Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1968 > April 1968 Decisions > G.R. No. L-28562 April 25, 1968 - DIMALOMPING MACUD v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-28562. April 25, 1968.]

DIMALOMPING MACUD, Petitioner, v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, MUNICIPAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS OF LUMBA-BAYABAO, LANAO DEL SUR and ALIODIN GANI NOOR, Respondents.

Jose W. Diokno and Mangorsi Mindalano, for Petitioners.

Ambrosio Padilla for respondent A. Noor.

Ramon Barrios for respondent COMELEC.


SYLLABUS


1. ELECTION LAW; COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS; APPEAL, THE APPROPRIATE RELIEF FOR AGGRIEVED PARTY WHEN PROCLAMATION SUSPENDED BY COMELEC. — When a board of canvassers rejects an election return on the ground that it is spurious or has been tampered with, the aggrieved party may elevate the matter to the Commission on Elections for appropriate relief (Ong v. COMELEC, G. R. No. L-28415, January 29, 1968), and if the Commission sustains the action of the Board of Canvassers, the aggrieved party may appeal from the corresponding resolution to the Supreme Court. Upon the facts appearing of record, COMELEC had not acted without, or in excess of its jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion. Petition for judicial recount is not the appropriate remedy but an appeal to the Supreme Court from the previous resolutions of the COMELEC of December 12, December 27, 1967, and January 2, 1968.

2. ID.; SUPREME COURT, ONLY BODY VESTED WITH AUTHORITY TO REVIEW FINDINGS OF COMELEC. — Writ of preliminary injunction issued by the Court of First Instance of Lanao del Sur against the COMELEC is of doubtful legality, considering the status and rank of the issuing court in relation to that of COMELEC.


D E C I S I O N


DIZON, J.:


Before Us is a verified petition praying for the issuance of the writs of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition, with an additional prayer for the immediate issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction, filed by Dimalomping Macud against the Commission on Elections — hereinafter referred to as COMELEC — the Municipal Board of Canvassers of the Municipality of Lumba-Bayabao, Lanao del Sur — hereinafter referred to as the Board — and Aliodin Gani Noor.

Purpose of the action as one for certiorari is to annul the resolution of COMELEC of January 10, 1968 sustaining the proclamation of respondent Noor as Municipal Mayor elect of the above mentioned municipality made by the Board on December 29, 1967; of another resolution of COMELEC dated January 18, 1968 denying Macud’s motion for reconsideration and reiterating its resolution of January 10, and, finally, to declare void the proclamation mentioned heretofore.

Purpose of the action as one for prohibition is to restrain respondent Noor from taking oath and/or assuming office as Mayor of Lumba-Bayabao, Lanao del Sur, and, in case he had already taken oath and assumed office, from discharging the duties thereof.

The action, as one for mandamus, seeks to compel the Board to take cognizance of the writ of preliminary injunction issued by the Court of First Instance of Lanao del Sur, 15th Judicial District, Branch I, pending resolution of the petition for judicial recount filed therewith by Macud; to reconvene as Board of Canvassers and make a recanvass on the basis of the result of said petition for recount.

Upon the filing of the verified petition We issued a temporary order restraining respondent Noor from taking oath and/or assuming office and from further exercising the duties and functions of the office of Mayor of Lumba-Bayabao, Lanao del Sur.

From the pleadings filed by the parties and the document thereto attached, We find the following to be the facts necessary for an adjudication of the issue involved:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

Macud and Noor were candidates for the office of Mayor of the Municipality of Lumba-Bayabao, Lanao del Sur, in the elections held on November 14, 1967. After the elections the Board met to canvass the results, but having failed to canvass the votes cast in Precincts 3 and 11, it made no proclamation of the winners. Considering this as violative of its order of December 12, 1967 directing the members of the Board to canvass the results and proclaim the winning candidates, COMELEC, on December 26, 1967, suspended the members of the Board, substituted them with lawyers employed in its law department, and ordered this new Board to complete the canvassing of the election returns and thereafter to proclaim the winners.

The new Board met for the above purposes on December 28 and 29 in the Manila office of COMELEC pursuant to another resolution of the latter of December 21, 1967 changing the venue of the canvassing in view of the tense conditions prevailing in the Municipality of Lumba- Bayabao. During the session of the Board on December 28, 1967, the question arose as to which copy of the election returns submitted to it corresponding to Precinct 3 should be used in the canvass. After hearing the parties through their representatives — so the minutes of the session show — the Board ruled that the copy of the election returns for COMELEC should be used because the other copy submitted to it appeared to have been tampered. When the Board met again the following day (December 29), a similar question arose as to which of the sets of election returns for Precinct 11 submitted to it should be used. Again the Board decided to use the election returns of said precinct bearing Serial No. 42721 prepared by the Board of Inspectors under the supervision of Atty. Adolfo Alagar, representative of COMELEC.

As a result of the completed canvass, respondent Noor was proclaimed as Municipal Mayor elect of the Municipality of Lumba- Bayabao on December 29, 1967. On the same date he took his oath of office, and assumed office on January 1, 1968.

It is a fact, however, that on December 30, 1967 Macud filed a motion with COMELEC for the annulment of the proclamation of respondent Noor made the previous day. At the hearing held in connection therewith on January 2, 1968, Senator Diokno, as Macud’s counsel, asked for a clarification of the COMELEC resolution of December 27, 1967 mentioned heretofore. In connection therewith COMELEC issued another resolution on that date reiterating "its resolution of December 27, 1967 suspending proclamation of winning candidates for the period of ten (10) days given in said resolution of December 27, 1967, in connection with the canvass and proclamation for local offices in LUMBA BAYABAO, LANAO DEL SUR, hereby setting aside during the said period of ten (10) days the effects of any proclamation made, if any, provided that if within the aforestated period no judicial relief is obtained, then the proclamation per canvass made shall stand."

It is not denied that Macud did not appeal from COMELEC resolution of December 12 and 27, 1967 nor from that of January 2, 1968. However, after the issuance of the latter, or more specifically on January 4, 1968, he filed in the Court of First Instance of Marawi City, Lanao del Sur, a petition for judicial recount and secured from said court a writ of preliminary injunction restraining the Board from proclaiming the winning candidate for Mayor of Lumba-Bayabao. Attempts to serve the writ on the Chairman of the Board, Atty. Lydia Querubin, failed, so on January 10, 1968, an undated letter of Atty. Mindalano, as counsel for Macud, — received by COMELEC on January 6 of the same year — was submitted to said body for consideration, and, acting upon the same, COMELEC issued on the same date a resolution, the dispositive part of which reads as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Considering that the ‘appropriate judicial relief’ stated in the resolution of this Commission dated January 2, 1968, contemplated a judicial relief from the Supreme Court, the Commission, after hearing Atty. Mangorsi Mindalano, RESOLVED to hold that the proclamation made by the Municipal Board of Canvassers of Lumba-Bayabao, Lanao del Sur, on December 29, 1967 shall stand."cralaw virtua1aw library

As Macud’s motion for reconsideration of this last resolution was denied by COMELEC on January 18, 1968, Macud, instead of appealing from the resolution referred to, filed the present triple petition.

According to petitioner, the issue in this case is whether or not the COMELEC has the power to order a canvassing board to refuse recognition of a petition for judicial recount filed by an affected candidate pursuant to a COMELEC resolution (AS INTERPRETED BY THEM) suspending the proclamation of the winner, to give opportunity to the aggrieved party to seek appropriate judicial relief, upon the ground that such petition for judicial recount is not the appropriate remedy but an appeal to the Supreme Court from the previous resolutions of COMELEC of December 12, December 27, 1967 and January 2, 1968.

On the other hand, respondents contend that the true issue in this case is whether COMELEC has jurisdiction to suspend the effects of a proclamation after the party proclaimed has already assumed office, and whether or not the phrase "appropriate judicial relief" used in the COMELEC resolutions meant a petition for judicial recount or an appeal to the Supreme Court from the orders complained of.

We have held heretofore that when a board of canvassers rejects an election return on the ground that it is spurious or has been tampered with, the aggrieved party may elevate the matter to the Commission on Elections for appropriate relief (Ong v. COMELEC, G.R. No. L-28415, January 29, 1968), and that, if the Commission sustains the action of the Board of Canvassers, the aggrieved party may appeal from the corresponding resolution to the Supreme Court. The facts stated heretofore show that Macud failed to appeal not only from the resolutions of COMELEC of December 12 and 27, 1967 and of January 2, 1968, but also from the one issued on January 10, 1968, which sustained the proclamation made by the Board on December 29, 1967 by allowing it to stand. Instead, he resorted to the abovementioned petition for judicial recount which COMELEC did not consider as the appropriate judicial relief mentioned in its aforesaid resolution of January 2, 1968. Upon the facts appearing of record, We cannot find that, in so doing, COMELEC had acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion.

Concerning Macud’s contention that COMELEC should be ordered to take cognizance of — in other words, to respect — the writ of preliminary injunction issued by the Court of First Instance of Lanao del Sur in the petition for judicial recount filed therewith, the least that We can say at this time is that the enforceability of said writ against COMELEC is of doubtful legality, considering the status and rank of the issuing Court in relation to that of COMELEC.

HAVING ARRIVED AT THE FOREGOING CONCLUSIONS, We are constrained to hold that neither one of the writs prayed for in the verified petition under consideration is proper. Consequently, the petition for their issuance is hereby denied, and the restraining order issued heretofore is set aside. With costs.

Reyes, J.B.L., (Acting C.J.), Makalintal, Bengzon, J.P., Sanchez, Castro, Angeles and Fernando, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






April-1968 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-24658 April 3, 1968 - PHILIPPINE LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE COMPANY v. ENRIQUE MEDINA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25811 April 3, 1968 - THE CENTRAL (POBLACION) BARRIO, ET AL. v. CITY TREASURER, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25826 April 3, 1968 - CENTRO ESCOLAR UNIVERSITY v. CALIXTO WANDAGA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-26208 April 3, 1968 - RAMON P. FERNANDEZ v. EDUARDO ROMUALDEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-26383 April 3, 1968 - PROGRESSIVE LABOR ASSOCIATION, ET AL. v. GUILLERMO VILLASOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25599 April 4, 1968 - HOME INSURANCE COMPANY v. AMERICAN STEAMSHIP AGENCIES, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-21450 April 15, 1968 - SERAFIN TIJAM, ET AL. v. MAGDALENO SIBONGHANOY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-21603 April 15, 1968 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUAN ENTRINA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-21497 April 16, 1968 - AMERICAN MACHINERY & PARTS MANUFACTURING, INC. ET AL. v. HAMBURG-AMERIKA LINIE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-21686 April 16, 1968 - LE HUA SIA v. LUIS B. REYES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-24371 April 16, 1968 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CONSTANCIO GUEVARRA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25298 April 16, 1968 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MANUEL FONTILLAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-26563 April 16, 1968 - RODOLFO ANDICO v. AMADO G. ROAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-21553 April 17, 1968 - IN RE: JOHN GO CHANG v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-18173 April 22, 1968 - BISAYA LAND TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, INC. v. MIGUEL CUENCO

  • G.R. No. L-21961 April 22, 1968 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MANUEL R. CASTILLEJOS

  • G.R. No. L-22150 April 22, 1968 - SWITZERLAND GENERAL INSURANCE CO., LTD. v. MANILA RAILROAD COMPANY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-24887 April 22, 1968 - INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA v. MANILA PORT SERVICE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25704 April 24, 1968 - ANGEL JOSE WAREHOUSING CO., INC. v. CHELDA ENTERPRISES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19590 April 25, 1968 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CHAW YAW SHUN, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-22130-L-22132 April 25, 1968 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRITO (PIDDY) WONG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22367 April 25, 1968 - AMADOR IBARDOLAZA v. FELIX V. MACALALAG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23266 April 25, 1968 - LAGUNA TRANSPORTATION EMPLOYEES UNION, ET AL. v. LAGUNA TRANSPORTATION CO., INC.

