G.R. No. 118861 - Relampagos vs. Cumba

Emmanuel M. Relampagos (petitioner) and Rosita C. Cumba (private respondent) both ran for Mayor of Magallanes, Agusan del Norte in the synchronized elections on May 11, 1992.
Rosita C. Cumba was proclaimed the winner by a margin of 22 votes.
Petitioner filed an election protest before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 2, Butuan City.

On June 29, 1994, the RTC found petitioner the winner by a margin of six votes and declared him the duly elected mayor.
Both parties received copies of the decision on July 1, 1994.
The private respondent appealed the RTC decision to the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) on July 4, 1994.
The RTC gave due course to the appeal on July 8, 1994.

Petitioner moved for execution pending appeal on July 12, 1994.
Private respondent opposed the motion; however, the RTC granted the motion on August 3, 1994 and issued a writ of execution on August 4, 1994.
A motion for reconsideration filed by private respondent was denied on August 5, 1994, and the sheriff held implementation in abeyance.
Private respondent then filed a petition for certiorari with the COMELEC to annul the RTC’s order granting the execution pending appeal and to lift the writ of execution.
On February 9, 1995, COMELEC resolved to grant the petition, annulled the RTC's order and writ of execution, and restored private respondent to the position of mayor pending appeal resolution.

COMELEC claimed jurisdiction to hear certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus cases involving elections based on Section 50 of B.P. Blg. 697 (the Law on the 1984 Batasang Pambansa Election), which expressly vests the Commission with exclusive authority to hear such petitions.
Petitioner challenged COMELEC’s jurisdiction, citing prior Supreme Court rulings (Garcia vs. De Jesus & Uy vs. COMELEC, Veloria vs. COMELEC) that COMELEC lacks original jurisdiction to issue these writs absent explicit constitutional or statutory grant.
Petitioner argued B.P. Blg. 697 was a temporary election law applicable only to the 1984 Batasang Pambansa election and self-destructed thereafter.
Contrary to petitioner’s claim, COMELEC maintained that Section 50 was not repealed by the Omnibus Election Code (B.P. Blg. 881), which repealed only inconsistent laws, and that Section 50 remains in full force and effect.
The Court was requested to resolve these jurisdictional issues, and whether COMELEC properly issued the writ of certiorari.

Does the COMELEC have jurisdiction to issue writs of certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus in election cases where it has exclusive appellate jurisdiction?

Whether Section 50 of B.P. Blg. 697 which vests such jurisdiction in COMELEC remains in effect or has been repealed or rendered obsolete by:

The passage of the Omnibus Election Code (B.P. Blg. 881), and
The fact that B.P. Blg. 697 was intended only to govern the 1984 Batasang Pambansa election, thus presumably self-destructed thereafter.

Whether the RTC acted with grave abuse of discretion in issuing the order for execution pending appeal after the appeal to COMELEC was perfected.

Whether the COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion in annulling the RTC’s order and execution writ through its certiorari resolution.