Gallardo v. Rimando
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner Gil C. Gallardo and respondent Franco F. Rimando were candidates for Municipal Mayor of Naguilian, La Union. On January 19, 1988, Rimando was proclaimed the winner. On January 22, 1988, Gallardo filed a petition to annul the proclamation with the Commission on Elections (COMELEC). Procedural History: The COMELEC dismissed Gallardo's petition on December 8, 1988. Gallardo appealed to the Supreme Court (G.R. No. 85974), which dismissed his petition for review on May 30, 1989. Gallardo received the resolution on June 23, 1989. On June 30, 1989, Gallardo filed an election protest in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 33, Bauang, La Union. The Petition: Respondent Rimando moved to dismiss the election protest, arguing it was filed out of time. The RTC initially denied the motion but later reconsidered and dismissed the protest, citing that the COMELEC's decision had become final and executory. Gallardo appealed this dismissal to the Supreme Court.
Issue(s)
Whether the election protest filed by petitioner Gallardo was filed within the reglementary period. Whether the filing of a pre-proclamation case with the COMELEC and its subsequent appeal to the Supreme Court suspends the running of the period for filing an election protest. Whether the Regional Trial Court committed a patent error and grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the election protest.
Ruling
The petition is granted. The orders of the RTC dismissing the election protest are annulled and set aside. The RTC is ordered to reinstate the election protest and proceed with trial.
Ratio Decidendi
On the timeliness of the election protest: The Supreme Court held that Gallardo's election protest was filed on time. Section 251 of the Omnibus Election Code provides a ten-day period for filing an election contest after proclamation. However, Section 248 of the same Code explicitly states that the filing of a petition to annul or suspend proclamation suspends the running of the period for filing an election protest. In this case, Gallardo filed his pre-proclamation petition on January 21, 1988, leaving only eight days of the reglementary period. This remaining period was suspended during the pendency of the pre-proclamation case before the COMELEC and subsequently before the Supreme Court until Gallardo received the Supreme Court's resolution on June 23, 1989. The eight-day remainder resumed running, making the deadline July 1, 1989. Gallardo filed his protest on June 30, 1989, which was within the remaining period. On the suspension of the period: The Court clarified that the appeal by certiorari to the Supreme Court is an integral part of the annulment proceeding. Therefore, the case is not considered concluded until the Supreme Court renders its verdict. Consequently, the computation of the ten-day period for filing an election contest does not commence until the Supreme Court's decision is handed down. The lower court's assertion that the period is not stopped by the elevation of the COMELEC's decision to the Supreme Court was deemed incorrect. On the interpretation of Section 246 of the Omnibus Election Code: The Court found that the RTC judge misinterpreted Section 246. While a COMELEC decision in a pre-proclamation case becomes executory after five days if not restrained by the Supreme Court, this executory nature pertains to the prevailing party's right to be proclaimed and assume office. It does not preclude the losing party from filing an election contest within the statutory ten-day period under Section 251. The issues resolved in a pre-proclamation controversy are limited to the legality of the canvassing board's proceedings, the authenticity of election returns, and whether they were prepared under duress, which are distinct from the election contest's purpose of ascertaining the true will of the voters through a proper evaluation of ballots and recounting.
Main Doctrine
The filing of a pre-proclamation petition with the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) suspends the running of the period within which to file an election protest. This suspension continues until the Supreme Court's final resolution of the pre-proclamation case is received by the losing party.