Case Digest (G.R. No. 149666)
Facts:
Bao v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 149666, December 19, 2003, the Supreme Court En Banc, Carpio Morales, J., writing for the Court. Petitioner Sangcad S. Bao ran for re-election as mayor of Butig, Lanao del Sur in the May 14, 2001 elections; other candidates included Gorigao Langco, Dimnatang L. Pansar, and Rasmia U. Salic Romato.On May 25, 2001 petitioner filed before the COMELEC a "Very Urgent Petition for Suspension of Counting of Votes ... and Declaration of Failure of Election in Butig, Lanao del Sur" (SPA Case No. 01-336), naming Pansar, Provincial Election Supervisor Atty. Ray Sumalipao, and Col. Felix Castro, Jr. as respondents. The petition alleged widespread irregularities in numerous precincts (armed escorts of nonvoters, missing ballot boxes, unauthorized persons acting as BEIs, premature or reopened closings, ballot stuffing and forcible filling of ballots) and sought suspension of canvass and declaration of failure of election.
Petitioner submitted on May 29 an "Additional Submission" containing Acting Election Officer Taha Casidar's Narrative Report describing bombings, commotion, ballot boxes moved to the Municipal Hall, and his refusal to reopen boxes because of danger. On June 4 petitioner moved to defer canvass and suspend proclamation. On June 8 Langco filed a petition-in-intervention adopting the allegations and adding more complaints about military presence, low turnout due to explosions, illegal transfers of polling places, and counting supervised by soldiers.
The COMELEC En Banc on June 14 admitted Langco's intervention, directed the Municipal Board of Canvassers to hold proclamation in abeyance, issued summons to respondents, and set the case for immediate hearing. A June 28, 2001 hearing was conducted, during which counsel for Romato manifested intervention and counsel for Pansar stated he had not received summons; the COMELEC granted intervention and ordered respondents to file answers within three days and declared the case submitted for resolution after filing of answers/memoranda. Petitioner’s counsel expressly requested that answers/memoranda be filed "to abbreviate the proceedings."
By Resolution dated August 13, 2001, the COMELEC En Banc dismissed the Very Urgent Petition and petition-in-intervention for lack of merit and denied the motion to defer canvass and suspend proclamation. Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari under Rule 64 of the 1997 Revised Rules o...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did petitioners waive their right to present further evidence before the COMELEC by agreeing to submit the case after filing answers/memoranda?
- Did the COMELEC commit grave abuse of discretion in refusing to declare a failure of election and dismissing the petitions...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)