Bolos v. Commission on Elections
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner Nicasio Bolos, Jr. served as Punong Barangay of Barangay Biking, Dauis, Bohol for three consecutive terms: 1994-1997, 1997-2000, and 2002-2004. In the May 2004 elections, he ran for and won the position of Municipal Councilor of Dauis, Bohol, assuming office on July 1, 2004, and thereby vacating his post as Punong Barangay. He served the full term as Municipal Councilor until June 30, 2007. Subsequently, he filed a Certificate of Candidacy for Punong Barangay for the October 29, 2007 elections. Procedural History: Respondent Rey Angeles Cinconiegue, an opposing candidate, filed a petition with the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) seeking the disqualification of petitioner Bolos, Jr. on the grounds that he had already served the constitutional three-term limit for the position of Punong Barangay. The COMELEC, in a Resolution dated March 4, 2008, granted the petition, disqualifying Bolos, Jr. and annulling his proclamation, finding that his assumption of office as Municipal Councilor constituted a voluntary renunciation of his Punong Barangay post, thus completing his third term. Petitioner's motion for reconsideration was denied by the COMELEC en banc in a Resolution dated August 7, 2008. The Petition: Petitioner Nicasio Bolos, Jr. filed this petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, alleging that the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. He contends that his election and assumption of office as Municipal Councilor was by operation of law, constituting an involuntary interruption of his service as Punong Barangay, and therefore, he had not completed his third term. The core issue presented to the Supreme Court is whether petitioner's relinquishment of the Punong Barangay office upon assuming the Municipal Councilor position was a voluntary renunciation, thereby disqualifying him from running for Punong Barangay in the 2007 elections.
Issue(s)
Whether the Commission on Elections acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction amounting to lack of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion in disqualifying petitioner as a candidate for Punong Barangay and annulling his proclamation. Whether petitioner's election and assumption of office as Sangguniang Bayan member constituted a voluntary renunciation of his office as Punong Barangay, thereby rendering his service continuous for the purpose of the three-term limit; and whether such relinquishment was by "operation of law".
Ruling
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition and affirmed the Resolutions of the COMELEC dated March 4, 2008, and August 7, 2008, upholding the disqualification of petitioner Nicasio Bolos, Jr. from running for Punong Barangay.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of disqualification and voluntary renunciation: The Court held that petitioner's election and assumption of office as Sangguniang Bayan member constituted a voluntary renunciation of his position as Punong Barangay. The three-term limit rule, as enshrined in Section 8, Article X of the Constitution and Section 43(b) of R.A. No. 7160 (Local Government Code), prohibits elective local officials from serving more than three consecutive terms in the same position. Crucially, voluntary renunciation of office for any length of time does not interrupt the continuity of service. Petitioner, having been elected for three consecutive terms as Punong Barangay, first met the condition for disqualification. The subsequent act of running for and assuming the position of Municipal Councilor, while still serving his third term as Punong Barangay, was not an involuntary severance from office but a deliberate choice to pursue a higher elective position. This choice, leading to the abandonment of his post as Punong Barangay, was deemed a voluntary renunciation. The Court emphasized that the petitioner knew that his election as municipal councilor would entail abandoning his post as Punong Barangay, and he intended to forego it. Abandonment, like resignation, is voluntary. Therefore, his service as Punong Barangay was considered continuous for the purpose of the three-term limit. On the argument of "operation of law" and voluntary renunciation: The Court rejected petitioner's argument that his relinquishment of the Punong Barangay office was by "operation of law." The Court clarified that "operation of law" refers to rights acquired or lost by the effect of a legal rule without any act of the person affected, or by the mere application of law without the act or cooperation of the party himself. Examples cited, such as succeeding to a higher office due to a vacancy (Montebon v. COMELEC) or assuming a higher office due to the death of the incumbent (Borja, Jr. v. COMELEC), involved involuntary interruptions in service. In contrast, petitioner's situation was different; he actively pursued and won an election for a different office, which necessitated his departure from his current post. This was a conscious decision and an act of his own volition, not an event imposed by law without his participation. Thus, his service as Punong Barangay was not interrupted by operation of law, and his assumption of the Sangguniang Bayan position was a voluntary renunciation.
Main Doctrine
The assumption of office as a Sangguniang Bayan member, which results in the relinquishment of the position of Punong Barangay, constitutes a voluntary renunciation of the Punong Barangay office, thereby rendering the service continuous for the purpose of the three-term limit rule.