the National Executive Council and/or National Edgardo J. Angara, and All Acts and Decisions Taken
Congress. The Resolution states that such suspension by Him to Enforce and Implement the Same; Ratifying
is deemed necessary to forestall further dissention and Confirming All His Other Acts and Decisions and
within the party members detrimental to the party’s Other Governing Bodies to Preserve the Integrity,
image and interest. Credibility, Unity and Solidarity of the Party; and,
Further Reiterating the Vote of Confidence of the
_______________
National Executive Council in Support of the
3
Annex “B” of Petition. Continued Efforts of Chairman Angara to Unite the
4
Annex “A” of Manifestation. Political Opposition.”
5
Annex “B” of respondent Aquino’s Answer (to Petition of Among the actions/decisions of petitioner Angara
petitioner Angara) filed with the COMELEC.
which were allegedly ratified and confirmed by the
6
Annex “C,” Id.
7
Annex “D” of respondent Aquino’s Comment (on the present LDP National Executive Council in
Petition). said Resolution were: (a) the creation of an opposition
691 coalition Koalisyon ng Nagkakaisang Filipino
VOL. 423, FEBRUARY 24, 2004 69 (KNP) which later adopted a Resolution entitled,
Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on “Resolution Choosing Mr. Fernando Poe, Jr. as the
Elections Standard Bearer of the KNP for President of the
On December 16, 2003, respondent Aquino submitted Republic of the Philippines in the May 10, 2004
his Comment on the Manifestation, claiming that he
8
National Elections;” (b)the decision to place respondent
was not given prior notice when petitioner Angara Aquino on indefinite forced leave; and (c) the filing of
“unilaterallyplaced him on indefinite forced leave.” the aforementioned LDP Manifestation before the
Thus, the Advisory,upon which the Manifestation was COMELEC.
based, “is a total nullity and must “be disregarded” by In his Answer to the Petition, respondent Aquino
11

the COMELEC. assailed the “so-called Resolution of the National

Subsequently, petitioner Angara converted Executive Council allegedly adopted during a meeting
the Manifestation into a verified Petition, docketed as
9
on December 22, 2003,” claiming that it
E.M. 03-018. The Petition further alleges that on is “unauthorized and illegal” because no proper notices
December 22, 2003, the National Executive Council met have been sent for the holding of such
and, 36 out of its 40 members, adopted a meeting. Moreover, based on LDP records, only 13
Resolution entitled, “A Resolution Ratifying and
10
members of the Council have signed and approved the
Confirming the Covenant of National Unity, the
_______________
Declaration of Unity Entered Into by Party Chairman
 8
Annex “C” of Petition. Sangguniang Bayan Kagawad as nominated and endorsed
9
Annex “G,” Id. by LDP Secretary General Agapito ‘Butz’ Aquino are
10
Annex “D,” Id.
recognized as official candidates of LDP ‘Aquino Wing.’
11
Annex “H,” Id.
692 “Consequently, each faction or ‘Wing’ is entitled to a
representative to any election committee to which it may be
692 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
entitled as created by the Commission for the May 10, 2004
Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on elections. For the copies of the election returns,
Elections the ‘Angara Wing’ will be entitled to the copies
supposed Resolution. Which means that it was not corresponding to odd number of precincts, that is, Precinct
approved by a majority of those present, taking into Nos. 1, 3, 5, etc., and for the ‘Aquino Wing’ to the even
account petitioner Angara’s claim that 36 Council number of precincts, that is, Precinct Nos. 2, 4, 6, etc. This
members attended the meeting. Thus, the is on the assumption that the LDP or as a party within a
supposed Resolution is void and cannot ratify/confirm registered Political Coalition becomes a recognized and
any act of petitioner Angara. denominated as a Dormant Minority Party under the
Election Laws. The two LDP ‘Wings’ are further entitled to
Respondent Aquino further asserted in
and be accorded the rights and privileges with
his Answer that since the 2001 national elections, he,
corresponding legal obligations under Election Laws.
as LDP Secretary General, was the sole officer who “SO ORDERED.”
endorsed the Certificates of Nomination of the party’s Claiming that the Resolution was issued with grave
national candidates and who delegated such authority abuse of discretion, petitioner Angara filed the
to duly authorized representatives. instant Petition for Certiorari.
The COMELEC then heard the parties on oral
arguments, after which the case was submitted for _______________
resolution.
Annex “A,” Id.
12

