ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[G.R. No. 151046.February 5, 2002]

TAWANTAWAN M. CAUNTONGAN AL HAJ, et al., vs. COMELEC, et al.

EN BANC

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated FEB 5 2002.

G.R. No. 151046(Tawantawan M. Cauntongan Al Haj, Nasser Manalao Sokrie R. Mutia, Rinandang B. Batalo, Esmael M. Dansal, et al., vs. The Commission on Elections, The Municipal Board of Canvassers, et al.)

Petitioners assail the resolution of the Commission on Elections en banc dismissing their petition to declare a failure of elections in the Municipality of Munai, Province of Lanao del Norte.

In their petition, petitioners Tawantawan M. Caruntongan and Nasser Manalao, candidates for Municipal Mayor and Vice Mayor, respectively, enumerated the following as grounds for the declaration of failure of elections:

1. Massive vote buying;

2. Illegal assignment of Rakim Paute as Election Officer of Munai;

3. Appointment of disqualified BEIs;

4. Shoot-out on the eve of the election between unidentified armed men and members of the Philippine Army escorting election forms and paraphernalia in barangay Cadulawan;

5. Transfer of polling places without notice;

6. Absence of voting booths in barangays Tambo and Cadulawan; and

7. Non-signing of the Voter's Registration Form.

(p. 151, Rollo).

The COMELEC dismissed the petition because the grounds relied upon are not those which constitute grounds for a declaration of failure of election.

Unperturbed, petitioners filed the instant petition which must necessarily fail.

Section 6, Article 1 of the Omnibus Election Code explicitly states:

SEC. 6. Failure of Election. If, on account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or other analogous causes the election in any polling place has not been held on the date fixed, or had been suspended before the hour fixed by law for the closing of the voting, or after the voting and during the preparation and the transmission of the election returns or in the custody or canvass thereof, such election results in a failure to elect, and in any of such cases the failure or suspension of election would affect the result of the election, the Commission shall, on the basis of a verified petition by any interested party and after due notice and hearing, call for the holding or continuation of the election not held, suspended or which resulted in a failure to elect on a date reasonably close to the date of election not held, suspended or which resulted in a failure to elect but not later than thirty days after the cessation of the cause of such postponement or suspension of the election or failure to elect.

Clearly, the only three instances wherein a failure of election may be validly declared are when: 1) the election in any polling place has not been held on the date fixed in account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or other analogous causes; 2) the election in any polling place had been suspended before the hour fixed by law for the closing of the voting on account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or other analogous causes; or 3) after the voting and during the preparation and transmission of the election returns or in the custody or canvass thereof, such election results in a failure to elect on account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or other analogous cases.This enumeration is exclusive and restrictive.It limits the power of this Commission to annul the results of an election only to those instances where the election is not held, is suspended or results in a failure to elect.The latter phrase should be understood in its literal sense, which is, nobody was elected (Borja, Jr. vs. COMELEC, 260 SCRA 604 [1996]).

Moreover, the irregularities pointed out by petitioners such as vote-buying, fraud, and terrorism are grounds for an election contest and may not, as a rule, be invoked to declare a failure of election and to disenfranchise the greater number of the electorate through the misdeeds, precisely, of only a relative few (Ututalum vs. COMELEC, 181 SCRA 335 [1990]; Depatuan vs. COMELEC, 185 SCRA 86 [1990]).

WHEREFORE, petition is DISMISSED.(Quisumbing, J., no part.Quisumbing and Carpio, JJ., abroad on official business)

Very truly yours,

LUZVIMINDA D. PUNO

Clerk of Court

(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA

Asst. Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE