Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2007 > February 2007 Resolutions >

[G.R. No. 149233 : February 13, 2007] GREGORIO B. HONASAN V. THE HONORABLE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, SITTING AS THE NATIONAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS, AND THE HON. RALPH G. RECTO :

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of the Court En Banc dated February 13, 2007.

G.R. No. 149233 (GREGORIO B. HONASAN v. THE HONORABLE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, sitting as the NATIONAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS, and the HON. RALPH G. RECTO)

Resort to a special civil action for the issuance of the revisory, remedial, and prerogative writ of certiorari may be allowed when the tribunal allegedly committed a grave abuse of discretion in ruling on a subject matter involving a constitutional issue, and the legal remedy is not the plain, expeditious, and ample relief under existing laws and rules of procedure.


In this Petition for Certiorari,^[1] former senatorial candidate Gregorio B. Honasan alleges that Resolution No. NBC 01-006 entitled "In the Matter of Declaring the Final Ranking of the Proclaimed 13 Senators in Connection with the May 14, 2001 National and Local Elections," promulgated on July 20, 2001 by the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) sitting as the National Board of Canvassers, was issued with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. Petitioner Honasan thus prays that Resolution No. NBC 01-006 and the third paragraph of Section 1 of Resolution No. 4343 of the COMELEC, which promulgated the procedures in the canvass of the votes and proclamation of the results of the election for Senators and Party-List in the May 14, 2001 National and Local Elections, be declared unconstitutional and void and of no legal force and effect. Petitioner Honasan also prays that the COMELEC, sitting as the National Board of Canvassers, be ordered to convene anew and properly render its decision on the matters deliberated in the assailed Resolution.^[2]


After the May 14, 2001 National and Local Elections, the COMELEC, pursuant to the powers vested in it by the Constitution, the Omnibus Election Code, and other pertinent election laws, resolved to promulgate Resolution No. 4343, setting out the procedures in the canvass of the votes and proclamation of the results of the election for Senators and Party-List representative in the May 14, 2001 National and Local Elections.^[3] Sec. 1 provided that "the Chairman and Members of the Commission on Elections sitting en banc shall constitute the National Board of Canvassers x x x," and that [a] majority of the members shall constitute a quorum and all questions shall be decided by a majority vote of the members present.^[4]

On June 5, 2001, the National Board of Canvassers issued Resolution No. NBC 01-005, proclaiming the following candidates for senator as the duly elected Senators of the Philippines in the May 14, 2001 elections who, obtained the corresponding number of votes as of June 4, 2001:

Name	Votes Garnered (as of 4 June 2001)
NOLI DE CASTRO	16,157,811
JUAN M. FLAVIER	11,676,129
SERGIO R. OSMENA III	11,531,427
FRANKLIN M. DRILON	11,223,020
RAMON B. MAGSAYSAY, JR.	11,187,447
JOKER P. ARROYO	11,163,801
MANUEL B. VILLAR, JR.	11,084,884
FRANCIS N. PANGILINAN	10,877,989
EDGARDO J. ANGARA	10,746,843
PANFILO M. LACSON	10,481,755
LUISA P. EJERCITO ESTRADA	10,456,674
RALPH G. RECTO	10,387,108
GREGORIO G. HONASAN	10,364,272 [5]

This resolution was promulgated by Chairman Alfredo L. Benipayo and Commissioners Rufino S.B. Javier, Ralph C. Lantion, Mehol K. Sadain, Resurreccion Z. Borra and Florentino A. Tuason, Jr., while Commissioner Luzviminda G. Tancangco took no part.^[6]

On July 20, 2001, the COMELEC, sitting as the National Board of Canvassers, promulgated Resolution No. NBC 01-006, which declared official and final the ranking of the proclaimed 13 Senators, with Sen. Ralph G. Recto as the twelfth, and Sen. Gregorio B. Honasan as the thirteenth. The ranking reads as follows:

RANK	NAME	VOTES GARNERED AS OF JUNE 20, 2001
1	DE CASTRO, NOLI L.	16,237,386
2	FLAVIER, JUAN M.	11,735,897
3	OSMENA, SERGIO II R.	11,593,389
4	DRILON, FRANKLIN M.	11,301,700
5	ARROYO, JOKER P.	11,262,402
6	MAGSAYSAY, RAMON JR. B.	11,250,677
7	VILLAR, MANUEL JR. B.	11,187,375
8	PANGILINAN, FRANCIS N.	10,971,896
9	ANGARA, EDGARDO J.	10,805,177
10	LACSON, PANFILO M.	10,535,559
11	EJERCITO ESTRADA, LUISA P.	10,524,130
12	RECTO, RALPH G.	10,498,940
13	HONASAN, GREGORIO B.	10,454,527

Five commissioners were present for the promulgation of said Resolution: Chairman Alfredo L. Benipayo, Commissioners Luzviminda G. Tancangco, Rufino S.B. Javier, Resurreccion Z. Borra, and Florentino A. Tuason, Jr.; and of the five, two dissented: namely, Commissioners Tancangco and Javier.^[8]


Petitioner Honasan submits that the promulgation of such resolution is a constitutionally infirm act, and that being so, the resolution is illegal and void.^[9] Petitioner thus presents the following issues to the court:

WHETHER OR NOT THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, SITTING AS THE NATIONAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS, MAY VALIDLY PROMULGATE A RESOLUTION BY A MERE MAJORITY VOTE OF THREE OF THE FIVE COMMISSIONERS PRESENT?[SIC]

COROLLARY TO THE FOREGOING IS ALSO THE ISSUE ON WHETHER OR NOT THE THIRD PARAGRAPH OF SECTION 1 OF COMELEC RESOLUTION NO. 4343, PROMULGATED ON 15 MAY 2001, ESTABLISHING THE NATIONAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS AND PROVIDING THAT ALL QUESTIONS BEFORE SUCH BOARD BE DECIDED BY A MAJORITY VORE OF THE NBC MEMBERS, IS CONSTITUTIONAL AND VOID?^[10]

The petition has no merit.

The third paragraph of Sec. 1 of Resolution No. 4343 of the COMELEC, constituting the National Board of Canvassers, stated: "A majority of the members shall constitute a quorum and all questions shall be decided by a majority vote of the members present."^[11]

Petitioner argues that this provision violates Sec. 7 of the Common Provisions covering the Constitutional Commissions under Article IX of the 1987 Constitution, namely, the first sentence which reads: "Each Commission shall decide by a majority vote of all its Members any case or matter brought before it within sixty days from the date of its submission for decision or resolution." He further argues that since Resolution No. NBC 01-006 dated July 20, 2001, which proclaimed the winning senators in the May 14, 2001 elections, and which was promulgated by the National Board of Canvassers, was promulgated by a majority of the members present, but not by majority of all the members, pursuant to Sec. 1 of Resolution No. 4343, it is void for contravening the Constitution.

This argument must fail.

Petitioner himself states that the National Board of Canvassers is not one of the Constitutional Commissions, and is in fact a creation of the COMELEC.^[12] A perusal of the first sentence of Sec. 7 clearly shows that the requirement in the Constitution is specifically applicable to the Commissions themselves, not to lesser bodies under those Commissions. If we were to apply the constitutional provision to the National Board of Canvassers, we would have to apply it to ALL bodies under each of the Constitutional Commissions, following petitioner's line of reasoning, that every matter brought before any of the Constitutional Commissions' lesser bodies should be decided by majority vote of all their members. This would unduly restrict the Commissions in their work, and hinder them in the exercise of their functions. The COMELEC must be distinguished from the National Board of Canvassers which it created. The functions of the National Board of Canvassers constituted in Resolution No. 4343 are limited to canvassing the votes for Senators and Party-Lists based on the Certificates of Canvass, proclaiming the winning candidates for Senator, certifying the results for the Party-List System, and proclaiming the nominees of the parties who obtained the required percentage of votes,^[13] which are of a narrower scope than the duties and responsibilities of the COMELEC.

