G.R. No. 170365 - Dibaratun vs. Commission on Elections

July 15, 2002: Synchronized Barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan Elections held.
July 16, 2002: Proclamation of Dibaratun as winning Punong Barangay.
October 17, 2005: COMELEC en banc Resolution declaring failure of elections and annulling Dibaratun’s proclamation.
February 2, 2010: Supreme Court decision on certiorari petition.

1987 Philippine Constitution, Article IX-C: COMELEC’s powers and responsibilities.
Omnibus Election Code, Sec. 6: Conditions and procedures for declaring failure of elections.
COMELEC Rules of Procedure, Rule 26, Sec. 2: Mirrors Sec. 6 provision.
Republic Act No. 9164, Sec. 5: Hold-over capacity of incumbent Punong Barangay.
Republic Act No. 7166, Sec. 4: EN BANC jurisdiction on failure and special elections.

On election day at Cayagan Elementary School, only ten of 151 registered voters cast ballots before voting was suspended.
Abubakar alleged that Alipecry Acop Gaffar (son of Dibaratun) was caught with three filled ballots and erupted in violence, leading to destruction and substitution of the ballot box.
Dibaratun’s supporters denied the allegation, blaming Abubakar’s faction for the disturbance.
The Election Officer recommended a special election, but the Board of Election Inspectors clandestinely canvassed returns and proclaimed Dibaratun.

Abubakar filed a verified petition under Sec. 6, Omnibus Election Code, to declare failure of elections in Precinct 6A/7A and annul Dibaratun’s proclamation.
Dibaratun’s side argued that ten votes were cast, precluding failure, and that the petition was filed out of time and constituted a pre-proclamation controversy under Sec. 241.
COMELEC en banc granted due course, citing undisputed suspension of voting due to violence before closing time and that uncast votes could affect the result.
It annulled Dibaratun’s proclamation, ordered him to cease exercising the office, and directed hold-over by the incumbent pending special elections.

Whether COMELEC en banc gravely abused its discretion by entertaining an allegedly time-barred petition and annulling a proclamation beyond the ten-day challenge period.
Whether Abubakar was estopped from raising election irregularities for failing to object during casting, counting, and canvassing.
Whether COMELEC en banc improperly declared failure of elections and ordered special elections.

COMELEC’s factual findings on violence and suspension before closing time are binding on the Court and involve specialized expertise.
Under Sec. 6, failure of elections is established when (a) voting was suspended before closing due to violence, (b) insufficient votes were cast, and (c) uncast votes could affect the outcome. Both parties agreed on suspension due to violence after only ten votes.
The petition properly fell under Sec. 6, not Sec. 241 (pre-proclamat