ChanRobles Virtual law Library
[G.R. Nos. 134163-64.August 17, 1999]
MUSLIMIN SEMA vs. COMELEC AND RODEL MANARA
EN BANC
Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated AUG 17, 1999.
G.R. Nos. 134163-64(Muslimin Sema vs. Commission on Elections and Rodel Manara).
Petitioner Muslimin Sema and private respondent Rodel Manara were two (2) of the eleven (11) candidates for city mayor of Cotabato City during the May 11, 1998 elections.
During the canvassing of the election returns from the three hundred sixty-two (362) precincts of Cotabato City by the City Board of Canvassers (CBC), petitioner objected to thirty (30) election returns and thereafter filed a petition for exclusion of such returns with the CBC on the ground that the same were allegedly tampered with or falsified, prepared under duress, threats and intimidation, or substituted with fraudulent ones.Excluding the 30 election returns, petitioner and private respondent would obtain 13,338 and 12,484 votes, respectively.Including the 30 election returns, the votes of petitioner and private respondent would be 13,713 and 15,442, respectively.
On May 22, 1998, the CBC issued an order dismissing for lack of merit the petition for exclusion with respect to fourteen (14) of the thirty (30) contested returns.
On May 23, 1998, the CBC issued another order dismissing for lack of merit the petition for exclusion with respect to fifteen (15) of the remaining sixteen (16) contested returns.In effect, only one (1) election return remained contested insofar as the CBC was concerned.
Nonetheless, on May 29, 1998, the CBC reversed its previous rulings and issued an order granting petitioner's petition for exclusion of the thirty (30) election returns. A copy of this order was served upon private respondent Manara in the morning of May 31, 1998.
Upon the resumption of the canvassing in the evening of May 31, 1998, private respondent brought to the attention of the CBC that it had already ruled upon and dismissed the petition for exclusion in its Orders dated May 22 and 23, 1998, which had already become final and executory but the CBC ignored private respondent's manifestation, explaining that the previous orders did not include petitioner Sema's objections. Consequently, on the same day, May 31, 1998, counsel for private respondent manifested his intent to appeal from the May 29, 1998 Order of the CBC.
On May 31, 1998, petitioner and the other winning candidates for the City of Cotabato were proclaimed by the CBC. Notably, said proclamation was based on a canvass of only three hundred thirty-two (332) election returns, thirty (30) returns having been excluded from the total of three hundred sixty-two (362) returns pursuant to the CBC's Order of May 29, 1998.
On June 2, 1998, private respondent filed his written notice of appeal with the CBC.
On June 5, 1998, private respondent filed his appeal with public respondent Commission on Elections (COMELEC), docketed as SPC No. 98-240, questioning the exclusion of the thirty (30) election returns in the canvass and the proceeding of the CBC in promulgating the May 29, 1998 order which he claimed to be illegal.The appeal was anchored on the following grounds:(1) the CBC exceeded its authority in its ruling of May 29, 1998 excluding from the canvass the 30 election returns, considering that the CBC had already dismissed the petition for exclusion in its orders dated May 22 and 23, 1998; (2) the CBC was illegally constituted when it issued its ruling of May 29, 1998 because it was presided by Casan Macadatu, who had already been replaced by Atty. Lintang Bedol effective May 25, 1998; and (3) the CBC's proclamation of petitioner as Mayor of the City of Cotabato was invalid as it was only on May 31, 1998 that the CBC completed the canvassing of 362 election returns and it was in the morning of the same day when the Board was not in session that private respondent was furnished with a copy of the CBC's questioned ruling of May 29, 1998; such being the case, it was only at nightfall of May 31, 1998 when the Board held session that private respondent was able to manifest his intent to appeal from the said ruling.
On June 9, 1998, private respondent filed with the COMELEC a petition for annulment of the proclamation of petitioner which was docketed as SPC No. 98-262.Private respondent assailed, among others, the proclamation of petitioner considering that the former had already taken his appeal from the May 29, 1998 ruling of the CBC excluding from the canvass 30 election returns which adversely affected the result of the election for mayor.
