Election Law: Chapter 2 — The Commission on Elections
Chapter 2 — The Commission on Elections
Purpose of the Commission.
In a democracy, the people are the fountainhead of governmental authority. This sovereign power is given expression through the exercise of the right of suffrage by the qualified voters.
The purity of elections is one of the fundamental requisites of popular government.
It is obvious that the sanctity of the ballot and the free and honest expression of the popular will can best be protected by an independent office whose sole work is to enforce laws on elections.
The Commission on Elections is organized for that purpose. The intention is to place it outside the influence of political parties and the control of the legislative, executive, and judicial organs of the government.
It is an independent administrative tribunal, co-equal with the other departments in respect to the powers vested in it.
Composition.
The Commission on Elections is composed of a Chairman and six (6) Commissioners.
The 1973 Constitution increased the membership from three (3) in the 1935 Charter to nine (9) on the theory that it would make it more difficult for the Commission to become the "captive" of any political party or group or any person who might be interested in the Commission deciding or taking action one way or the other.
It was held by many that the bigger the membership of the Commission the less likely it was to be "bought" or influenced.
The new Constitution opted for a seven (7)-man collegiate body.
Qualifications of members.
The Chairman and Members of the Commission shall be:
natural-born citizens of the Philippines and,
at the time of their appointment,
at least thirty-five years of age,
holders of a college degree, and
must not have been candidates for any elective position in the immediately preceding elections.
However, a majority thereof, including the Chairman, shall be members of the Philippine Bar who have been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.
The reason for the requirement of membership in the Philippine Bar is the fact that the Commission exercises quasi-judicial powers.
Appointment and terms of office of members.
The Chairman and the Commissioners are appointed by the President with the consent of the Commission on Appointments for a term of seven (7) years without reappointment.
Of the Commissioners first appointed:
three (3) shall hold office for seven (7) years,
two (2) for five (5) years, and
the last members for three (3) years, without reappointment.
The Constitution likewise provides, as in the case of the membersof the Civil Service Commission and the Commission on Audit, for a staggered term of two (2) years interval.
A member appointed to fill a vacancy shall serve only for the unexpired term to preserve the staggered terms of office.
The staggering of term also makes the Commission a continuing and self-perpetuating body and consequentiy, its members would have the benefit of the experience and expertise of the older members in the performance of its functions.
The continuity of its tenure as a body makes for greater stability for its policies and decisions and serves as a guarantee against arbitrary action which is likely to occur in a body handling partisan questions.
Appointments or designations in temporary or acting capacity in the Commission are not also allowed.
The Commission is an independent body and to preserve its independence, the members appointed to that position must be permanent.
The members thereof must be made to feel they are secure in the office and are entitled to fixed emoluments during their incumbency.
That independence and impartiality may be shaken and destroyed by a designation of a person or officer to act temporarily in the Commission .
Disabilities of members.
Section 2, Article IX-A reads:
No Member of a Constitutional Commission shall, during his tenure, hold any other office or employment.
Neither shall he engage in the practice of any profession or in the active management or control of any business which in any way may be affected by the functions of his office, nor shall he be financially interested, directly or indirectly, in any contract with, or in any of its subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities, including government-owned or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries."
The fiduciary nature of a public office which the Constitution expressly guards in the case of the President, the Vice-President, members of the Cabinet and their deputies and assistants, and the members of Congress, is also protected in relation to the members of the Commission on Elections.
"Historically, the COMELEC has always been an administrative agency whose powers have been increased from the 1935 Constitution to the present one, to reflect the country's awareness of the need to provide greater regulation and protection to other electoral processes to ensure their integrity.
Their disabilities during their continuance in office are similar to those imposed on the President and the Vice-President.
Constitutional powers and functions of the Commission.
As an independent body, the Commission on Elections is clothed with the three (3) powers of government:
executive or administrative
to enforce and administer election laws
Quasi-legislative
to promulgate rules on all questions affecting elections and its rules of procedure
quasi-judicial powers
to exercise original and appellate jurisdiction over certain election contests
The basic powers of the Commission as enforcer and administrator of our election laws, are clearly spelled out in the Constitution, thus Section 2, Article IX-C provides:
The Commission on Election shall exercise the following powers and functions:
Enforce and administer all laws and regulations relative to the conduct of an election, plebiscite, initiative, referendum, and recall.
Exercise exclusive original jurisdiction over all contests relating to the elections, returns, and qualifications of all elective regional, provincial, and city officials, and appellate jurisdiction over all contests involving elective municipal officials decided by trial courts of general jurisdiction, or involving elective barangay official decided by trial courts of limited jurisdiction.
Decisions, final orders, or rulings of the Commission on election contests involving elective municipal and barangay offices shall be final, executory, and not appealable.
