G.R. No. 176296 - Ferdez vs. Commission on Elections

The case involves the July 15, 2002 synchronized barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) Elections in Barangay Pandan del Sur, Pandan, Catanduanes.
The original vote count showed respondent Mark Anthony B. Rodriguez obtaining 27 votes and petitioner Indira R. Fernandez obtaining 25 votes for the position of SK chairman.

Dissatisfied with the initial results, petitioner Fernandez filed an election protest (Election Case No. P-192) before the 4th Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC) of Pandan-Caramoran.
After review, the MCTC rendered a decision on January 12, 2004 declaring petitioner Fernandez as the duly elected SK chairman based on a revised tally showing her with 29 votes against Rodriguez’s 24.

Adversely affected by the trial court’s decision, respondent Rodriguez appealed the case to the Commission on Elections (COMELEC).
On December 4, 2006, the COMELEC First Division issued a Resolution nullifying the MCTC decision. The resolution held that three ballots marked as Exhibits “1”, “4” and “5” were improperly credited to petitioner Fernandez because they had been tampered with to misrepresent the true vote.
The COMELEC ruled that where a vote is cast on a ballot that is altered by a third party (i.e., the original candidate’s name being crossed out and replaced), the vote should be accepted for the originally indicated candidate and rejected for the substituted name.
The recalculation resulted in petitioner Fernandez’s vote total being reduced by 3 (from 29 to 26) and respondent Rodriguez’s vote total increased by 3 (from 24 to 27), thereby declaring Rodriguez the winner by one vote.

On January 31, 2007, COMELEC, acting through the First Division, denied petitioner Fernandez’s motion for reconsideration on the ground that it was filed beyond the allowed time.
On February 6, 2007, petitioner Fernandez filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition before the Supreme Court.
In her petition, she advanced two main arguments:

That the COMELEC does not have appellate jurisdiction over election contests involving SK officials decided by trial courts of limited jurisdiction.
That, even if jurisdiction were proper, the COMELEC gravely abused its discretion in nullifying the trial court’s decision.

The term of office for SK officials elected in 2002 was governed by Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9164, which initially set the term from August 15, 2002, to November 30, 2005.
A subsequent amendment by R.A. 9340 reset the next synchronized barangay and SK elections to October 2007, thereby extending the term of the 2002 elected officials until November 30, 2007.
As the term of the contested office had expired on November 30, 2007, the petition was rendered moot and academic.
Notwithstanding the mootness, the Supreme Court addressed the issue of jurisdiction for the benefit of the bench and the bar.

Whether or not the respondent COMELEC (First Division) has appellate jurisdiction to entertain appeals from decisions rendered by trial courts of limited jurisdiction in cases involving the election of the SK chairman.

The petitioner questioned the statutory and constitutional basis for the COMELEC’s appellate jurisdiction.

Whether there exists a statutory right to appeal decisions of the trial courts in election contests involving SK officials to a higher court or to the COMELEC.
Assuming that the COMELEC has proper jurisdiction, whether its nullification of the trial court’s decision constituted a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction.