Case Digest (G.R. No. 149800)
Facts:
Ricardo V. Quintos v. Commission on Elections and Jose T. Villarosa, G.R. No. 149800, November 21, 2002, the Supreme Court En Banc, Carpio, J., writing for the Court. Petitioner Ricardo V. Quintos and private respondent Jose T. Villarosa were opposing candidates for Governor of Occidental Mindoro in the May 14, 2001 elections. On May 26, 2001 the Provincial Board of Canvassers proclaimed Villarosa winner; Quintos filed an election protest with the COMELEC (docketed Election Protest Case No. 2001‑34) contesting ballots from Precinct Nos. 13A and 14A, Barangay Lumangbayan, Municipality of Paluan.Villarosa answered with an Answer, Counter‑Protest and Counterclaim, identifying thirteen (13) additional ballot boxes from Paluan as counter‑protested. Meanwhile, two separate municipal election protests involving the same contested ballot boxes were pending before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Mamburao, Branch 44 (Election Cases Nos. 19 and 20). At an August 7, 2001 hearing the COMELEC initially denied a request that the RTC take custody first, citing COMELEC Resolution No. 2812 (Oct. 17, 1995), which prescribes an order of preference giving COMELEC priority over RTCs.
Villarosa filed a Manifestation and Motion for Partial Reconsideration asking that the RTC be permitted to take custody of the fourteen contested ballot boxes (one protested by Quintos and thirteen counter‑protested by Villarosa) so the municipal contests could be resolved promptly. On August 27, 2001 the COMELEC Second Division issued the first Assailed Order deferring retrieval of the ballot boxes and authorizing their delivery to the COMELEC only one week prior to the termination of the COMELEC’s revision of other protested ballot boxes; the RTC was requested to expedite its proceedings. Quintos moved for reconsideration.
On September 12, 2001 the COMELEC denied reconsideration but reiterated that the RTC should transmit the precinct 13A/14A ballot box to COMELEC one week prior to COMELEC’s completion of its revision schedule. Quintos then filed a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 with prayers for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, asserting that the Assailed Orders departed from the order of preference in COMELEC Resolution No. 2812, were issued without due process, and that the Manifestation was unverified in violation of COMELEC rules.
After filing, the RTC Clerk certified (Nov. 19, 2001) that revision of the ballots for precincts 13A/14A had been completed; respondents and the Office of the Solici...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the COMELEC act without or in excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion, in issuing the Assailed Orders that gave the RTC of Mamburao priority in custody and revision of the contested ballot boxes (a) because there was no compelling reason to disturb the order of preference in COMELEC Resolution No. 2812, and (b) because the Assailed Order of August 27, 2001 was impractical?
- Should the unverified Manifestation and Motion for Partial Reconsideration have been denied for lack of verification under COMELEC rules?
- Was the failure to give petitioner the opportunity to comment or oppose the Manifestation and Motion for Partial Reconsideration a denial of due process?
- (Procedural) Was the petition moot and...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)