Mogueis Jr. v. Commission on Elections
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: In the January 30, 1980 local elections, petitioner Francisco C. Mogueis, Jr. and private respondent Cesar Al. Bisnar were candidates for mayor of San Fernando, Masbate. The Municipal Board of Canvassers proclaimed Mogueis as the winner with a margin of two votes. Procedural History: On February 7, 1980, Bisnar filed an election protest with the Court of First Instance of Masbate, alleging tampering and falsification of election returns in specific voting centers and seeking to be declared the mayor-elect. On February 11, 1980, Bisnar filed a petition with the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) docketed as Pre-Proclamation Case No. 372, seeking to annul the canvass and proclamation of Mogueis, invoking similar grounds. The COMELEC issued Resolution No. 9264 suspending the proclamation, then Resolution No. 9330 lifting the suspension, and subsequently Resolution No. 9449 reconsidering Resolution No. 9330 and restoring the suspension, ordering a recount in specific voting centers. Resolution No. 9552 was issued to implement Resolution No. 9449. Later, COMELEC issued Resolution No. 9704 ordering a new canvass excluding returns from specific voting centers. On May 2, 1980, a new Board of Canvassers proclaimed Bisnar as mayor-elect based on a recount excluding certain voting centers, and Bisnar assumed office. On June 5, 1980, the Supreme Court issued a restraining order. The Petition: Petitioner Mogueis filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition with the Supreme Court, alleging that the COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion in issuing Resolutions Nos. 9449 and 9552.
Issue(s)
Whether the Commission on Elections acted with grave abuse of discretion in entertaining Pre-Proclamation Case No. 372 and issuing Resolutions Nos. 9449 and 9552. Whether private respondent Bisnar should be cited for contempt of court.
Ruling
The petition is granted. The questioned resolutions of the Commission on Elections are set aside, and respondent Cesar Al. Bisnar is ordered to surrender the office of Mayor of San Fernando, Masbate to petitioner Francisco C. Mogueis Jr., without prejudice to the continuance of the electoral protest filed by respondent Bisnar with the Court of First Instance of Masbate. The decision is immediately executory.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of grave abuse of discretion by the COMELEC: The Supreme Court held that the COMELEC committed a grave abuse of discretion. The Court emphasized that once a Court of First Instance acquires jurisdiction by virtue of the filing of an election protest, all questions relative thereto are to be decided in that case to the exclusion of any other forum. In this instance, private respondent Bisnar had already filed a regular election protest with the Court of First Instance of Masbate on February 7, 1980. Four days later, on February 11, 1980, he filed a petition with the COMELEC seeking to nullify the canvass and proclamation, invoking the same grounds. This subsequent filing with the COMELEC, after an election protest was already pending, could not be considered a valid pre-proclamation controversy. The Court reiterated the established rule that after an election duly held and a proclamation thereafter made, a pre-proclamation controversy should no longer be entertained. The Court found that Bisnar's act of filing an election protest first and then a pre-proclamation case with the COMELEC was either an afterthought or an attempt to circumvent the proper procedure, and that he was deemed estopped from pursuing the COMELEC petition. The Court also noted that Bisnar could still prove his allegations regarding tampering and falsification in the election protest he himself initiated, which is the appropriate remedy for such matters. The Court cited previous rulings in Filart vs. Comelec, Reyes vs. Reyes, Acain vs. Board of Canvassers, Aguinaldo vs. Comelec, Arcenas vs. Comelec, Singco vs. Comelec, Olfato vs. Comelec, and Mitmug vs. Comelec to support its conclusion that the COMELEC should not have interfered with a matter already under the jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance through an election protest. On the motion for contempt: The Supreme Court found the motion for contempt not tenable. It was established that respondent Bisnar had already assumed the office of mayor before he received the restraining order dated June 5, 1980. The restraining order only prohibited him from assuming office but did not require him to vacate it if he had already done so. Therefore, his assumption of office prior to receiving the order did not constitute defiance. Regarding the alleged contemptuous remark about the restraining order being a "scrap of toilet paper," the Court noted that this claim was denied by Bisnar and supported by affidavits from residents, making the charge untenable due to conflicting evidence.
Main Doctrine
The Commission on Elections committed a grave abuse of discretion in entertaining a pre-proclamation case when an election protest had already been filed with the Court of First Instance, as the latter court had acquired jurisdiction over the controversy to the exclusion of the COMELEC.