Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions

"G. R. No. 197636 (Artemio T. Binarao v. Commission on Elections, Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Rizal-Sibutad, Zamboanga del Norte, and Bienvenido E. Sumagang) - The Court DISMISSES the Verified Petition dated 25 June 2011 filed by Artcmio T. Binarao, considering that the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) did not act with grave abuse of discretion in the proceedings below.

In denying petitioner Binarao's Motion for Reconsideration, the COMELEC simply exercised its discretion under the rules. When a party fails to file the corresponding fees, such as the fees for motions for reconsideration, the COMELEC has the option to either wait until the fee is paid before acting on the matter, or dismiss the same altogether. (COMELEC Rules of Procedure, Rule 40, Sec. 18) In similar vein, it is within the scope of the COMELEC's discretion whether to accept or reject the delayed payment of the motion fee in deciding whether a motion for reconsideration has been seasonably and properly filed. Hence, the claim of liberal construction of the procedural rules cannot overcome the proper exercise of the COMELEC's discretion when faced with the delayed payment of the motion fee, absent any showing of caprice or abuse thereof.

In the interest of foreclosing any further question on the COMELEC's action on Binarao's appeal and of affirming prevailing jurisprudence on the matter, the Court shall, in any event, render a resolution on the COMELEC Division's main Decision that dismissed his appeal based on his failure to pay the second COMELEC appeal fee, which is actually the subject-matter of his Motion for Reconsideration with the COMELEC en banc.

The COMELEC validly acted within its discretion in dismissing petitioner Binarao's appeal. Appeals of a decision of an election contest decided by the lower courts are subject to two appeal fees under this Court's Rules and the COMELEC's Rules of Procedure. (Rules of Procedure in Election Contests before the Courts Involving Elective Municipal and Barangay Officials, A. M No. 07-4-15-SC, Rule 14, Sec. 9; COMELEC Rules of Procedure, Rule 40, Sec. 3; and Rule 22, Sec. 9 [a]). In COMELEC Resolution No. 8486 dated 15 July 2008, the COMELEC clarified that the appellant must pay the first appeal fee to the lower court within 5 days after promulgation, and the second COMELEC appeal fee within a period of fifteen (15) days from the time of the filing of the Notice of Appeal. The failure to file the second COMELEC appeal fee within the prescribed period has been declared a fatal mistake that will render the appeal subject to outright dismissal.

In Divinagracia v. COMELEC, G. R. No. 186007 & 186016, 27 July 2009, 594 SCRA 147, cited in the COMELEC�s Order, this Court, in no uncertain terms, ruled that any future errors in the matter of nonpayment or incomplete payment of the two appeal fees in election cases are no longer excusable after the promulgation of the Decision. (See also Barro v. COMELEC, G. R. No. 186201, 09 October 2009, 603 SCRA 292) Hence, the COMELEC correctly applied the Court's ruling in dismissing Binarao's appeal for failure to pay the second appeal fee to the COMELEHC within the prescribed fifteen-day period.

Even if a liberal construction were to be applied with respect to petitioner Binarao's belated payment of the motion fee in his Motion for Reconsideration, the Court cannot ignore his manifest disregard of the Court's clear warnings in its earlier Decisions with respect to the nonpayment of the second COMELEC appeal fee within the prescribed period. The Court can no longer extend leniency on the matter of failure to pay the COMELEC appeal fee.

WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the instant Petition is hereby DISMISSED."

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) ENRIQUETA E. VIDAL
Clerk of Court