Petitioner does not question the power of the COMELEC to constitute the National Board of Canvassers under the Constitution, the Omnibus Election Code, and other pertinent election laws. There is no question that the majority of all the members of the COMELEC promulgated Resolution No. 4343. The only point of contention is that Resolution No. 4343 allowed the National Board of Canvassers to decide matters by a majority vote of the members present and the subsequent resolutions issued pursuant to Resolution No. 4343, which proclaimed the duly elected Senators of the May 14, 2001 elections. As Resolution No. 4343 is constitutional, the questioned Resolutions of the National Board of Canvassers, Resolution No. NBC 01-006 promulgated on July 20, 2001 pursuant to Resolution No. 4343, proclaiming the duly elected Senators of the Philippines in the May 14, 2001 elections, are also valid, being concurred in by a majority of the members present.

Despite this petition ostensibly questions the constitutionality of the rules of procedure of the National Board of Canvassers, the true purpose of the petitioner is hinted at when he stated:

2.2 However, petitioner is greatly affected and prejudiced by the assailed Resolution as it confirms his ranking as the 13^th Senator, which aside from its mythical and superstitious connotations, only grants him a tenure of three (3) years as compared to six (6) years for the other twelve (12) Senators.

2.3 The above petitions dismissed by the COMELEC, sitting as the NBC, have a decisive effect on the ranking of Senators Honasan and Recto as the said NBC proceedings assailed the votes garnered by Senator Recto. Considering that the difference between total votes of herein petitioner and Senator Recto is only 44,413 votes, it is highly probable that herein petitioner could have been the twelfth (12^th) Senator.^[14]

In the subsequent Memorandum^[15] filed by petitioner Honasan, his purpose in filing the petition for certiorari becomes clear. He would rather file this petition, rather than an election protest, to support his claim that he is twelfth in rank in the number of votes garnered by the duly elected Senators. He actually questions the ranking made by the National Board of Canvassers, and would have this corrected in this Petition for Certiorari. He claims that "[n]o Senate election contest and no Presidential election contest under the 1987 Constitution has ever been prosecuted to a satisfactory conclusion. The protestant always withdraws in angry desperation or because he has won in a subsequent (after 3 years) election. As earlier stated, an election contest is a long drawn, expensive, and insuperable, if not useless, remedy for the specific problem in this case."^[16] The specific problem concerning petitioner Honasan in this case is the ranking of the Senators, and the fact that he was proclaimed the 13th in the ranking. It is certainly not a matter for a petition for certiorari. Under Section 17, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution: "[t]he Senate and the House of Representatives shall each have an Electoral Tribunal which shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of their respective Members. x x x." The remedy which petitioner Honasan seeks does not lie with this Court. In Rasul v. Commission on Elections, we held: "Where as in the case at bar, petitioner assails the Commission's resolution proclaiming the twelfth (12^th) winning senatorial candidate, petitioner's proper recourse was to file a regular election protest which under the Constitution and the Omnibus Election Code exclusively pertains to the Senate Electoral Tribunal."^[17] There is a proper remedy for petitioner Honasan, but he refused to avail of it.

The petitioner has failed to show that the questioned Resolutions are unconstitutional; thus, they remain effective. But for the actual remedy he seeks, which is to question his ranking in the list of duly elected Senators, his recourse is clearly not to this Court. Even if he finds the process unsatisfactory or too difficult, he is not at liberty to simply disregard it and carve out a new procedure according to his liking.

WHEREFORE, the instant petition is hereby DENIED for lack of merit. No costs.

Endnotes:

---

^[1] Rollo, pp. 3-20.

^[2] Id. at 16.

^[3] Id. at 28.

^[4] Id.

^[5] Id. at 38-39.

^[6] Id. at 40.

^[7] Id. at 23. This situation arose from the appointment of then-Senator Teofisto T. Guingona, Jr. as Vice-President of the Philippines in February 2001, creating a vacancy in the Senate. In the May 14, 2001 national elections, the elected Senator who ranked 13th would get full term of six years. Then-Senator Guingona had been elected Senator in 1998.

^[8] Id. at 23.

^[9] Id. at 11.

^[10] Id. at 12.

^[11] Id. at 28.

^[12] Id. at 14-15.

^[13] Id. at 28.

^[14] Id. at 6.

^[15] Id. at 347-381.

^[16] Id. at 377.

^[17] G.R. No. 134142, August 24, 1999, 313 SCRA 18.