Decide, except those involving the right to vote, all questions affecting elections, including determination of the number and location of polling places, appointment of election officials and inspectors, and registration of voters.
Deputize, with the concurrence of the President, law enforcement agencies and instrumentalities of the Government, including the Armed Forces of the Philippines, for the exclusive purpose of ensuring free, orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible elections.
Register, after sufficient publication, political parties, organizations, or coalitions which, in addition, to other requirements, must present their platform or program of government; and accredit citizens' arms of the Commission on Elections.
Religious denominations and sects shall not be registered.
Those which seek to achieve their goals through violence or unlawful means, or refuse to uphold and adhere to this Constitution, or which are supported by any foreign government shall likewise be refused registration.
Financial contributions from foreign governments and their agencies to political parties, organizations, coalitions, or candidates related to elections constitute interference in national affairs, and, when accepted, shall be additional ground for the cancellation of their registration with the Commission, in addition to other penalties that may be prescribed by law.
Note: The jurisdiction of the Commission over petitions for registration or cancellation of registration of any political party, etc. is derived from Sec 2(5) of Art IX-C. This authority is reflected in Sec. 6 of R.A. No. 7941.
File, upon a verified complaint, or on its own initiative, petitions in court for inclusion or exclusion of voters; investigate and, where appropriate, prosecute cases of violations of election laws, including acts or omissions constituting election frauds, offenses, and malpractices.
Recommend to the Congress effective measures to minimize election spending, including limitation of places where propaganda materials shall be posted, and to prevent and penalize all forms of election frauds, offenses, malpractices, and nuisance candidacies.
Recommend to the President the removal of any officer or employee it has deputized, or the imposition of any other disciplinary action, for violation or disregard of, or disobedience to, its directive, order, or decision.
Submit to the President and the Congress, a comprehensive report on the conduct of each election, plebiscite, initiative, referendum, or recall.
Among the more important election laws are:
B.P. Blg. 881 (Omnibus Election Code), as amended, the basic statutory election law;
Executive Order No. 157 (March 30, 1987), Providing for Absentee Voting by Officers and Employees of the Government;
R.A. No. 6644 (Dec. 28, 1987), An Act Reducing the Minimum Age of the Different Elective Local Officials;
R.A. No. 6645 (Dec. 28, 1987), An Act Prescribing the Manner of Filling a Vacancy in the Congress of the Philippines;
R.A. No. 6646 (Jan. 5, 1988), An Act Introducing Additional Reforms in the Electorial System;
R.A. No. 6735 (Aug. 4, 1989), An Act Providing for a System of Initiative and Referendum;
R.A. No. 7160 (Oct. 10, 1991), the Local Government Code, with respect to provisions relating to the Qualifications and Election of Local Elective Officials, Recall of Local Elective Officials, and Local Initiative and Referendum;
R.A. No. 7166 (Nov. 26, 1991), An Act Providing for Synchronized National and Local Elections and for Electoral Reforms;
R.A. No. 7941 (March 3, 1995), An Act providing for the election of party-list representatives through the Party-List System;
R.A. No. 8171 (Oct.23, 1995), An Act providing for the repatriation of Filipino women who have lost their citizenship by marriage to aliens and of natural-born Filipinos;
R.A. No. 8173 (Dec. 20, 1995), An Act granting all Citizens' Arms equal opportunity to be accredited by the Commission on Elections;
R.A. No. 8189 June 11, 1996), An Act providing for a General Registration of Voters, adopting a System of Continuing Registration, and prescribing the procedure therefor;
R.A. No. 8295 (June 6, 1997), An Act providing for the proclamation of a lone candidate for any elective office in a special election;
R.A. No. 9006 (Feb. 12, 2001), An Act to enhance the holding of free, orderly, honest, peaceful and credible elections through fair election practices;
R.A No. 9189 (Feb. 14, 2003), An Act Providing for a System of Overseas Absentee Voting by Qualified Citizens of the Philippines abroad; and
R.A. No. 9225 (Aug. 29, 2003), An Act making the citizenship of Philippine citizens who acquire foreign citizenship, permanent amending for this purpose Commonwealth Act No. 63, as amended, and for other purposes
R.A. No. 7166 governed the May 11, 1992, national and local elections.
All subsequent elections and plebiscites shall be governed by the Act, and by the provisions of the Omnibus Election Code, R.A. No. 6646, and other elections laws not inconsistent therewith.
The Act repealed Secs. 107, 108, and 245 of the Omnibus Election Code, and the inclusion in Section 262 of the Code, the violations of Sections 105 to 112 as among election offenses.
B.P. Blg. 881, R.A. No. 6646, E.O. No. 144 and No. 157 and all other laws, orders, decrees, rules and regulations or other issuances, or any part thereof, inconsistent with the provisions of the Act are amended or repealed accordingly.
