Velasco v. Belmonte
REITERATIONFacts
1. The Antecedents: The underlying dispute concerns the election for the Lone District Representative of Marinduque in the May 13, 2013 elections. A petition was filed with the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) to deny due course or cancel the Certificate of Candidacy (COC) of Regina Ongsiako Reyes (Reyes), alleging material misrepresentations regarding her residency, citizenship, and eligibility. The COMELEC First Division granted this petition, cancelling Reyes's COC. This decision was affirmed by the COMELEC En Banc. 2. Procedural History: Despite the COMELEC's cancellation of her COC, Reyes was proclaimed the winner by the Marinduque Provincial Board of Canvassers on May 18, 2013. Lord Allan Jay Q. Velasco (Velasco), the opposing candidate, filed an election protest and a quo warranto petition with the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET). Meanwhile, Reyes filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court (SC) challenging the COMELEC's cancellation of her COC. The SC dismissed Reyes's petition, upholding the COMELEC's decision. Subsequently, the COMELEC En Banc declared Reyes's proclamation void and proclaimed Velasco as the winning candidate. The COMELEC also issued an order directing the reconstitution of the Provincial Board of Canvassers to proclaim Velasco, which occurred on July 16, 2013. Reyes's subsequent motions for reconsideration before the SC were denied. The HRET later dismissed quo warranto petitions against Reyes, citing the SC's ruling in Reyes v. COMELEC as the reason for its lack of jurisdiction. 3. The Petition: Velasco filed a Petition for Mandamus under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court against the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Secretary General of the House, and Regina Ongsiako Reyes. Velasco seeks to compel the Speaker to administer his oath of office and allow him to assume the position of Representative for Marinduque, and to compel the Secretary General to remove Reyes's name from the Roll of Members and register his name in her stead. He argues that he has a clear legal right to the position based on the final and executory decisions of the COMELEC and the Supreme Court, and that the acts sought are ministerial duties. He also seeks a temporary restraining order and injunction to prevent Reyes from continuing to hold the office.
Issue(s)
Whether Speaker Belmonte, Jr. can be compelled by a Writ of Mandamus to administer the oath in favor of petitioner and allow him to assume the position of Representative for Marinduque. Whether Sec. Gen. Barua-Yap can be compelled by a Writ of Mandamus to delete the name of respondent Reyes from the Roll of Members and include the name of petitioner. Whether a TRO and a Writ of Permanent Injunction can be issued to prevent respondent Reyes from exercising the prerogatives and performing the functions as Marinduque Representative, and to order her to vacate the said office.
Ruling
The Petition for Mandamus is GRANTED. The Supreme Court ordered that Speaker Feliciano R. Belmonte, Jr. shall administer the oath of office of petitioner Lord Allan Jay Q. Velasco as the duly-elected Representative of the Lone District of the Province of Marinduque. Public respondent Hon. Marilyn B. Barua-Yap, Secretary General, House of Representatives, shall register the name of petitioner Lord Allan Jay Q. Velasco in the Roll of Members of the House of Representatives after he has taken his oath of office. The Decision is IMMEDIATELY EXECUTORY.
Ratio Decidendi
On the propriety of Mandamus and the ministerial duty of Speaker Belmonte, Jr. and Sec. Gen. Barua-Yap: The Court clarified that the petition is one for mandamus, not quo warranto, as it seeks the enforcement of clear legal duties based on final and executory decisions, rather than trying a disputed title to an office. A writ of mandamus lies when an officer unlawfully neglects to perform an act specifically enjoined by law as a duty, and the petitioner has a well-defined, clear, and certain right to warrant the grant. The acts of administering the oath and registering a member in the Roll of Members are ministerial duties when mandated by final court decisions, not discretionary acts. The Court found that Speaker Belmonte, Jr. and Sec. Gen. Barua-Yap have no discretion in administering the oath to Velasco and registering his name, respectively. This is because there exist final and executory resolutions from the Supreme Court in G.R. No. 207264 and the COMELEC in SPA No. 13-053 (DC) and SPC No. 13-010, which cancelled Reyes's Certificate of Candidacy (COC), declared her proclamation void, and proclaimed Velasco as the winning candidate. These settled facts establish Velasco's clear and certain right to the position. On the validity of Reyes's proclamation and assumption of office and the jurisdiction of the HRET: The Court emphasized that Reyes's proclamation on May 18, 2013, was without basis because her COC had already been cancelled by the COMELEC En Banc on May 14, 2013, a decision affirmed by the Supreme Court. Without a valid COC, she could not be a candidate, much less a proclaimed winner. Her subsequent oath of office and assumption of duties were therefore baseless. The Court noted that the COMELEC's cancellation of Reyes's COC preceded her proclamation, and this cancellation was upheld by the Supreme Court, rendering any subsequent proclamation illegal. The Court reiterated its ruling in G.R. No. No. 207264 that the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) has jurisdiction only after a candidate is considered a Member of the House, which requires a valid proclamation, a proper oath, and assumption of office. Since Reyes's proclamation was nullified, she was never considered a Member of the House, and thus the HRET lacked jurisdiction over quo warranto petitions against her. The HRET's own resolution in December 2015 dismissing cases against Reyes for lack of jurisdiction, based on the Supreme Court's ruling in G.R. No. 207264, further supported this conclusion. On the application of res judicata and the finality of judgments: The Court rejected the argument that Velasco, Speaker Belmonte, Jr., and Sec. Gen. Barua-Yap were not parties to G.R. No. 207264 and thus could not invoke its enforcement. The Court held that all are legally bound by its judgment, which established Reyes's ineligibility. To allow otherwise would clog the dockets and defeat the purpose of res judicata. The Court stressed that the rule of law demands obedience to final and executory decisions, and there is no alternative to it except chaos and confusion.
Main Doctrine
A writ of mandamus may be issued to compel the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Secretary-General to administer the oath of office and register a duly proclaimed winning candidate in the Roll of Members, respectively, when such acts are ministerial duties mandated by final and executory court decisions, and not discretionary.