Title
Aguilar vs. Commission on Elections
Case
G.R. No. 185140
Decision Date
Jun 30, 2009
Jerry Aguilar won by one vote in a barangay election; Romulo Insoy protested. COMELEC dismissed Aguilar's appeal over fee discrepancies. Supreme Court ruled COMELEC acted without jurisdiction, annulled orders, and remanded the case, emphasizing liberal interpretation of election laws.
Font Size:

Case Summary (G.R. No. 185140)

Background of the Case

  • This legal proceeding is a petition for certiorari challenging the orders issued by the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) regarding the election protest filed by Romulo R. Insoy against Jerry B. Aguilar following the October 2007 barangay elections.
  • Aguilar was initially proclaimed the winner by one vote, but Insoy contested this result, which led to a trial court ruling in favor of Insoy.

Trial Court Decision

  • The Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Kapatagan found Insoy to be the duly elected punong barangay after a revision of votes.
  • The MTC's decision required Aguilar to vacate his office, prompting Aguilar to file a notice of appeal and pay the appeal fee of P1,000.00 as per the new election rules.

COMELEC Orders and Dismissal

  • Upon receiving the appeal, COMELEC's First Division issued an order dismissing Aguilar's appeal, citing failure to pay the required appeal fee of P3,000.00 within the specified five-day period.
  • Aguilar's motions for reconsideration were denied on the grounds of insufficient payment of fees and the lack of jurisdiction of the COMELEC First Division to decide on such motions.

Constitutional and Procedural Violations

  • The orders issued by the COMELEC First Division were deemed null and void as they were not resolved by the COMELEC en banc, violating Article IX-C, Section 3 of the Constitution.
  • The violation of procedural rules regarding the handling of motions for reconsideration indicated a grave abuse of discretion by the COMELEC First Division.

Key Legal Provisions and Requirements

  • Election Protest and Appeal Process:

    • An aggrieved party may appeal a decision within five days by filing a notice of appeal with the trial court and serving a copy on the opposing party.
    • An appeal fee of P1,000.00 must be paid to the trial court, which perfects the appeal.
  • Payment of Additional Appeal Fee:

    • According to COMELEC Resolution No. 8486, if the appeal is given due course by the court, an additional appeal fee of P3,200.00 must be paid to COMELEC within 15 days.
    • Failure to pay this additional fee can result in dismissal of the appeal, as stated in Rule 22, Section 9 of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure.
  • Finality of Decisions:

    • Decisions made by the COMELEC en banc are final, executory, and not appealable.

Consequences of Non-Compliance

  • The dismissal of Aguilar's appeal for non-payment of the additional fee was found to be an unjustified exercise of discretion by the COMELEC First Division, given the urgent nature of election cases.
  • The court emphasized the importance of adherence to procedural rules while advocating for a more lenient interpretation of election laws to ensure the will of the electorate is r

    ...continue reading

    Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
    Jur is an AI-powered legal research tool in the Philippines with case digests and full jurisprudence. AI summaries highlight key points but might skip important details or context. Always check the full text for accuracy.