R.A. No. 8436 (as amended) is the Automated Election System Act.
The COMELEC Rules of Procedure govern pleading, practice, and procedure before the Commission or any of its offices.
Enforce and administer laws relative to conduct of elections, etc.
Scope of power.
The power vested in the Commission includes the power to "enforce and administer all laws and regulations relative to the conduct of plebiscites, initiatives, referenda, and recalls which are not, strictly speaking, "elections."
The word "regulations" is not found in either the 1935 or 1973 Constitution.
Its incorporation into the present Constitution took into account the Commission's power under the Omnibus Election Code which was already in force when said Constitution was drafted and ratified.
The Commission exercises administration and supervision of these processes akin to its powers over the conduct of elections.
The clear text and intent of the Constitution is to give the Commission all the necessary and incidental powers for it to achieve the holding of free, orderly, honest, peaceful and credible elections.
It must be borne in mind that the purpose of governing statutes on the conduct of elections is to protect the integrity of elections, to suppress all evils that may violate its purity and defeat the will of the voters.
The constitutional grant of investigatory and prosecution power in the Commission finds statutory expression under Section 265 of B.P. Blg. 881 , otherwise known as the Omnibus Elections Code.
When investigating and prosecuting election offenses, the Commission is acting analogous to the Ombudsman with its investigatory and prosecutory powers.
Great latitude is accorded the Commission in adopting means and methods to insure the accomplishment of the great objective for which it was created — to insure free, orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible elections which is the whole purpose of election laws. The choice of means taken by the Commission, unless they are clearly illegal or arbitrary, should not be interfered with.
It has broad powers to ascertain the results of an election by means available to it, such as relying on the certificate issued by its registrar which confirms that issued by the board of canvassers.
For the attainment of that end, it is not strictly bound by the rules of evidence.
The rule that factual findings of administrative bodies will not be disturbed by courts of justice except when there is absolutely no evidence or no substantial evidence in support of such findings should be applied with greater force when it concerns the COMELEC, as the framers of the Constitution intended to place the COMELEC — created and explicitly made independent by the Constitution itself — on a level higher than statutory administrative organs.
Power to annul an election not included.
Abes v. Commission on Elections, 21 SCRA 1252 (1967):
But the enforcement and administration of all election laws by the Commission does not include the power to annul an election which may not have been free, orderly, and honest, as such power is merely preventive, and not curative.
If it fails to accomplish that purpose, it is not for such body to cure or remedy the resulting evil but some other agencies of the government.
This ruling will now apply only to elections involving the President, Vice-President, and Members of Congress.
The COMELEC exercises exclusive original jurisdiction over all election contests involving regional, provincial, and city officials and appellate jurisdiction over election contests involving elective municipal and barangay officials.
Specific powers included.
The Commission on Elections has the power:
to annul or cancel illegal registry lists of voters and to order the preparation of a new one;
to cancel the canvass of election returns and annul an illegal proclamation as when they are based on incomplete returns and order a new canvass to be made by the board of canvassers by counting the returns illegally or wrongfully excluded;
to suspend the proclamation of winning candidates pending an inquiry into irregularities brought to its intention;
to direct the board of canvasser to include in the canvass returns from questioned precincts; and
to review, in the exercise of its plenary prerogative of direct control and supervision, the actuations of a board of canvassers even to the extent of inquiring beyond the election records of the voting centers in questions.
Where proclamation had been made.
However, once the announcement of the result of the elections or the proclamation of the winners had been made, any alteration or amendment in any statements of election, or in any contradiction or discrepancy appearing therein, whether due to clerical error or otherwise, cannot be made without the intervention of a competent court.
But the Commission can order a new canvass even after proclamation where its valid order directing the suspension of the proclamation of a candidate has been violated for such order serves to nullify the continuation of the canvass and consequently, the proclamation of the candidate to the contested position.
Decide election contests.
Election contest refers to the adversary proceedings by which matters involving the title or claim to an elective office, made before or after proclamation of the winner, is settled whether or not the contestant is claiming the office in dispute.
In the case, however, of elections of barangay officials, the term is restricted to proceedings after the proclamation of the winner as no pre-proclamation controversies are allowed.
An election contest is neither a civil action nor a criminal proceeding.
Strictly speaking, it is neither an action at law nor a suit in equity; it is a summary proceeding of a political character.
The purpose of an election contest is to ascertain the candidate lawfully elected to office.
Under the COMELEC Rules of Procedure, an election protest is an ordinary action governed by Rule 20 thereof.
An en banc decision of the COMELEC in an ordinary action becomes final and executory after 30 days from its promulgation, while an en banc decision in a special action, like a petition to declare a failure of elections, becomes final and executory after five (5) days from promulgation, unless restrained by the Supreme Court.
For that reason, a petition cannot be treated as both an election protest and petition to declare a failure of election.
Election contests involving regional, provincial, and city officials are placed under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commission on Elections.
Those for municipal and barangay officials are under the jurisdiction of regional trial courts and municipal trial courts, respectively subject to appeal to the Commission.
Election contests involving elections of Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) officials do not fall within Section 252 of the Omnibus Election Code and paragraph 2, Section 2, Article IX-C of the Constitution and no law in effect prior to the ratification of the Constitution had made the SK chairman an elective barangay official. Sangguniang Kabataan elections are under the direct control and supervision of the Department of Interior and Local Government.
In election cases involving an act or omission of a municipal or a regional trial court, the petition shall be filed exclusively with the Commission in and of its appellate jurisdiction. (Sec. 4, Rule 65, Rules of Court.)
A court (or the Commission) may issue a writ of certiorari in aid of its appellate jurisdiction if said jurisdiction to review by appeal or writ of error the final orders or decisions of the lower court.
The power of the Commission to decide election contests includes the power to determine the validity or nullity of votes.
Aside from the adjudicatory or quasi-judicial power of the Commission to decide election contests and administrative questions, it is also vested with the power of a public prosecutor with the exclusive authority to conduct the preliminary investigation and the prosecution of election offenses punishable under the election law before a competent court.
The Commission has not been given, by the Constitution nor by law, jurisdiction to issue writs of certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus.
Hence, an original special civil action of certiorari, prohibition, or mandamus against a regional trial court in an election contest may be filed only in the Court of Appeals or in the Supreme Court, being the only courts given such original jurisdiction under the Constitution and the law.
The well-settled rule is that jurisdiction is conferred only by the Constitution or by law. It is never derived by implication.
The validity or invalidity of the expulsion of a political party's officers is purely a party's membership and discipline issue that has to be settled within the party; it is an internal party matter over which the Commission has no jurisdiction given the limited scope of the power over political parties.
It may intervene in intra-party disputes only when necessary to the discharge of its constitutional functions, such as in resolving an intra-party leadership as an incident of its power to register political parties.
The above ruling has been abandoned. Both the Supreme Court and the Commission have concurrent jurisdiction to issue writs of certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus over decisions of trial courts of general jurisdiction, (Regional Trial Courts) in election cases involving elective municipal officials.
The one that takes jurisdiction first shall exercise exclusive jurisdiction over the case.
The Commission has authority to issue the extraordinary writs in cases involving elections only in aid of its appellate jurisdiction.
The Senate or House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal has sole and exclusive jurisdiction over all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of member of Congress.
Once a winning candidate has been proclaimed, taken his oath, and assumed office as member thereof, the COMELEC's jurisdiction ends, and the Electoral Tribunal's own jurisdiction begins.
In other words, for the electoral, tribunal to acquire jurisdiction, the case must involve a "member" of Congress, meaning the candidate to the position must have taken his an oath and assumed office when his term begins, i.e., June 30 following the election.
Previously, the Supreme Court has ruled in many case that proclamation alone of the winning candidate, following the election, divests the Commission of jurisdiction in favour of the HR Electoral tribunal.
The Supreme Court, setting en banc, as Presidential Electoral Tribunal, is sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of the President or Vice-President.
The phrase "election, returns and qualifications" should be interpreted in its totality as referring to all matters affecting the validity of the contestee's title.
Decide all questions affecting elections.
The jurisdiction of the Commission is over popular elections, the elected officials of which are determined through the will of the electorate.
An election is the embodiment of the popular will, the expression of the sovereign power of the people.
It involves the choice or selection of candidates to public office by the popular vote.
Specifically, the term "election" in the context of the Constitution may refer to the conduct of the polls including the listing of voters, the holding of the electoral campaign, and the casting and counting of the votes which do not characterize the election of officers in the "Katipunan ng mga Barangay" composed of popularly elected "punong barangay" as prescribed by law whose officers are voted upon by their respective members.
The Commission exercises only appellate jurisdiction over election contests involving elective barangay officials decided by Metropolitan or Municipal Trial Courts which likewise have limited jurisdiction.
The Commission has the inherent power to amend or control its processes and orders before they become final and executory.
It is not strictly bound by the rules of evidence.
The Rules of Court applies suppletorily to proceedings before the Commission.
The Commission has no jurisdiction over questions involving the right to vote which includes qualifications and disqualifications of voters, the right of a person to be registered as voter, the right to cast his vote, and other allied questions. Such questions shall be decided by the courts.
Deputize law enforcement agencies.
Under the Constitution, the deputizing should be with the concurrence of the President.
This limitation seeks to make the holding of "free, orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible elections" the joint responsibility of the President and the Commission.
The former phrase was "with the consent or at the instance of the President."
Nevertheless, the President on his own authority may still call out the armed forces when necessary under his powers as Commander-in-Chief.
In a case, the private respondents contended that the deputation by the COMELEC of the prosecuting arms of the Government would be warranted only before the elections and only to ensure free, honest, orderly, peaceful and credible elections, that is, to perform the peace-keeping functions of policemen. The Supreme Court ruled:
"The contention lacks substance. There is nothing in Section 2(4) of Article IX-C which requires such a pinched and niggardly interpretation of the authority of the COMELEC to appoint as its deputies, officials or employees of other agencies and instrumentalities of the government. The prompt investigation and prosecution and disposition of election offenses, constitute an indispensable part of the task of securing free, orderly, honest, peaceful and credible elections. The investigation and prosecution of election offenses are, in an important sense, more important than the maintenance of physical order in election precincts. Without the assistance of provincial and city fiscals [now prosecutors] and their assistants and staff members, and of the state prosecutors of the Department of Justice, the prompt and fair investigation and prosecution of election offenses committed before or in the course of nationwide elections would be simply not possible, unless, perhaps, the COMELEC had bureaucracy many times larger than what it actually has.
Moreover, the prosecution officers designated by the COMELEC become deputies or agents of the COMELEC and pro tanto subject to the authority, control and supervision of the COMELEC in respect of the particular functions covered by such deputation. The acts of such deputies within the lawful scope of their delegated authority are, in legal contemplation, the acts of the COMELEC itself.
The only limitation the Constitution itself places upon the COMELEC's authority over its deputies relates to the enforcement of such authority through administrative sanctions. Such sanctions — e.g., suspension or removal — may be recommended by the COMELEC to the President rather than directly imposed by the COMELEC evidently to pre-exempt and avoid potential difficulties with the executive department of the Government where the prosecution and other officers deputized are ordinarily located."
Register political parties, etc. and accredit its citizens' arms.
The constitutional provision is one of the reforms intended to make our electoral system more responsive to the needs and demands of the times.
Political parties (infra.) which:
have no platform or program of government, or
seek to achieve their goals through violence or unlawful means, or
refuse to uphold and adhere to the Constitution, or
are supported by any foreign government shall be refused registration.
Religious denominations and sects are not allowed to be registered as political parties in view of the principle of separation between the church and the state.
Acceptance of financial contributions from foreign governments and their agencies related to elections is a ground for the cancellation of the registration of a political party or organization. Such contributions are declared as constituting interference in our internal affairs.
Citizens' arms accredited by the Commission are supposed to be completely neutral and non-partisan in assisting the Commission in the conduct of elections, etc.
File petitions, investigate, and prosecute.
The power given to the Commission on Elections under Section 2(6) are new.
It can exercise these powers on its own initiative even in the absence of any complaint.
In effect, the Constitution mandates the Commission not only to investigate but also to prosecute cases of violation of election laws.
This means that the Commission is empowered to conduct preliminary investigations in cases involving election offenses for the purpose of helping the court determine probable cause and for filing an information in court.
This power is exclusive with Commission.
Under the COMELEC Rules of Procedure (secs. 3, 4 thereof.), initiation of complaints for election offenses may be done motu proprio by the Commission or upon written complaint of any citizen, candidate or registered political party or organization under the party-list system or any of the accredited citizens arms of the Commission. However, such complaints should be filed with the Law Department of the Commission; or with the offices of the Election Registrars Provincial Election supervisors, Regional Election Directors, or the State Prosecutor, Provincial Fiscal or City Fiscal (now Prosecutor).
An election offense has its criminal and electoral aspects while its criminal aspect to determine the guilt or innocence of the accused cannot be the subject of summary hearing, its electoral aspect to ascertain whether the offender should be disqualified from office can be determined in an administrative proceeding that is summary in character.
Hence, the Ombudsman or Prosecutor as such, assumes no role in the prosecution of election offenses. If he files an information charging an election offense or prosecutes a violation of election law, it must be because he has been deputized by the Commission. He does not do sounder the sole authority of his office.
Recommend measures.
As the body charged with the duty of enforcing and administering laws relative to the conduct of elections, etc., the Commission on Elections has also the duty to recommend measures as would effect more improvements on the election laws of the country such as those that would curb over-spending, ensure the enforcement of the fair and equal exposure rule for political parties and their candidates, including limitation of places where propaganda materials shall be posted, and prevent a strong party or candidate from taking undue advantage of the weakness of the others.
Under the Constitution, the Commission has the power to prevent and penalize all forms of election frauds, offenses and malpractices, nuisance candidacies (candidate has no bona fide intention to run for office), or other similar acts.
Recommend removal or disciplinary action.
The President may or may not follow the recommendation of the Commission on Elections.
