G.R. No. 160465 - Estrella vs. Commission on Elections

Romeo M. Estrella (petitioner) and Rolando F. Salvador (respondent) were candidates for mayor of Baliuag, Bulacan in the May 14, 2001 elections.
The Municipal Board of Canvassers proclaimed Salvador as winner.

Petitioner filed an election protest before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Bulacan, docketed as EPC No. 10-M-2001.
On April 10, 2002, the RTC annulled respondent’s proclamation and declared petitioner as the duly elected mayor.

Respondent appealed the RTC decision to the Commission on Elections (COMELEC), docketed as EAC No. A-10-2002, raffled to the Second Division.
Petitioner filed a motion for execution of the RTC decision pending appeal before the RTC.
On April 16, 2002, the RTC granted execution pending appeal and issued a writ of execution.

Respondent assailed the RTC’s April 16, 2002 order via petition for certiorari filed with COMELEC, docketed as SPR No. 21-2002, raffled to the Second Division.
Petitioner moved for the inhibition of Commissioner Ralph C. Lantion of the COMELEC Second Division.
On May 30, 2002, the COMELEC Second Division issued a Status Quo Ante Order.
The motion for inhibition was denied by the COMELEC Second Division on July 9, 2002.

Petitioner elevated issues to the Supreme Court in G.R. No. 154041 challenging the May 30, 2002 Status Quo Ante Order, supplemented on July 30, 2002.
No temporary restraining order (TRO) was issued, leading to the implementation of the Status Quo Ante Order by July 17, 2003, resulting in petitioner’s ouster.
On July 23, 2002, during the hearing of SPR No. 21-2002, Commissioner Lantion voluntarily inhibited himself.
Commissioner Ressureccion Z. Borra was designated as substitute by order dated August 25, 2002.

On January 16, 2003, the COMELEC Second Division nullified the writ of execution issued by the RTC.
Respondent filed a motion for reconsideration, certified to the COMELEC En Banc.
The Supreme Court dismissed G.R. No. 154041 on September 16, 2003 due to mootness and lack of jurisdiction over COMELEC Division orders.
On October 15, 2003, COMELEC Second Division adopted the substitution of Commissioner Borra.
On October 20, 2003, the COMELEC Second Division issued a resolution affirming with modifications the RTC decision and declared petitioner as duly elected mayor.
Respondent filed a motion for reconsideration the same day.
Petitioner filed a motion for immediate execution of COMELEC Second Division’s October 20, 2003 resolution, set for hearing initially on October 28, 2003, reset to November 4, 2003.

On October 29, 2003, respondent filed a very urgent motion to elevate the case to the COMELEC En Banc (certified to the Commission).
On November 3, 2003, respondent filed a very urgent motion to suspend proceedings.
On November 4, 2003, a hearing on these incidents was conducted before the COMELEC Second Division.
On November 5, 2003, the COMELEC Second Division denied respondent’s motion to suspend proceedings and granted petitioner’s motion for execution pending appeal, directing issuance of writ of execution.
Also on November 5, 2003, the COMELEC En Banc issued a Status Quo Ante Order which effectively suspended the execution.

Five Commissioners including Commissioner Lantion participated in the November 5, 2003 En Banc order.
Commissioner Lantion stated that his prior voluntary inhibition was only in the SPR cases but not in the Election Case (EAC), and thus he voted in the en banc proceedings.
Commissioner Borra dissented from the November 5, 2003 Status Quo Ante Order.
Petitioner filed the present petition arguing:

The November 5 Status Quo Ante Order is null and void for lack of jurisdiction.
The COMELEC En Banc acted in breach of inter-collegial comity by interfering with the Second Division’s continuing jurisdiction.
Commissioner Lantion’s vote should be disregarded due to his prior voluntary inhibition, making the order lacking the required majority.
The COMELEC En Banc arbitrarily prevented enforcement of the Second Division’s order of execution.
Petitioner’s right to equal protection and fair treatment was violated, as prior similar motions in other cases were resolved differently.

Whether the Commission on Elections En Banc had the constitutional and statutory authority to issue the November 5, 2003 Status Quo Ante Order in EAC No. A-10-2002.
Whether Commissioner Ralph C. Lantion’s participation and vote in the COMELEC En Banc order was valid given his previous voluntary inhibition in related cases and at the division level.
Whether the Status Quo Ante Order issued by the COMELEC En Banc complied with the required quorum and majority vote as mandated by Rule 3, Section 5(a) of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure.
Whether the COMELEC En Banc acted with grave abuse of discretion and violated petitioner’s constitutional right to equal protection by nullifying the execution order of the COMELEC Second Division.