  • G.R. No. L-23562 April 25, 1968 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK v. ALBERTO DE LA CRUZ

  • G.R. No. L-23685 April 25, 1968 - CIRILA EMILIA v. EPIFANIO BADO (Alias Paño), ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23783 April 25, 1968 - JRS BUSINESS CORPORATION, ET AL. v. AGUSTIN P. MONTESA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23885 April 25, 1968 - FIDELINO C. AGAWIN v. QUINTIN CABRERA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23920 April 25, 1968 - RAMON R. DIZON v. LORENZO J. VALDES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-24043 April 25, 1968 - RIZAL SURETY & INSURANCE COMPANY v. MANILA RAILROAD COMPANY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-24286 April 25, 1968 - IN RE CHUA BOK v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-24540 April 25, 1968 - ANTONIO LEE, EN BANC v. LEE HIAN TIU, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25055 April 25, 1968 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. LAUREANO BROS., INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-26057 & L-26092 April 25, 1968 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO JL. BAUTISTA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-28562 April 25, 1968 - DIMALOMPING MACUD v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23497 April 26, 1968 - J.M. TUASON & CO., INC. v. ESTRELLA VDA. DE LUMANLAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23658 April 26, 1968 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. COSME BAYONGAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-24080 April 26, 1968 - SIMEON CORDOVIS, ET. AL. v. BASILISA A. DE OBIAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25775 April 26, 1968 - TOMASITA BUCOY v. REYNALDO PAULINO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25043 April 26, 1968 - ANTONIO ROXAS, ET AL. v. COURT OF TAX APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25310 April 26, 1968 - NATIONAL WATERWORKS AND SEWERAGE AUTHORITY v. QUEZON CITY, ET AL.

  • A.C. No. 533 April 29, 1968 - IN RE: FLORENCIO MALLARE

  • G.R. No. L-17077 April 29, 1968 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. WENCESLAO FLORES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20800 April 29, 1968 - CITIZEN’S SURETY & INSURANCE COMPANY, INC. v. SOLOMON LORENZANA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22946 April 29, 1968 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAXIMO DIVA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23712 April 29, 1968 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. RAMONA RUIZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23769 April 29, 1968 - REGINA ANTONIO, ET AL. v. PELAGIO BARROGA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23924 April 29, 1968 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FELIPE S. TANJUTCO

  • G.R. No. L-25856 April 29, 1968 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JACINTO RICAPLAZA

  • G.R. No. L-26055 April 29, 1968 - FELIPE SUÑGA, ET AL. v. ARSENIO H. LACSON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-27260 April 29, 1968 - NATIONAL MARKETING CORPORATION, ET AL. v. GAUDENCIO CLORIBEL

  • G.R. No. L-28790 April 29, 1968 - ANTONIO H. NOBLEJAS v. CLAUDIO TEEHANKEE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19546 April 30, 1968 - FRANCISCO CELESTIAL, ET AL. v. JOSE L. GESTOSO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20060 April 30, 1968 - LILIA DE JESUS-SEVILLA v. COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE

  • G.R. No. L-21257 April 30, 1968 - INSULAR LIFE ASSURANCE CO., LTD. v. COURT OF TAX APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-21260 April 30, 1968 - NATIONAL LABOR UNION v. GO SOC & SONS AND SY GUI HUAT, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-21839 April 30, 1968 - INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA v. UNITED STATES LINES CO., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22035 April 30, 1968 - LEONCIA SAN ROQUE v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-23202 April 30, 1968 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMARICO ELIZAGA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-24711 April 30, 1968 - BENGUET CONSOLIDATED, INC. v. BCI EMPLOYEES & WORKERS UNION-PAFLU, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-24732 April 30, 1968 - PIO SIAN MELLIZA v. CITY OF ILOILO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-27486 April 30, 1968 - REBAR BUILDINGS, INC. v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-28472 April 30, 1968 - CALTEX FILIPINO MANAGERS AND SUPERVISORS ASSOC. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-28536 April 30, 1968 - SECURITY BANK EMPLOYEES UNION-NATU, ET AL. v. SECURITY BANK & TRUST COMPANY, ET AL.