Initially, the hearing of private respondent's appeal and petition for annulment of proclamation was set on June 19, 1998 before the COMELEC en banc.However, the hearing was cancelled and the two (2) cases were referred to the First Division of the COMELEC instead.
Said cases were then heard on June 27, 1998 by the First Division of the COMELEC afterwhich they were submitted for resolution.
On June 29, 1998, the First Division of the COMELEC issued the challenged order which reads as follows:
Without prejudice to the issuance at a later time of a formal Resolution in these cases, but based on the pleadings, the evidence adduced by the parties during the hearing on June 27, 1998, and the facts established therein, the effects and consequences of the proclamation for the position of City Mayor per Certificate of Canvass of Votes and Proclamation dated May 31, 1998 issued by the City Board of Canvassers of Cotabato City is HEREBY SUSPENDED.
Respondent Muslimin Sema is directed to cease and desist from taking his oath of office as City Mayor and/or from discharging the functions of said office.
The Clerk of the Commission is directed to furnish a copy of this order to the Hon. Secretary of the Department of Interior and Local Government, and Land Bank of the Philippines, thru its branch at Cotabato City.
The Regional Election Director, Atty. Hector Masna shall serve immediately to the parties a copy of this Order. 1 Rollo, pp. 24-25.
Despite the above order of the public respondent, on June 30, 1998, petitioner assumed the office of the City Mayor of Cotabato and commenced to discharge the functions of said office.
On July 3, 1998, petitioner filed the present petition for certiorari and prohibition to annul the order of the COMELEC dated June 29, 1998 with prayer for the issuance of a temporary restraining order and/or writ of preliminary injunction directing the COMELEC to desist from enforcing the questioned order.As grounds therefor, petitioner alleged that:
The pendency of the appeal which was apparently filed out of time and the petition for annulment of proclamation is not a sufficient basis to enjoin petitioner from discharging the functions of the contested office especially where, as here, he had already taken his oath of office and assumed the same in accordance with law.
The evidence submitted by the private respondent before the Comelec proved beyond doubt that his appeal (SPC No. 98-240) was filed out of time and that he failed to comply with the requirements of a pre-proclamation controversy. 2 Id., at 12 and 14.
On July 14, 1998, this Court issued a resolution directing the parties to maintain the status quo ante prevailing at the time of the issuance of the order of the COMELEC dated June 29, 1998 in SPC Nos. 98-240 and 98-262. 3 Id., at 124.
The matters and issues discussed in the instant petition are the same as those raised before respondent COMELEC in SPC Nos. 98-240 and 98-262, which cases are pending resolution before the COMELEC. Consequently, it is premature for this Court to rule on the same.It may be stressed, in this connection, that the status quo ante order of the Court dated July 14, 1998 was directed at the parties, meaning, for them to respect the proclamation of petitioner as Mayor of Cotabato City in the meantime that the Court is considering the merits of the instant petition.Said order did not, and was not intended, to stay the COMELEC from issuing a formal resolution on the cases before it.The COMELEC itself expressly stated in its June 29, 1998 order that its suspension of the effects of petitioner's proclamation was "(w)ithout prejudice at a later time of a formal Resolution in these cases xxx." It does not escape us that said order is improper and is not sanctioned by the rules because it disposes of a vital election incident without stating therein findings of fact and the law on which is based for the proper information and guidance of the parties.The parties ought to know what was the reason or basis for not allowing petitioner to sit as Mayor after his proclamation as such.
ACCORDINGLY, the Court Resolved to DIRECT respondent Commission on Elections to resolve SPC Nos. 98-240 and 98-262 within thirty (30) days from receipt of this resolution and to forthwith make a report thereon to this Court within five (5) days from its promulgation of the resolution.
Very truly yours,
LUZVIMINDA D. PUNO
Clerk of Court
(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA
Asst. Clerk of Court
HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
QUICK SEARCH
