BANAGA, JR. vs. COMELEC (G.R. No. 134696)

BANAGA, JR. vs. COMELEC
G.R. No. 134696
July 31, 2000

This special civil action for certiorari seeks to annul the en banc resolution of public respondent Commission on Elections promulgated on June 29, 1998, in a COMELEC special action case, SPA No. 98-383.

Facts:

Petitioner Banaga, Jr. and respondent Bernabe, Jr. were both candidates for vice-mayor of the City of Parañaque in the May 1998 election. In said election, the city board of canvassers proclaimed respondent Bernabe, Jr., as the winner for having garnered 71,977 votes over petitioner Banaga, Jr.’s 68,970 votes.

Dissatisfied with the result, petitioner filed with the COMELEC on May 1998, a Petition to Declare Failure of Elections and/or For Annulment of Elections, alleging that said election was replete with election offenses, such as vote buying and flying voters. He also alleged that numerous Election Returns pertaining to the position of Vice-Mayor in the City of Parañaque appear to be altered, falsified or fabricated.

In fact, there were people arrested who admitted the said election offenses. Therefore, the incidents were sufficient to declare a failure of elections because it cannot be considered as the true will of the people.

Petitioner Banaga, Jr. is praying that he should be adjudged as the duly elected Vice-Mayor in the City of Parañaque, during the May 1998 local elections.

Respondent COMELEC dismissed petitioner’s suit and held that the election offenses relied upon by petitioner do not fall under any of the instances enumerated in Section 6 of the Omnibus Election Code. The election tribunal concluded that based on the allegations of the petition, it is clear that an election took place and that it did not result in a failure to elect and therefore, cannot be viewed as an election protest.

Thus, this petition for certiorari alleging that the respondent COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction for dismissing his petition motu propio without any basis whatsoever and without giving him the benefit of a hearing.

Issue:

WON petition to declare a failure of elections and/or for annulment of election is considered as an election protest.

WON respondent COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion in dismissing petitioners petition, in the light of petitioners foregoing contentions.

Decision:

WHEREFORE, the instant petition is DISMISSED. The assailed RESOLUTION of public respondent is AFFIRMED. Costs against petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi:

1) No. Mr. Banaga, Jr.’s petition docketed as SPA-98-383 before the COMELEC was a special action under the 1993 COMELEC Rules of Procedure. An election protest is an ordinary governed by Rule 20 on ordinary actions, while a petition to declare failure of elections is covered by Rule 26 under special actions. Petitioner also did not comply with the requirements for filing an election protest such as failing to pay filing fee and cash deposits for an election protest.

2) No. Respondent COMELEC committed no grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the petition to declare failure of elections and/or for annulment of elections for being groundless. The petition to declare a failure of election and/or to annul election results must show on its face that the conditions necessary to declare a failure to elect are present. Respondent COMELEC only based its decision on the provisions of the Omnibus Election Code with regard to declaring a failure of election. There are three instances where a failure of election may be declared, namely:
(a) the election in any polling place has not been held on the date fixed on account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud or other analogous causes;
(b) the election in any polling place has 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
(c) 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 causes.
The instances being not present in the petition of Mr. Banaga, Jr. The respondent COMELEC have no other recourse but to dismiss the petition.

fr: atty. manuel >.<