Title
Basher vs. Commission on Elections
Case
G.R. No. 139028
Decision Date
Apr 12, 2000
A barangay election held late at night at an unauthorized venue, with insufficient notice, was declared void by the Supreme Court due to non-compliance with legal requirements.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 139028)

Petitioner and Respondents

  • Petitioner challenges the Commission on Elections (Comelec) En Banc’s June 8, 1999 Resolution dismissing his Petition to Declare a Failure of Election and to Call Special Election.
  • Respondents: Comelec En Banc and Abulkair Ampatua, proclaimed winner of the August 30, 1997 special election.

Key Dates

  • May 12, 1997: Original barangay election declared a failure.
  • June 12, 1997: First special election—failed.
  • August 30–31, 1997: Second special election conducted from 9:00 PM to early morning.
  • June 8, 1999: Comelec dismissed the failure-of-election petition.
  • April 12, 2000: Supreme Court decision issued.

Applicable Law

  • 1987 Constitution: Right to suffrage
  • Omnibus Election Code (A6; Sec. 190; Sec. 42)
  • Republic Act No. 6679 (Barangay Election Law), Sec. 2
  • Comelec Resolution No. 2971, Art. IV, Sec. 22
  • Jurisprudence: Mitmug v. Comelec (230 SCRA 54); Hassan v. Comelec (264 SCRA 125)

Factual Background

  • Basher and Ampatua were candidates for Barangay Maidan’s Punong Barangay.
  • Two prior election attempts failed due to security threats.
  • On August 30, 1997, election officer delayed voting until 9:00 PM after threats by the mayor’s armed followers and seizure of ballot box.
  • Voting was announced “over the mosque,” ostensibly in Barangay Maidan, but exact venue undisclosed.
  • Tally: Ampatua 250 votes; Basher 15 votes; third candidate 10 votes. Ampatua proclaimed winner.
  • Basher’s petition alleged no valid election at the legally prescribed place, date, or time, and insufficient notice.

Issue

Whether the nocturnal, unannounced special election at an undisclosed venue complied with statutory requirements and produced a valid result.

Comelec’s Resolution

  • Held the special election was conducted on the scheduled date and actual voting occurred.
  • Relied on Comelec Res. 2971, Art. IV, Sec. 22 to permit continuation of voting beyond 3:00 PM if voters remained within 30 meters.
  • Found Mitmug v. Comelec conditions for failure of election (no voting or no election of officials, and votes not cast affecting the result) were not met.

Supreme Court’s Ruling

  1. Election Venue: Violated Sec. 42, Omnibus Election Code. The designated public building within the barangay must be used; respondents failed to specify the actual site.
  2. Voting Hours: Statutory hours are 7:00 AM–3:00 PM. The continuation rule presupposes an election already in progress; it does not authorize starting at night.
  3. Election Officer’s Authority: Only Comelec may suspend, postpone, or declare failure of an election under RA 6679, Sec. 2, after summary proceedin

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.