On January 6, 2004, the COMELEC en banc issued 693

the assailed Resolution, the dispositive portion of
12

VOL. 423, FEBRUARY 24, 2004 693

which reads:
Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on
“WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition
is GRANTEDwith LEGAL EQUITY for both Petitioner and Elections
Oppositor. The candidates for President down to the last The contending parties raise the issue as who between
Sangguniang Bayan Kagawad nominated and endorsed by the petitioner, as LDP Chairman, and the respondent,
LDP Chairman Edgardo J. Angara are recognized by the as LDP Secretary General, shall nominate its official
Commission as official candidates of LDP ‘Angara Wing.’ candidates in the coming national elections.
The candidates from President down to the last
 Undoubtedly, this is to me a purely internal party political party, but will leave the matter for determination
concern, the determination of which rests solely within by the proper tribunals of the party itself or by the electors at
the party itself, in the absence of statutes giving the the polls (25 Am. Jur. 2d, Elections Sec. 205, 982). Similarly,
courts jurisdiction over the same. The party has its in the absence of specific constitutional or legislative
regulations defining how nominations are to be made, or
own machinery to govern such conflict. Consequently,
prohibiting nominations from being made in certain ways,
this Court cannot step into such private turf and
political parties may handle party affairs, including
dictate on the LDP party members who should be their nominations, in such manner as party rules may establish
official candidate for president. In Sinaca vs. (Tucker v. State Board of Alcoholic Control, 240 NC 177, 81
Mula, this Court en banc,through Chief Justice
13
SE 2d 399; Brewster v. Massey [Tex Civ. App.] 232 SW2d
Hilario G. Davide, Jr., ruled: 678).” (Italics ours)
“We also agree with the contention of EMMANUEL (Sinaca)
that the decision as to which member a party shall nominate _______________
as its candidate is a party concern which is not cognizable
by the courts. G.R. No. 135691, September 27, 1999, 315 SCRA 266.
13

694
“A political party has the right to identify the people who
constitute the association and to select a standard bearer 694 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
who best represents the party’s ideologies and preference Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino vs. Commission on
(see 26 Am. Jur. 2d, Elections Sec. 255, 67). Political parties Elections
are generally free to conduct their internal affairs free from In fine, we should not assume jurisdiction over
judicial supervision; this common-law principle of judicial the petition,the issue here being purely an internal
restraint, rooted in the constitutionally protected right of free party matter not cognizable by this Court.
association, serves the public interest by allowing the ACCORDINGLY, I vote to DISMISS the instant
political processes to operate without undue interference
petition.
(Nielsen v. Kezer, 232 Conn. 65, 652 A2d 1013). Thus, the
COMELEC Resolution annulled, petition granted in
rule is that the determination of disputes as to party
nominations rests with the party, in the absence of statutes part.
giving the courts jurisdiction (Hunt v. Superior Court, 64 Notes.–History would also show that the “majority”
Ariz. 325, 170 P2d 293. See also O’niel v. O’Connell, 300 Ky in either house of Congress has referred to the political
707, 189 Sw2d 965, 169 ALR 1271, holding that courts have party to which the most number of lawmakers
no power in the absence of a statute conferring jurisdiction belonged, while the “minority” normally referred to a
to interfere with operations of a political party). party with a lesser number of members. (Santiago vs.
“Quintessentially, where there is no controlling statute or Guingona, Jr., 298 SCRA 756 [1998])
clear legal right involved, the court will not assume Disunity and discord amongst members of a
jurisdiction to determine factional controversies within a political party should not be allowed to create a
mockery of the electoral process, which envisions one
candidate from a political party for each position.
(Recabo, Jr. vs. Commission on Elections, 308 SCRA
793 [1999])
The reason behind the right given to a political
party to nominate a replacement where a permanent
vacancy occurs in the Sanggunian is to maintain the
party representation as willed by the people in the
election. (Navarro vs. Court of Appeals, 355 SCRA
672 [2001])

––o0o––

© Copyright 2019 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights

reserved.