Labao v. Commission on Elections
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Leodegario A. Labao, Jr. (Labao, Jr.) filed his Certificate of Candidacy (COC) for Mayor of Mambusao, Capiz for the May 2013 elections. On April 10, 2013, an Information for Murder was filed against him in connection with the assassination of Vice-Mayor Abel P. Martinez, and a warrant of arrest was issued. On April 14, 2013, police attempted to arrest Labao, Jr. at a hospital in Iloilo City, but he left the premises before they could serve the warrant. Ludovico L. Martelino, Jr. (Ludovico) subsequently filed a petition for disqualification against Labao, Jr. on the ground that he was a 'fugitive from justice' under Section 40(e) of the Local Government Code (LGC). Procedural History: Labao, Jr. won the election and was proclaimed Mayor on May 14, 2013. However, the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) First Division disqualified him on September 24, 2013, ruling that his acts indicated an intent to evade prosecution. Labao, Jr. moved for reconsideration, citing that the Regional Trial Court (RTC) had temporarily suspended the warrant and that he was participating in Department of Justice (DOJ) review proceedings. On May 21, 2014, the RTC dismissed the murder charge for lack of probable cause. On the same day, the COMELEC En Banc affirmed the disqualification and ordered the rules of succession under Section 44 of the LGC to apply. Sharon Grace Martinez-Martelino (Sharon), the second-placer, intervened, seeking to be proclaimed Mayor instead of applying succession. The Petition: Labao, Jr. filed a Petition for Certiorari (G.R. No. 212615) arguing that the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion because the case was no longer a pre-proclamation controversy after his proclamation and that he was not a fugitive from justice, especially since the murder charge was dismissed. Sharon filed a separate petition (G.R. No. 212989) seeking proclamation as the winning candidate based on Labao, Jr.'s disqualification.
Issue(s)
Whether the petition for disqualification filed against Labao, Jr. constitutes a pre-proclamation controversy. Whether Labao, Jr. was a 'fugitive from justice' at the time of the May 13, 2013 elections, thereby disqualifying him under Section 40(e) of the Local Government Code (LGC).
Ruling
The Supreme Court GRANTED Labao, Jr.'s petition (G.R. No. 212615) and DISMISSED Sharon's petition (G.R. No. 212989) as moot. The COMELEC Resolutions were SET ASIDE.
Ratio Decidendi
On Issue 1: The Court ruled that the petition was for disqualification and not a pre-proclamation controversy. Under Section 241 of the Omnibus Election Code (OEC), a pre-proclamation controversy is limited to questions pertaining to the proceedings of the board of canvassers or matters related to the preparation and appreciation of election returns. Section 243 of the OEC provides a restrictive and exclusive list of issues that may be raised, such as illegal composition of the board or tampered returns. Disqualification based on Section 40(e) of the Local Government Code (LGC) is not included in this restrictive list. Therefore, the COMELEC did not err in entertaining the petition as a disqualification case even after Labao, Jr.'s proclamation, as it did not involve canvassing irregularities. On Issue 2: The Court held that Labao, Jr. was not a 'fugitive from justice' because the 'intent to evade' prosecution was not established by substantial evidence. Applying the doctrine in Rodriguez v. Commission on Elections, the Court emphasized that knowledge of an indictment must be coupled with a deliberate flight to avoid the legal process. Labao, Jr. demonstrated a desire to participate in the legal proceedings by filing a Petition for Review with the Department of Justice (DOJ) and motions with the Regional Trial Court (RTC). Furthermore, he remained in Mambusao, took his oath of office, assumed his duties, and received his salary, which are acts inconsistent with being in hiding. The eventual dismissal of the murder charge for lack of probable cause further supported the conclusion that his disqualification was grossly unreasonable and constituted grave abuse of discretion.
Main Doctrine
The status of a 'fugitive from justice' as a ground for disqualification under Section 40(e) of the Local Government Code (LGC) requires the concurrence of two elements: (1) the existence of an indictment or conviction, and (2) a deliberate intent to evade prosecution or punishment. This intent is the 'compelling factor' and must be proven by substantial evidence showing that the subject is actively hiding or has fled the jurisdiction to avoid the legal process. Mere failure to be apprehended at a specific time or place, especially when the individual continues to participate in legal remedies or performs public duties, is insufficient to establish such status.