Header Ads Widget

Digest: Veloria v. Commission on Elections (211 SCRA 907, 1992)

Digest: Veloria v. Commission on Elections (211 SCRA 907, 1992)

Facts: The seven (7) petitioners, Ramon Veloria, Renato Espejo, Jesus Bandolin, Segundo Billote, Geronimo Enriquez, Rodolfo Madriaga and Sofronio Mangonon, as well as the seven (7) private respondents, Pedro Sales, Wilfredo Soriano, Erlinda Tambaoan, Emilio Angeles, Jr., Eleuterio Sison, Manuel Ferrer and Santos Sibayan were candidates for municipal mayor (Veloria and Sales), vice-mayor (Espejo and Soriano) and members of the Sangguniang Bayan of Manaoag, Pangasinan, in the local elections of January 18, 1988.

After the canvass of the election returns, the private respondents were proclaimed duly elected to the positions they ran for. Dissatisfied, the petitioners filed Election Protest.

Several proceedings were had, and some issues were brought up to the Court of Appeals and this Court for determination.

After a thorough discussion of the issues, the following crystallized as the only issues to be presented for resolution by the Commission, namely: (1) the issue of whether or not a Motion for Reconsideration in electoral cases is a prohibited pleading; and (2) the parties agreed that in case the answer to the first issue is "yes," the notice of appeal was filed out of time and in case the answer is "no," the notice of appeal was filed on time.

On August 2, 1990, the COMELEC granted the petition for certiorari

Hence, this special civil action of Certiorari and Prohibition with prayer for a writ of preliminary injunction and/or temporary restraining order, filed on August 31, 1990 by the petitioners (protestants below), pursuant to Rule 39, Section 1, COMELEC RULES OF PROCEDURE

Issue: Whether or not the COMELEC Erred in Granting the petition.

Ruling: Yes. COMELEC does not have jurisdiction to grant writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus. These suits can only be acted upon by the CA and SC because they have original jurisdiction to act on these and it is provided by the Constitution. Thus, such petition should have been coursed to the CA.

Post a Comment