ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[G.R. No. 163259.� July 27, 2004]

PING vs. COMELEC

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JUL 27 2004.

G.R. No. 163259 (Harry Ang Ping and Maria Zenaida Ang Ping vs. Commission on Elections and Miles Andrew Mari Roces.)

This petition involves the validity of the substitution of petitioner Maria Zenaida Ang Ping for petitioner Harry Ang Ping as candidate for Representative of the Third Congressional District of the City of Manila. During the pendency of this case, private respondent Miles Andrew Mari Roces was proclaimed by the City Board of Canvassers as the duly elected candidate for the said position.

In the meantime, it appears that on May 24, 2004, petitioner Maria Zenaida Ang Ping filed an election protest against private respondent Miles Andrew Mari Roces before the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal, docketed as HRET Case No. 04-004.

Indeed, jurisdiction over election contests involving Congressmen is vested in the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal. Article VI, Section 17 of the Constitution states:

The 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 . Each Electoral Tribunal shall be composed of nine Members, three of whom shall be Justices of the Supreme Court to be designated by the Chief Justice, and the remaining six shall be Members of the Senate or the House of Representatives, as the case may be, who shall be chosen on the basis of proportional representation from the political parties and the parties or organizations registered under the party-list system represented therein. The senior Justice in the Electoral Tribunal shall be its Chairman. (emphasis ours)

Before this Court can resolve the substantive merits of this petition, there must first be a clear showing that it has jurisdiction over the same.

ACCORDINGLY, petitioners are required to SHOW CAUSE, within a non-extendible period of TEN (10) DAYS from notice hereof, why this Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition should not be dismissed in view of the filing and pendency of HRET Case No. 04-004 before the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA

Acting Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE