Kare v. Commission on Elections
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Salvador K. Moll and Avelino Ceriola were candidates for the position of Mayor of Malinao, Albay, in the May 14, 2001 elections. Moll garnered the highest number of votes, with Ceriola placing second. Emiliana Toral Kare was elected Vice Mayor in the same election. Ceriola filed a petition with the Commission on Elections (Comelec) seeking Moll's disqualification, alleging Moll had been convicted by final judgment for usurpation of authority or official functions, an offense punishable by imprisonment. Procedural History: The Comelec First Division initially dismissed Ceriola's petition. However, upon Ceriola's motion for reconsideration, the Comelec en banc set aside the dismissal and remanded the case for further hearing. After the provincial election supervisor submitted a report, the Comelec en banc, on March 19, 2003, issued a resolution disqualifying Moll from holding the office of Mayor and ordering the proclamation of Ceriola as the mayor-elect. Emiliana Toral Kare subsequently filed a petition with the Supreme Court seeking to nullify the proclamation of Ceriola, and Moll also filed a petition seeking to annul the Comelec resolution. The Petition: Before the Supreme Court, two petitions were filed: GR No. 157526 by Emiliana Toral Kare, and GR No. 157527 by Salvador K. Moll. Both petitions sought, through Petitions for Certiorari under Rules 64 and 65, the nullification of the Comelec's March 19, 2003 Resolution. Kare argued that as the elected Vice Mayor, she should succeed to the mayoral position if Moll were disqualified. Moll contended that his conviction had not attained finality and thus he should not be disqualified. The core issues presented to the Supreme Court were whether Moll should be disqualified and, if so, who should assume the mayoral position – the second-placer Ceriola or the elected Vice Mayor Kare.
Issue(s)
Should Moll be disqualified from running and/or holding the position of mayor, considering the finality of his conviction? If Moll is disqualified after the election, who should become the mayor – the second placer (Ceriola) or the elected vice-mayor (Kare)?
Ruling
The Petition in G.R. No. 157526 is partly granted, and the assailed Resolution is modified. Petitioner Salvador K. Moll is declared ineligible for the position of municipal mayor of Malinao, Albay. In view of the vacancy created in that office, Petitioner Emiliana Toral Kare, the duly elected vice mayor, shall succeed as mayor, following the rule on succession. The status quo order of this Court dated April 1, 2003, is made permanent. Petitioner Kare shall continue discharging the duties and powers of the mayor of Malinao, Albay. The Petition in G.R. No. 157527 is dismissed for lack of merit.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of Moll's disqualification: The Court disagreed with Moll's contention that his judgment of conviction had not attained finality. Applying Section 7 of Rule 120 and Section 6 of Rule 122 of the Rules of Court, the Court clarified that the period for appeal is interrupted only by a motion for reconsideration or new trial directed at the judgment itself. Moll's "Motion to Quash the Information" and subsequent "Motion for Reconsideration" were directed at matters extraneous to the judgment of conviction and thus did not interrupt the finality of his conviction. Furthermore, the promulgation of the judgment was validly made even in Moll's absence because his counsel was present and he had received notice. Since no appeal was seasonably filed, the judgment became final, disqualifying Moll under Section 40(a) of the Local Government Code (RA No. 7160) as he was sentenced by final judgment for an offense punishable by imprisonment. On who should become mayor: The Court disagreed with the Comelec's application of Section 211(24) of the Omnibus Election Code (OEC) to declare Ceriola, the second placer, as the winner. The Court held that while Section 211(24) states that votes for a disqualified candidate shall be considered stray, this must be read in conjunction with Section 72 of the OEC, as amended by RA 6646. Section 72 provides that a candidate declared disqualified by final judgment before an election shall not be voted for, and votes cast for him shall not be counted. However, if a candidate is not declared disqualified by final judgment before the election and receives the winning votes, his violation shall not prevent his proclamation. In this case, Moll was not declared disqualified by final judgment before the May 14, 2001 election. The Comelec's resolution disqualifying him was issued on March 19, 2003, long after the election. Therefore, the votes cast for Moll were presumed to have been made in the sincere belief that he was qualified and could not be retroactively invalidated as stray votes. The Court reiterated the doctrine that the second placer cannot be proclaimed winner when the winning candidate is disqualified after the election, as this would disenfranchise the voters and substitute the Court's judgment for the voters' will. The Court cited Aquino v. Comelec to emphasize that the second placer is merely repudiated by the electorate and cannot be assumed to have received the votes of the disqualified candidate. The Court concluded that a permanent vacancy was created by Moll's failure to qualify, and under Section 44 of RA 7160, the duly elected vice-mayor, Emiliana Toral Kare, shall succeed as mayor. The Comelec's contrary ruling was deemed a grave abuse of discretion.
Main Doctrine
When a candidate who garnered the highest number of votes is disqualified after the election, a permanent vacancy is created, and the duly elected vice-mayor succeeds to the position, as votes cast for the disqualified candidate are considered stray if the disqualification was declared prior to the election, but not if declared thereafter.