Title
Supreme Court
Naval vs. Commission on Elections
Case
G.R. No. 207851
Decision Date
Jul 8, 2014
Provincial board member served three terms despite district reapportionment; SC upheld COMELEC, ruling term limit applies regardless of renaming.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 198688)

Factual Antecedents

Naval served as Sanggunian member of Camarines Sur’s Second District for two terms (2004–2010). RA 9716 reconfigured the old Second District (minus Gainza, Milaor) into the renamed Third District. Naval was elected from this Third District in 2010 and ran again in 2013. Julia filed to cancel his COC, alleging violation of the three‐term limit.

COMELEC Second Division Resolution

The Second Division held that Naval had served “three consecutive terms in the same local government post” over identical territory and electorate. Citing Lonzanida v. COMELEC, it found that mere renaming does not alter continuity of service and that the electorate remained essentially the same. It cancelled Naval’s COC for material misrepresentation under OEC §78.

COMELEC En Banc Resolution

The En Banc denied Naval’s motion for reconsideration, reaffirming that (1) the reconfigured Third District retained the same core municipalities and voters, (2) Latasa v. COMELEC treated conversion/renaming as not creating a new office, and (3) Article X, §8 and LGC §43(b) apply inflexibly to prevent more than three consecutive terms.

Petitioner’s Contentions

Naval argued that Sanggunian members are elected per legislative district, and the Third District constitutes a distinct electorate after excluding Gainza and Milaor. He invoked Borja v. COMELEC to assert that the three‐term limit applies only if one is elected thrice from the same district. He maintained Bandillo v. Hernandez supports a reset when district composition changes.

Office of the Solicitor General’s Position

The OSG urged denial of the petition, contending that Naval knowingly filed an ineligible COC, that the district renaming did not alter continuity of service, and that Bandillo is distinguishable because it involved addition (not mere renaming) of municipalities and creation of a new district.

Supreme Court’s Deliberation on Term Limits

The Court emphasized: (1) elections ensure representative democracy but are subject to constitutional term limits; (2) term limits in Art X, §8 and LGC §43(b) are “inflexible” and must be strictly applied; (3) the 1987 Constitutional Commission adopted a compromise barring immediate re‐election after three consecutive terms to prevent power entrenchment while allowing a one‐term break.

Analysis of RA 9716 Reapportionmen

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.