However, since the deputization was with the concurrence of the President, it is unlikely that he will disregard the recommendation of the Commission.
Under the Omnibus Election Code, the Commission may relieve any officer or employee deputized by it, and, upon its recommendation, the corresponding authority shall suspend or remove from office any or all such officers or employees who may, after due process, be found guilty of such violation or failure."
It is the department or agency to which the charged official or employee belongs which has the ultimate authority to impose the disciplinary penalty.
As to the officers and employees appointed by the Commission, it can remove them for cause.
Submit report.
The report required should contain a description on how a previous election (regular or special), plebiscite, initiative, referendum, or recall was conducted and what laws or regulations, if any, were violated.
The Commission on Elections may also make recommendations with respect to flaws or defects it has discovered in the enforcement of the election laws.
Without the provision, the Commission, because of its independence, may refuse to give any information at all to other branches of the govemment.
Power to punish for contempt.
The Commission on Elections not only has the duty to enforce and administer all laws relative to the conduct of elections, but also to hear and decide any controversy that may be submitted to it in connection with the elections.
And as an incident of the power, it may also punish for contempt in those cases provided for in Rule 64 of the Rules of Court. The power to punish for contempt is inherently judicial in character.
In the exercise of its administrative functions, the Commission has no power to hold a person for contempt.
Thus, it was held that the Commission on Elections has no power to punish for contempt a reporter who wrote an article regarding a contract for the manufacture and supply of ballot boxes to the Commission on the ground that the article in question tended to interfere with the Commission in the adjudication of a controversy pending before it. The act of the Commission in requisitioning for the required ballot boxes is a ministerial duty to be performed in connection with its administrative capacity.
Similarly, the Commission on Elections does not possess the power to punish for contempt a person for failing to follow the procedure in the distribution of ballots and other election paraphernalia.
Resolutions of the Commission concerning the procedure to be followed in the distribution of ballots and other election paraphernalia call for the exercise of the administrative or ministerial function and for violations of said resolution the Commission has no power to punish for contempt.
Finality of decisions.
Under Section 2(2) of the Constitution, where the election contests involve elective municipal and barangay officials, the decisions, final orders or rulings of the Commission on Elections shall be final, executory and not appealable.
Sec. 3, Rule 22 of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure specifically mandates that the notice of appeal (to the COMELEC) must be filed within five (5) days after the promulgation of the court, otherwise the appeal is dismissible under Sec. 9 of the same Rule. Secs. 3 and 4, Rule 40 of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure provide the amount of the appeal fee and when and where to pay. Errors in the payment of filing fees in election cases are no longer excusable. The cases now bar any claims of good faith, excusable negligence or mistake in any failure to pay the full amount of appeal fees within the reglementary period to appeal.
Those involving elective regional, provincial, and city officials may be appealed to the Supreme Court.
Section 2(2) does not divest the Supreme Court of its authority to resolve questions of law as inherent in the judicial power conferred upon it by the Constitution. No judicial or quasi-judicial act or order including (interlocutory orders) issued by the COMELEC, or by any judicial or quasi-judicial body for that matter, is beyond the reach of the Supreme Court's power to correct through the writ of certiorari for grave abuse of discretion, amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.
Hearing and deciding election cases.
Section 3, Article IX-C of the Constitution reads:
The Commission on Elections may sit en banc or in two divisions, and shall promulgate its rules of procedure in order to expedite disposition of election cases, including pre-proclamation controversies.
All such election cases shall be heard and decided in division, provided that motions for reconsideration of decisions shall be decided by the Commission en banc.
First at Division level.
The above constitutional provision establishes the two (2)-tiered organizational and functional structure of the Commission.
It requires that election cases including pre-proclamation controversies (except such cases relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of members of Congress which are under the exclusive jurisdiction of the respective Electoral Tribunal of each House) and appeals from trial courts must first be heard and decided by a Division of the Commission.
This requirement is mandatory and jurisdictional.
The Commission, sitting en banc, does not have the authority to hear and decide the same at the first instance. Any decision rendered by it en banc as regards election cases in the first instance is null and void.
It is only when the exercise of quasi-judicial powers are involved that the Commission is mandated to decide cases first in division, and then, upon motion for reconsideration, en banc. The Commission en banc can act directly on matters falling within its administrative powers.
Commission en banc.
The Commission en banc shall decide motions for reconsideration of only of "decisions" of a Division, meaning those acts of a final character.
Thus, an order denying petitioner's demurrer to evidence, being interlocutory, may not be resolved by the Commission en banc.
A decision, order or resolution of a Division of the Commission must be reviewed by the Commission en banc via a motion for reconsideration before the final en banc decision may be brought to the Supreme Court on certiorari. The prerequisite filing of a motion for reconsideration is mandatory.
