Fermin Vs Comelec

MIKE A.
FERMIN,Petitioner
versus
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and ALIMUDIN A. MACACUA, Respondents.
G.R. NO. 172563 : April 27, 2007
En Banc
Authority of COMELEC to annul Special Public Hearing related on local

elections.
This is a petition for certiorari alleging that the COMELEC en banc acted with grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in issuing the Orders
dated May 9, 2006 and May 16, 2006.
FACTS:
Petitioner Mike A. Fermin and private respondent Alimudin A. Macacua were

candidates for Mayor in the May 2004 local elections in the Municipality of Kabuntalan,
Maguindanao. The Municipal Board of Canvassers of Kabuntalan proclaimed petitioner
as the duly elected mayor of Kabuntalan. The COMELEC, however, annulled the
proclamation due to the failure of clustered polling Precinct No. 25A/26A to function in
Barangay Guiawa, Kabuntalan, Maguindanao. The existence of 264 registered voters in
the clustered precinct would affect the results of the election. Thus, the COMELEC
scheduled a special election in clustered Precinct No. 25A/26A on July 28, 2004.
In the special election of July 28, 2004, private respondent was

proclaimed as the winning candidate for Mayor. Petitioner challenged the special
election due to alleged procedural infirmities. In a Resolution dated June 2, 2005,
the COMELEC nullified the special election. Private respondent's proclamation
was set aside and the vice mayor-elect temporarily assumed the mayoralty post.
Despite the Order dated May 9, 2006 setting the date for hearing for the parties
to argue their sides, the Special Public Hearing pushed through on May 14, 2006, and
the SMBOC proclaimed petitioner as the duly elected Mayor of Kabuntalan. Private
respondent alleged in his Comment 4 that he was absent during the Special Public
Hearing.
On May 16, 2006, the COMELEC en banc issued an Order, which annulled the
proceedings of the Special Public Hearing conducted on May 14, 2006 and set aside
the proclamation of petitioner.
Hence, this petition.
ISSUE: Whether or not the COMELEC en banc gravely abused its discretion
amounting to lack of jurisdiction in issuing the Orders dated May 9, 2006 and
May 16, 2006.
HELD: No.
RULING EXPLAINED
Sections 3 and 4, Rule 1 of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure provide:
“Sec. 3. Construction. These rules shall be liberally construed in order to

promote the effective and efficient implementation of the objectives of ensuring the
holding of free, orderly, honest, peaceful and credible elections and to achieve just
expeditious and inexpensive determination and disposition of every action and
proceeding brought before the Commission.
Sec. 4. Suspension of the Rules. - - In the interest of justice and in order to

obtain speedy disposition of all matters pending before the Commission, these rules or
any portion thereof may be suspended by the Commission.”
A scripted scenario of violence initiated by persons identified with petitioner and

abetted by the PNP contingent marred the second special elections on May 6, 2006.
Further, the Chairman of the SMBOC allegedly stopped the election at 2:15 p.m.
although there were still voters lined up to vote in the precinct.
Hence, the COMELEC issued the first Order dated May 9, 2006 requiring
petitioner and the SMBOC to file their respective Comments on the omnibus motion,
and to hold in abeyance the Special Public Hearing set on May 14, 2006.
However, despite notice to both parties and the SMBOC, the Special Public
Hearing proceeded on May 14, 2006. In its Order dated May 16, 2006, the COMELEC
annulled the proceedings of the Special Public Hearing and set aside the proclamation
of petitioner therein as the duly elected mayor of Kabuntalan, evidently for failure to
heed its Order dated May 9, 2006.
Under Section 227 of the Omnibus Election Code, the COMELEC is vested with
the power of direct control and supervision over the board of canvassers; hence, it took
cognizance of the complaint in the omnibus motion which questioned the conduct of the
special elections by the SMBOC.
Under the circumstances, COMELEC's action is not tainted with grave abuse of
discretion.

Fermin Vs Comelec

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fermin Vs Comelec

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fermin Vs Comelec

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MIKE A.

COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and ALIMUDIN A. MACACUA, Respondents.

G.R. NO. 172563 : April 27, 2007

Authority of COMELEC to annul Special Public Hearing related on local

Petitioner Mike A. Fermin and private respondent Alimudin A. Macacua were

In the special election of July 28, 2004, private respondent was

Sections 3 and 4, Rule 1 of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure provide:

“Sec. 3. Construction. These rules shall be liberally construed in order to

Sec. 4. Suspension of the Rules. - - In the interest of justice and in order to

A scripted scenario of violence initiated by persons identified with petitioner and

You might also like