Lonzanida v. Commission on Elections

G.R. No. 135150 · 1999-07-28 · J. GONZAGA-REYES, J.: · Primary: Political; Secondary: Election Law
REITERATION

Facts

The Antecedents: Petitioner Romeo Lonzanida served two consecutive terms as Mayor of San Antonio, Zambales. In the May 1995 elections, he was again proclaimed winner. His opponent, Juan Alvez, filed an election protest, which resulted in a declaration of failure of elections by the RTC. Both parties appealed to the COMELEC. On November 13, 1997, the COMELEC declared Alvez the duly elected mayor, reversing the RTC decision. A writ of execution was issued, and Lonzanida vacated the office in March 1998. Procedural History: In the May 11, 1998 elections, Lonzanida again ran for Mayor. Eufemio Muli filed a petition to disqualify Lonzanida on the ground of having served three consecutive terms. Despite Lonzanida's proclamation as winner on May 13, 1998, the COMELEC First Division issued a resolution on May 21, 1998, disqualifying him. The COMELEC En Banc affirmed this on August 11, 1998. The Petition: Lonzanida filed a petition for certiorari, seeking to set aside the COMELEC resolutions. He argued that he had only served two consecutive terms and that his assumption of office in 1995 should not be counted as a full term because he was not lawfully elected and was later unseated. He also contended that the COMELEC lost jurisdiction after his proclamation.

Issue(s)

Whether petitioner Romeo Lonzanida's assumption of office as Mayor of San Antonio, Zambales from May 1995 to March 1998 should be considered service of one full term for the purpose of applying the three-term limit. Whether the COMELEC retained jurisdiction over the petition for disqualification after the petitioner was proclaimed winner in the May 1998 elections.

Ruling

The petition is granted. The assailed resolutions of the COMELEC declaring petitioner Lonzanida disqualified to run for mayor in the 1998 mayoral elections are set aside.

Ratio Decidendi

On the issue of service of term for the three-term limit: The Supreme Court held that petitioner Lonzanida's assumption of office from May 1995 to March 1998 cannot be counted as a term for the purpose of computing the three-term limit. The Court reiterated the principle established in Benjamin Borja, Jr. vs. COMELEC, emphasizing that the three-term limit requires both election for three consecutive terms and full service of those terms. Firstly, Lonzanida was not duly elected in the May 1995 elections, as evidenced by the COMELEC's final judgment declaring Juan Alvez as the winner. His assumption of office was based on a void proclamation, which is no proclamation at all and subject to the final outcome of an election protest. Secondly, Lonzanida did not fully serve the 1995-1998 term because he was involuntarily removed from office before its expiration, pursuant to a writ of execution. This involuntary severance constitutes an interruption of continuity of service, unlike a voluntary renunciation which does not interrupt service for the full term. Therefore, the two requisites for the application of the three-term rule were absent. On the issue of COMELEC jurisdiction: The Supreme Court affirmed that the COMELEC retained jurisdiction over the petition for disqualification. The petition was filed on April 21, 1998, before the May 1998 elections. Citing Section 6 of RA 6646 and the ruling in Sunga vs. COMELEC, the Court stated that the proclamation or assumption of office of a candidate against whom a disqualification case is pending does not divest the COMELEC of its jurisdiction. The legislative intent behind RA 6646 is for the COMELEC to continue hearing and deciding disqualification cases to their conclusion, even after the election and proclamation, to prevent candidates from employing delaying tactics.

Main Doctrine

The three-term limit for elective local officials applies only when the official has been duly elected for three consecutive terms and has fully served those terms. An assumption of office based on a void proclamation, or service interrupted by an involuntary relinquishment before the full term expires, does not count towards the three-term limit.

Access audio review, related cases, codal links, and more.

Open LexMatePH →