Under Sec. 2, Rule 19 of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure, the five (5)-day period for filing a motion for reconsideration, should be counted from the receipt of the decision, resolution, order, or ruling of the COMELEC Division. If the motion is not pro forma, it suspends the execution of the decision, etc. The mere reiteration in a motion for reconsideration of the issues raised by the parties does not make a motion pro forma; otherwise, the movant's remedy would not be a reconsideration of the decision but a motion for new trial or some other remedy.
Factual findings of the Commission.
Such findings based on its own assessments and duly supported by gathered evidence, are conclusive upon the courts, more so, in the absence of a substantiated attack on the validity of the same.
When the Commission en banc reviews and evaluates a party's petition, a party's answer and the supporting papers attached thereto, the same is tantamount to a fair "hearing."
Technical rules of evidence.
They are not rigorously applied in administrative proceedings especially where the law calls for the proceeding to be summary.
The Commission has broad powers to ascertain the true results of an election by means available to it. It is not strictly bound by procedural rules in the attainment of this end.
Period for rendition of decisions.
Congress may, by legislation, fix a period for the rendition of decisions for election cases.
Under the 1973 Constitution, "all election cases shall be decided within ninety (90) days from the date of their submission for decision." (art. XII-C, sec 3 thereof.)
Not infrequently in the past, delays in the rendition of decisions has allowed the wrong men to occupy elective positions for practically the entire terms of the office so that the people's will was thereby nullified.
Section 257 of the Omnibus Election Code requires that election cases brought before the Commission shall be decided within 90 days from the date of submission for decision. The Commission has numerous cases before it where attention to minutiae is critical.
Considering further the tribunal's manpower and logistic limitations, it is sensible to treat the procedural requirements on a deadlines realistically. Overly strict adherence to deadlines might induce the Commission to resolve election contests hurriedly by reason of lack of material time. This is not what the framers of the Code had intended since a very strict construction might allow procedural flaws to subvert the will of the electorate and would amount to disenfranchisement of voters in numerous cases.
Preferential disposition of election contests.
The provision of Section 258 of the Omnibus Election Code on the preferential disposition of election contests applies only to cases before the courts and not those before the Commission on Elections.
Regulation of public entities and media.
Section 4, Article IX-C of the Constitution provides:
The Commission may, during the election period, supervise or regulate the enjoyment or utilization of all franchises or permits for the operation of transportation and other public utilities, media of communication or information, all grants, special privileges, or concessions granted by the government or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including any government-owned or controlled corporation or its subsidiary. Such supervision or regulation shall aim to ensure equal opportunity, time, and space, and the right to reply, including reasonable, equal rates therefor, for public information campaigns and forums among candidates in connection with the objective of holding free, orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible elections.
The above authority given to the Commission is to be exercised for the purpose of ensuring free, orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible elections and only during the election period.
Note that government-owned or controlled corporations are among those that may be supervised or regulated by the Commission.
The provision seeks to place all candidates on more or less equal footing in making known their qualifications and platforms and their stand on public issues and thereby equalize their opportunities of winning at the polls.
A similar provision in the 1973 Constitution was held applicable also to plebiscites.
Pardon, etc. of violators of election laws.
Section 5, Article IX-C of the Constitution reads:
No pardon, amnesty, parole, or suspension of sentence for violation of election laws, rules, and regulations shall be granted by the President without the favorable recommendation of the Commission.
The purpose of the above provision is to avoid any possibility of the President granting pardon, amnesty, parole, or suspension of sentence to violators of law or rules and regulations concerning elections, who may belong to his party or for political reasons.
Election and campaign periods.
Section 9, Article IX-C of the Constitution reads:
Unless otherwise fixed by the Commission in special cases, the election period shall commence ninety days before the election and shall end thirty (30) days thereafter.
The above provision prescribes the election period.
It shall commence 90 days before the day of election (national or local) and shall end 30 days thereafter.
It does not, however, fix an unalterable period of 90 days for an election campaign.
As a general rule, the period of election starts at 90 days before and ends 30 davs after the election date pursuant to the Constitution above and Sec. 3 of B.P. Blg. 881.
This rule, however, is not without exception, since the Commission is not precluded from setting a period different from that provided thereunder.
The Commission fixed the election period for the May 10, 2010 elections at 120 days before and 30 days after the date of the election.
The Commission on Elections or the Congress, in special cases, may change the duration of the election period. The limitation is designed to minimize partisan political activities and expensive election contests.
The election period is not the same as campaign period.
The former includes the 30 days after the election while the latter can only be for a maximum of 90 days part of which is intended for the Commission to prepare for the election, the printing and distribution of forms, appointment of members in the registration boards, etc. and other preparatory acts.
The campaign period is fixed by law and covers only the period before the day of the election.
