ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[G.R. No. 140574.December 7, 1999]

BOBONG A. OMAR vs. HON. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

EN BANC

Gentlemen :

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated DEC 7, 1999 .

G.R. No. 140574(Bobong A. Omar and Cesar L. Callo vs. The Hon. Commission on Elections [Manila]).

At bar is a petition for mandamus filed by petitioners seeking to compel the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) to finally resolve and decide SPC No. 98-049.

Petitioners filed with the COMELEC a Petition for Declaration of Failure of Elections in the whole Municipality of Magsaysay, Lanao del Norte, with prayer for the issuance of an order to hold/stop the counting and subsequent proclamation of winning candidates. It was therein alleged that acts of terrorism were committed during the May 11, 1998 elections.

The subject petition with the COMELEC was filed on May 18, 1998 and was deemed submitted for resolution on July 1998.

Meanwhile, on November 24, 1998, the COMELEC ordered the viewing of a VHS tape which had been adduced in evidence by petitioners. The viewing was, however, postponed to January 1999.

Finally, on February 2, 1999, upon failure of respondents to formally offer their evidence, the COMELEC ordered the case to be deemed submitted for resolution.

Petitioner now seeks relief from the Court to compel the COMELEC to immediately resolve the subject case, alleging that the delay of more than 8 months is repugnant to the mandate of Article IX, Section 7 of the Constitution which requires the COMELEC to decide any case or matter brought before it within 60 days from the date of submission.

The petition is unavailing.

The time limitation within which an election contest is to be decided is intended to impress the need to speedily resolve the same for the obvious reason that the term of the contested office grows shorter within the passing of each day (Veles vs. Varela, 93 Phil. 282 [1953]). However, the period within which to decide the case is not mandatory but merely directory in the sense that the failure to resolve the case within the prescribed period will not deprive the COMELEC of the jurisdiction to render judgment thereon (Marcelino vs. Cruz, 121 SCRA 51 [1983]).

WHEREFORE , the petition is dismissed.

Very truly yours,

LUZVIMINDA D. PUNO

Clerk of Court

(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA

Assistant Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE