Title
Vicente Sotto vs. The Commission on Elections et al.
Case
L-329
Decision Date
Apr 16, 1946
Dispute over Popular Front Party presidency: Sotto challenges COMELEC's ruling favoring Javier, citing invalid 1946 resolution; SC affirms Javier's legitimacy.

Case Summary (L-329)

Findings of the Commission on Elections

The Commission on Elections conducted a thorough analysis of the evidence presented by both parties. It noted that Javier functioned as the acting president following the illness and subsequent death of Juan Sumulong. The Commission established that, during this interim, there were no formal elections held to fill any presidential vacancy, and Javier was recognized by both party members and the Directorate as the acting president.

Validity of the February 1, 1946 Meeting

The essence of Sotto's claim stems from a resolution adopted at a meeting on February 1, 1946, where four members of the Directorate purported to accept Javier's resignation and designate Sotto as president. The Commission dismissed this meeting and its resolution as invalid, primarily due to the lack of majority support and the fact that it was convened without the consent of Javier, who was still the acting president.

Legal Framework and Review Power of the Supreme Court

Under Section 9 of Commonwealth Act No. 657, the decision of the Commission on Elections may be reviewed by the Supreme Court only by writ of certiorari based on specific legal grounds rather than facts. The ruling cites constitutional provisions prohibiting the review of factual findings by inferior bodies, thus restricting the Supreme Court's ability to reassess the factual determinations made by the Commission.

Conclusion on the Leadership Dispute

The Supreme Court found that Javier's claim as the continuing acting president was supported by adherence to party rules and regulations, which mandated that authority resided within the Directorate. The Commission's determination that Javier remained as the legitimate president of the Popular Front Party was ultimately upheld, confirming that the majority of Directorate members supported him.

Implications of Party Leadership and Election Inspector Appointments

The court noted that, regardless of the internal disputes, Javier, backed by a majority of the Directorate, held the prerogative to propose election inspectors for upcoming elections, while Sotto's faction was deemed not to have a rightful claim to such representation due to their minority status.

Dissenting Views

While the majority opinion emphasized the legality of Javi

...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.