G.R. No. 182380 - Guzman vs. Commission on Elections

On March 31, 2004, the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Tuguegarao City passed Resolution No. 048-2004 authorizing City Mayor Randolph S. Ting to acquire two parcels of land for a public cemetery.
The acquisition was made in accordance with the resolution, aiming to convert the purchased land into a public cemetery, thereby fueling subsequent legal controversies.

The two parcels of land, identified as Lot Nos. 5860 and 5861, with an aggregate area of 24,816 square meters, were purchased from Anselmo Almazan, Angelo Almazan, and Anselmo Almazan III.
The payment for the purchase was effected through Treasury Warrant No. 0001534514, dated April 20, 2004, amounting to P8,486,027.00.
On May 5, 2004, the City Government of Tuguegarao registered the sale and issued new Transfer Certificates of Title, transferring the lots into its name.

Based on the transaction, the petitioner, Robert P. Guzman, filed a criminal complaint in the Office of the Provincial Election Supervisor of Cagayan Province.
The complaint charged City Mayor Ting and City Treasurer Salvacion Garcia with violations of Section 261, paragraphs (v) and (w), of the Omnibus Election Code.
The allegations centered on conducting transactions during the election ban period (from March 26, 2004 to May 9, 2004), specifically:

The Acting Provincial Election Supervisor investigated the matter and, on December 13, 2006, recommended the dismissal of the complaint for lack of merit.
The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) en banc adopted this recommendation in a resolution dated February 18, 2008, dismissing the complaint.
In its resolution, the COMELEC held that:

The acquisition of the land did not fall within the ambit of “public works” as prohibited under Section 261(v) of the Omnibus Election Code, and
Consequently, the issuance of the treasury warrant was not considered a disbursement for public works.

The COMELEC’s interpretation of “public works” was overly restrictive and contrary to the true purpose of the law, and
Based on the exceptions in Section 261(v), disbursements during the prohibited period should only cater to ordinary administrative or emergency expenditures.

City Mayor Ting maintained that the mere acquisition of land for a public cemetery did not constitute a “public works” project, which should involve actual physical construction activities initiated by an order to commence work.
The COMELEC contended that the petition was premature because the petitioner did not file a motion for reconsideration as required by the COMELEC Rules of Procedure.
The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) agreed with the COMELEC on the point regarding the land acquisition but dissented on the issue concerning the issuance of the treasury warrant, opining that there was probable cause for violating Section 261(w).

Whether the petitioner’s failure to file a motion for reconsideration rendered the petition premature before invoking the certiorari jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

Whether the acquisition of Lots 5860 and 5861 during the election ban period can be classified as “public works,” thus triggering the prohibition against disbursement of public funds for such projects.

Whether the issuance of Treasury Warrant No. 0001534514 during the election ban period violated Section 261(w) of the Omnibus Election Code by constituting an act of disbursement of public funds for public works.