Sangcopan v. Commission on Elections
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: This case concerns a dispute over the proclamation of winning candidates in the special barangay elections held on August 13, 2002, in Barangay Basak/Bangco, Madalum, Lanao del Sur. The core of the controversy lies in whether Barangay Bangco should be considered a separate entity from Barangay Basak, or if they constitute a single barangay for electoral purposes. The petitioner, Alizaman S. Sangcopan, a losing candidate, alleged that the merger of Bangco with Basak was illegal and that the election itself was invalid due to procedural irregularities and a prior COMELEC order to hold it in abeyance. Procedural History: The petitioner initially lodged a complaint with the COMELEC on June 25, 2002, questioning the merger of Bangco with Basak, presenting evidence that Bangco had been treated as a separate barangay in previous elections. This led to the COMELEC issuing Resolution No. 5227, giving the Election Officer a chance to present his side, and subsequently declaring the July 15, 2002 election a failure. A special election was scheduled for August 13, 2002, but COMELEC Resolution No. 5503 placed it in abeyance pending investigation. Despite this, the Election Officer proceeded with the election, which was later nullified by field memoranda. However, on January 14, 2003, the COMELEC en banc issued Minute Resolution No. 03-0062, directing the counting of ballots and proclamation of winners, treating Basak/Bangco as a single barangay. This directive was followed, leading to the proclamation of private respondents. The petitioner then filed a petition to annul this proclamation and the election, which was denied by the COMELEC Second Division on May 12, 2005. A motion for reconsideration was subsequently denied by the COMELEC en banc on August 26, 2005. The Petition: Petitioner filed the present petition for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus under Rule 64 in relation to Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, assailing the COMELEC en banc's August 26, 2005 Resolution. He argues that the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion by ruling that a valid election occurred, by issuing Minute Resolution No. 03-0062, and by authorizing the merger of Barangay Basak and Bangco. Specifically, he contends that COMELEC Resolution No. 5503 effectively withdrew the Election Officer's authority to hold the August 13, 2002 election, rendering it null and void, and that the subsequent COMELEC en banc resolution allowing the counting and proclamation was an arbitrary act. Furthermore, he maintains that Bangco is a distinct barangay and should not have been merged with Basak, citing historical evidence of its separate status. The petition seeks to nullify the proclamation of the winning candidates and the election itself.
Issue(s)
Whether or not the respondent Commission gravely abused its discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in ruling that there was a valid election in Precinct No. 68A for Barangay Basak/Bangco and in issuing COMELEC Minute Resolution No. 03-0062. Whether or not the respondent Commission gravely abused its discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when it authorized the merger of Barangay Basak and Barangay Bangco treating it as one barangay.
Ruling
The petition is DISMISSED. The COMELEC Resolution in SPC No. 03-001 dated August 26, 2005 is hereby AFFIRMED.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of whether there was a valid election and the issuance of COMELEC Minute Resolution No. 03-0062: The Court held that the COMELEC en banc did not commit grave abuse of discretion. Resolution No. 5503 only ordered the election to be held in abeyance, but this order was not officially received by the Election Officer until after the casting of votes had been completed. The COMELEC Second Division correctly noted that the order to hold the election in abeyance was not implemented because it came to the knowledge of the voters only after the casting of votes. The Election Officer acted appropriately by proceeding with the election in the absence of any official document directing him to hold it in abeyance. Furthermore, the COMELEC en banc, which has the sole discretion to annul elections, did not annul the special barangay election of August 13, 2002. The COMELEC Second Division found no evidence of widespread and pervasive terrorism or election frauds that would vitiate the election, and the counting and canvassing proceeded without major untoward incidents, thus giving credence to the election and its results. The subsequent Minute Resolution No. 03-0062 directing the counting and proclamation was a consequence of the COMELEC Law Department's finding that Basak and Bangco had been considered one barangay. On the issue of the merger of Barangay Basak and Barangay Bangco: The Court found no grave abuse of discretion. The COMELEC relied on the Certification dated June 19, 2002, from the DILG, Province of Lanao del Sur, which stated that Bangco was not an existing barangay and had no legal basis for existence according to the Masterlist of Barangays in 1997, despite being listed in 1994. Absent any official declaration from the DILG and the Province of Lanao del Sur that Bangco was a separate barangay, the COMELEC acted appropriately by relying on its official documents and integrating the voters of Bangco with those of Barangay Basak under Precinct No. 68A, consistent with past election exercises. The Court noted that questions regarding the legal existence of separate barangays should be threshed out in a separate adversarial proceeding, not in the present election dispute.
Main Doctrine
The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) did not commit grave abuse of discretion in affirming the proclamation of winning candidates in a special barangay election, even if the election was initially ordered held in abeyance, when the order of abeyance was not officially received by the Election Officer and the election proceeded without major untoward incidents, and the COMELEC en banc, which has the sole discretion to annul elections, did not annul the election.