Title
Layug vs. Commission on Elections
Case
G.R. No. 192984
Decision Date
Feb 28, 2012
Layug sought to disqualify Buhay Party-List from the elections, claiming it was not a legitimate party. The Court ruled there was no due process violation as Layug provided an incorrect address, causing him to miss filings.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 192984)

Facts

On March 31, 2010, Layug, acting as a concerned citizen, filed a petition to disqualify the Buhay Party-List from participating in the upcoming elections, alleging it was an extension of the El Shaddai religious sect. He contended that the party-list was disqualified under Article VI of the 1987 Constitution and the Party-List System Act due to its religious affiliation and that Brother Mike, a businessman, did not belong to the marginalized sector as required for party-list nominees. In response, Buhay Party-List claimed to represent various marginalized sectors, asserting that it was neither a religious sect nor disqualified.

Procedural Background

The COMELEC Second Division denied Layug’s petition on June 15, 2010, citing lack of substantial evidence. Layug, who claimed he had not received the decision due to a mailing error, later found the resolution was deemed served as his incorrect address prohibited proper notification. Consequently, the COMELEC declared the decision final and sent Buhay Party-List’s election results, proclaiming its nominees as winners.

Motion for Reconsideration

Layug filed a motion for reconsideration on July 28, 2010, claiming due process violations due to inadequate service of the resolution. However, the motion was denied for being out of time, leading Layug to file the current petition, alleging grave abuse of discretion by COMELEC.

Issues

The primary issues raised include: (1) Whether the COMELEC Second Division violated procedural due process by not serving Layug’s counsel; and (2) Whether the COMELEC En Banc unlawfully neglected to resolve Layug's timely motion for reconsideration after the finality of the earlier resolution.

Jurisdiction

The court ruled it had jurisdiction over the petition despite respondents’ claims that the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) held exclusive jurisdiction regarding the qualifications of representatives already assumed into office. The court clarified that the legal qualifications of political parties fall within the jurisdiction of COMELEC, particularly citing the Party-List System Act, thereby placing Layug’s petition under the court’s review authority.

Due Process

The ruling concluded that Layug was not denied due process. The court emphasized that the responsibility for providing correct address information lies with Layug. The failure to receive the resolution stemmed from his erroneous address, and thus, the assumption of receipt after unsuccessful delivery attempts was deemed valid. Layug's deliberate choice to provide an inexistent address revealed an intention to obstruct the proceedings.

Finality of Resolution

The court maintained that the finality of decisions is a jurisdictional matter, asserting that it cannot be influenced by a party’s convenience. Layug's attempts to leverage his own procedural

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.