Case Digest (G.R. No. 258448)
Facts:
Wilson Caritero Amad v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 258448, July 05, 2022, the Supreme Court En Banc, Gaerlan, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Wilson Caritero Amad filed his Certificate of Candidacy for Vice President on October 7, 2021. On October 11, 2021, respondent Commission on Elections (COMELEC) filed a motu proprio petition to declare Amad a nuisance candidate (SPA No. 21-057 (DC)(MP)), alleging lack of genuine intention to run, absence of nationwide support or political machinery, and limited notoriety confined to Northern Mindanao; the COMELEC emphasized Amad’s status as an independent without party backing.
On December 13, 2021, the COMELEC First Division granted the Nuisance Petition and cancelled Amad’s COC; the dispositive portion declared Amad a “NUISANCE CANDIDATE” and cancelled his certificate. Amad filed a Motion for Reconsideration via e-mail on December 20, 2021 pursuant to COMELEC Resolution No. 10673; the Office of the Clerk acknowledged receipt, assessed filing fees, and Amad paid and submitted official receipts. On January 3, 2022, the COMELEC En Banc issued two orders: one noting receipt of payment and referring the matter to the ponente for action, and another denying Amad’s motion for reconsideration as allegedly filed late (at 5:01 p.m.), unverified, and without proof of payment.
Amad filed a Petition for Certiorari with an urgent application for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) / Writ of Preliminary Injunction on January 4, 2022, challenging (1) the alleged defectiveness and lateness of his motion for reconsideration and (2) his designation as a nuisance candidate. On January 20, 2022, the Court issued a TRO enjoining the COMELEC from enforcing the December 13, 2021 Resolution and the January 3, 2022 Order and required COMELEC to comment within ten days.
Despite the TRO, Amad learned that the COMELEC had begun pre-election activities (generation of final ballot face templates beginning January 9, loading of candidates and generation of serialized ballots by January 15, configuration of SD cards by January 19, and printing of serialized ballots beginning January 23, 2022) and that draft ballot faces circulated without his name. Amad filed an Extremely Urgent Motion asking the Court to direct COMELEC to include him in the official ballot and to show cause for contempt. COMELEC filed comments (Feb. 2 and Mar. 11, 2022) asserting that the case was moot and academic due to the conduct of the May 2022 National and Local Elections and detailing its pre-election timeline.
The Court took the case and, after considering precedent including Marquez v. Commission on Elections and Philippine Guardians Brotherhood, Inc. v. Commission on Elections (PGBI), proceeded to decide despite the elections having been held. The Court found that the COMELEC committed ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is Amad’s petition moot and, if so, should the Court nonetheless exercise jurisdiction?
- Was Amad’s motion for reconsideration defective and filed out of time?
- Was Amad a nuisance candidate within the meaning of Section 69 of the Omnibus Election Code (Batas ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)