Gonzalez v. Commission on Elections
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner Fernando V. Gonzalez and respondent Reno G. Lim were candidates for Representative of the 3rd congressional district of Albay in the May 10, 2010 elections. A petition was filed by Stephen Bichara to disqualify and cancel Gonzalez's certificate of candidacy, alleging that Gonzalez was not a Filipino citizen and had failed to elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority, as required by Commonwealth Act No. 625. Gonzalez asserted his Filipino citizenship, citing his oath of allegiance taken on his 21st birthday, his marriage to a Filipina, his status as a registered voter, his election to local positions, and his possession of a Philippine passport. Procedural History: The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) Second Division, on May 8, 2010, granted the petition and disqualified Gonzalez. Gonzalez received this resolution on May 11, 2010, and subsequently filed a motion for reconsideration on May 14, 2010. Meanwhile, Gonzalez was proclaimed the winner on May 12, 2010, and took his oath of office. Bichara filed a motion to suspend the effects of the proclamation. The COMELEC En Banc, on July 23, 2010, denied Gonzalez's motion for reconsideration, affirmed his disqualification, and annulled his proclamation, ordering the proclamation of Reno G. Lim as the duly elected Representative. Gonzalez then filed the instant petition before the Supreme Court. The Petition: This case is a petition for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus under Rule 65 in relation to Rule 64 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, assailing the COMELEC's resolutions. Petitioner Gonzalez contends that the COMELEC gravely abused its discretion by installing Lim, who did not win the election, as Representative; by holding that Gonzalez is not a Filipino citizen; by convening a special board of canvassers to proclaim Lim; by issuing resolutions with haste and glaring mistakes; by issuing resolutions without valid certification; and by failing to hold Lim for forum-shopping. The core issues revolve around the timeliness of the petition to cancel Gonzalez's certificate of candidacy, the validity of his proclamation, and the COMELEC's jurisdiction over his citizenship after his proclamation and assumption of office.
Issue(s)
Whether the petition to cancel Gonzalez's certificate of candidacy (COC) and disqualify him was timely filed. Whether the COMELEC gravely erred in holding that the proclamation of Gonzalez was premature and illegal. Whether the COMELEC had lost jurisdiction over the issue of Gonzalez's citizenship after his proclamation and assumption of office.
Ruling
The petition is GRANTED. The assailed Resolution of the Second Division dated May 8, 2010, and the COMELEC En Banc Resolution dated July 23, 2010, in SPA No. 10-074 (DC) are ANNULLED and SET ASIDE. The Petition for Disqualification and Cancellation of Certificate of Candidacy of Fernando V. Gonzalez is DISMISSED, without prejudice to the filing of a proper petition before the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal raising the same question on the citizenship qualification of Fernando V. Gonzalez.
Ratio Decidendi
On the timeliness of the petition to cancel COC and disqualify: The Court held that a petition to cancel a COC based on false representation regarding citizenship, filed before the election, must be filed under Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code (OEC). This section prescribes a period of not later than twenty-five days from the filing of the COC. Gonzalez filed his COC on December 1, 2009. The petition by Bichara on March 30, 2010, was filed beyond the 25-day period, rendering it out of time. The COMELEC erred in treating it as a disqualification case under Section 68 of the OEC, which has a different filing period, as the issue of citizenship pertains to a material representation under Section 78. COMELEC rules or resolutions cannot supersede the statutory period provided by law. On the COMELEC's grave error in holding the proclamation premature and illegal: The Court found that Gonzalez's motion for reconsideration of the COMELEC Second Division's May 8, 2010 resolution was not pro forma. It raised substantive arguments regarding the timeliness of the petition and the insufficiency of evidence. As such, the motion for reconsideration suspended the execution of the May 8, 2010 resolution, meaning it had not become final and executory at the time of Gonzalez's proclamation on May 12, 2010. Therefore, Gonzalez remained qualified at the time of his proclamation, making it valid and legal. The COMELEC's reliance on Section 16 of COMELEC Resolution No. 8678 and Section 6 of R.A. No. 6646 to suspend proclamation was misplaced, as these provisions require a motion from the complainant or intervenor, which was not timely acted upon by the COMELEC before the proclamation. On the COMELEC's loss of jurisdiction over the citizenship issue: The Court reiterated the established doctrine that once a winning candidate has been proclaimed, taken their oath of office, and assumed office as a Member of the House of Representatives, the COMELEC's jurisdiction over election contests concerning their election, returns, and qualifications ends, and the jurisdiction transfers to the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET). In this case, Gonzalez was proclaimed on May 12, 2010, took his oath, and assumed office. Therefore, the COMELEC lost jurisdiction over the issue of his citizenship, and any further proceedings should have been conducted before the HRET. The COMELEC's attempt to annul the proclamation and order the proclamation of the second placer was an act of grave abuse of discretion.
Main Doctrine
The Supreme Court held that the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) committed grave abuse of discretion in annulling the proclamation of Fernando V. Gonzalez as the duly elected Representative of the 3rd District of Albay. The Court found that the petition to cancel Gonzalez's certificate of candidacy was filed out of time, and that his motion for reconsideration of the COMELEC's disqualification resolution was not pro forma, thus suspending the execution of the resolution. Furthermore, once a winning candidate has been proclaimed, taken his oath, and assumed office as a Member of the House of Representatives, the COMELEC's jurisdiction over election contests relating to his qualifications ends, and the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal's (HRET) jurisdiction begins.