Case Summary (G.R. No. 191723)
Petitioners and Respondents
Petitioners:
- Victorino Dennis M. Socrates, mayor of Puerto Princesa City.
- Vicente S. Sandoval, Jr., mayoral aspirant in the recall election.
- Ma. Flores P. Adovo, Mercy E. Gilo and Bienvenido Ollave, Sr., recall election candidates.
Respondents:
- Commission on Elections (COMELEC).
- Preparatory Recall Assembly (PRA) of Puerto Princesa City and its officers.
- Edward S. Hagedorn, mayoral candidate in the recall election.
Key Dates
- July 2, 2002: PRA convenes and adopts Recall Resolution.
- July 16, 2002: Socrates files petition to nullify the Recall Resolution.
- August 14, 2002: COMELEC en banc dismisses Socrates’s petition; recall election set for September 7.
- August 21, 2002: COMELEC Resolution No. 5673 fixes 10-day campaign period.
- August 23, 2002: Hagedorn files Certificate of Candidacy.
- August 27 & 30, 2002: Petitions filed to disqualify Hagedorn under SPA Nos. 02-492 and 02-539.
- September 20, 2002: COMELEC First Division dismisses disqualification petitions.
- September 23, 2002: COMELEC en banc denies reconsideration.
- September 24, 2002: Recall election held; Court issues TRO against proclamation.
- October 1, 2002: Socrates granted leave to intervene.
Applicable Law
- 1987 Philippine Constitution, Article X, Section 8 (three-term limit for local officials).
- Republic Act No. 7160 (1991 Local Government Code), Section 43(b) (three-term limit).
- Republic Act No. 7160, Sections 69–75 (recall procedure).
- 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, Rules 64 and 65 (certiorari and injunction).
Antecedents
Three hundred twelve of five hundred twenty-eight barangay officials formed the PRA on July 2, 2002, to initiate the recall of Mayor Socrates. They adopted Resolution No. 01-02 expressing loss of confidence and petitioned COMELEC to schedule a recall election within 30 days.
Recall Assembly and Resolution
The PRA appointed Mark David M. Hagedorn as interim chair and passed the Recall Resolution without notifying 130 members but supported service evidence, attendance sheets, media notices, and government certifications. The PRA requested the recall election date from COMELEC.
COMELEC Proceedings on Recall Resolution
Socrates challenged the Recall Resolution in E.M. No. 02-010(RC). On August 14, 2002, the COMELEC en banc found no grave abuse of discretion, upheld the Resolution, and initially set the recall election for September 7, 2002.
Campaign Period and Candidacies
COMELEC Resolution No. 5673 fixed a ten-day campaign period. Hagedorn filed his candidacy on August 23. Adovo, Gilo, and Ollave filed consolidated SPA Nos. 02-492 and 02-539 to disqualify him under the three-term limit rule. The COMELEC First Division dismissed these challenges on September 20; the en banc denied reconsideration on September 23, and the recall election was rescheduled to September 24, with an additional 15-day campaign period granted by Court order.
Recall Election Results and Post-Election Motions
In the September 24 election, Hagedorn received 20,238 votes; Socrates 17,220; Sandoval 13,241. A temporary restraining order barred proclamation of the winner pending resolution of the petitions. Hagedorn moved to lift the TRO and assume office; Socrates intervened to support disqualification arguments.
Issues for Resolution
- Whether COMELEC gravely abused its discretion in giving due course to the Recall Resolution and scheduling the election.
- Whether Hagedorn is disqualified under the three-term limit for running in the recall election.
First Issue: Validity of the Recall Resolution
Socrates alleged defective notice to PRA members, lack of authority by barangay officials nearing election, and violation of his right to information. COMELEC found notices were sent, posted, and broadcast; attendees offered no objections; factual findings on service of notice and assembly validity stood unchallenged. This Court defers to COMELEC’s factual determinations absent patent error. Socrates admitted receiving notice and attending the PRA. No grave abuse of discretion occurred.
Second Issue: Qualification of Hagedorn
Article X, Section 8 of the 1987 Constitution and Section 43(b) of the Local Government Code bar more than three consecutive full terms. Constitutional Commission debates
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 191723)
Antecedents
- On July 2, 2002, 312 of 528 barangay officials of Puerto Princesa City convened as a Preparatory Recall Assembly (PRA) to initiate the recall of Mayor Victorino Dennis M. Socrates.
- The PRA designated Mark David M. Hagedorn as interim chair, adopted Resolution No. 01-02 declaring loss of confidence in Socrates, and requested COMELEC to schedule a recall election within 30 days.
- Socrates filed E.M. No. 02-010 (RC) on July 16, 2002 to nullify the Recall Resolution; on August 14, 2002 the COMELEC en banc dismissed his petition for lack of merit and scheduled the recall election for September 7, 2002.
- COMELEC Resolution No. 5673 (August 21, 2002) set a 10-day campaign period (August 27–September 5); Edward S. Hagedorn filed his certificate of candidacy on August 23, 2002.
- Petitions to disqualify Hagedorn (SPA Nos. 02-492 and 02-539) were filed August 17 and 30, 2002, alleging a fourth consecutive term; COMELEC dismissed them on September 20 and denied reconsideration on September 23, 2002.
- A Supreme Court TRO of September 24, 2002 enjoined proclamation of the recall winner pending consolidated certiorari petitions.
Petitions and Procedural History
- G.R. No. 154512 (Socrates): certiorari seeking nullification of COMELEC en banc resolution (Aug. 14, 2002) giving due course to the Recall Resolution and fixing the recall election date.
- G.R. No. 154683 (Sandoval): certiorari to annul Resolution No. 5673 (Aug. 21, 2002) for an inadequate 10-day campaign period; Court en banc granted a 15-day extension by Order of Sept. 3, 2002.
- G.R. Nos. 155083-84 (Adovo, Gilo, Ollave): certiorari to set aside COMELEC resolutions of Sept. 20 and 23, 2002 upholding Hagedorn’s qualification and praying for TRO against proclamation.
- The three petitions were consolidated and treated as Rule 65 certiorari with prayers for injunctions, including a Supreme Court TRO of Sept. 24, 2002 requiring ₱20,000 bond.
Issues for Resolution
- Did the COMELEC gravely abuse its