It may thus be less than the 90-day pre-election period.
Under the Omnibus Election Code, the period of campaign is as follows:
Presidential and Vice-President election — 90 days;
members of the Batasang Pambansa (now Congress) and Local election — 45 days; and
barangay election — 15 days.
The campaign periods do not include the day before the day of the election.
Sec. 29 of R.A. No. 6646 provides that "if it should no longer be reasonably possible to observe the periods and dates prescribed by law for certain pre-election acts, the Commission shall fix other periods and dates in order to ensure accomplishment of the activities so voters shall not be deprived of their right of suffrage.
It is unlawful to engage in an election campaign or partisan political activity outside the campaign period.
Rendition of decision and judicial review.
Section 9, Article IX-C of the Constitution provides:
The Commission on Elections] shall decide by a majority vote of all its members any case or matter brought before it within 60 days from the date of its submission for decision or resolution.
A case or matter is deemed submitted for decision or resolution upon the filing of the last pleading, brief, or memorandum required by the rules of the Commission or by the Commission itself.
Unless otherwise provided by this Constitution or by law, any decision, order or ruling of each Commission may be brought to the Supreme Court on certiorari by the aggrieved party within thirty days from receipt or a copy thereof.
Decisions, orders, or rulings reviewable by Supreme Court on certiorari.
Decisions, orders and rulings of the Commission may be brought to the Supreme Court by means of the special civil action of certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.
The Supreme Court can only review via certiorari a decision, order, or ruling of the Commission en banc in accordance with Sec. 7, Art. IX-A of the Constitution.
The rule admits of exceptions as when the final order of a Division is a patent nullity because of the absence of jurisdiction to issue the same.
It is its decision, etc. of the Commission en banc that may be brought to the Supreme Court on certiorari.
What is contemplated by the Constitution are decisions, orders, or rulings of the Commission rendered in actions or proceedings before it and taken cognizance by it in the exercise of its adjudicatory or quasi-judicial powers involving "elective regional, provincial and city officials.
The "case" or "matter" referred to by the Constitution must be something within the jurisdiction of the Commission, i,e., it must pertain to an election dispute.
For example, a resolution of the Commission awarding a contract for the supply of voting booths to a private party, as a result of its choice among various proposals submitted in response to its invitation to bid, is not reviewable by certiorari as it is not an order rendered in a legal controversy before it but merely as an incident of its inherent administrative functions over the conduct of elections. Any question arising from said order may be taken in an ordinary civil action before the regional trial courts.
Similarly, the alleged failure of the Commission to implement its resolution ordering the deletion of a candidate's name in the list of qualified candidates does not call for the exercise of the Supreme Court's function of judicial review as it is undoubtedly administrative in nature, beyond judicial interference.
Also, a resolution which provides for the rules and regulations governing the conduct of a plebiscite is not issued pursuant to the Commission's quasi-judicial functions but merely as an incident of its inherent administrative functions over the conduct of the plebiscite; thus, the said resolution may not be deemed as a "final order" reviewable by the Supreme Court."
The period of 60 days within which a case or matter shall be decided begins to run from the filing of the last pleading, brief, or memorandum required by the rules of the Commission or by the Commission itself.
Section 1, Rule 13 of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure does not allow a motion for reconsideration of an en banc ruling, resolution, order or decision except in election cases. Any party who does not agree with it has only one recourse, and that is to file a special civil action of certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.Βͺ
A motion for reconsideration when not pro forma, suspends the running of the period to elevate the matter to the Supreme Court.
Review limited to questions involving abuse of discretion.
Under the Constitution, the Supreme Court has no general power of supervision over the Commission on Elections except to review the decisions, orders or rulings of the Commission on petition by certiorari by an aggrieved party.
The certiorari jurisdiction of the Supreme Court should be confined to instances of grave abuse of discretion amounting to patent and substantial denial of due process committed by it in the exercise of its adjudicatory or quasi-judicial powers.
A distinction should be drawn between an original action for certiorari and an appeal by certiorari or petition for review. In the first, the main issue is lack of jurisdiction or grave abuse of discretion amounting to excess of jurisdiction while the second is limited to the consideration of questions of law. Not every abuse of discretion justifies the original action of certiorari.
Under the 1935 and 1973 Constitutions as well as under the present Constitution, the Supreme Court cannot review the factual findings of the Commission except only where there is absolutely no evidence or no substantial evidence in support of such findings, more so in the absence of a substantial attack on the validity of the same.
Substantial evidence means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.
The settled principle is that findings of fact of administrative bodies charged with their specific field of expertise, are afforded great weight by the courts, and in the absence of substantial showing that such findings are made from an erroneous estimation of the evidence presented, they are conclusive, and in the interest of stability of the governmental structure, should not be disturbed.
By certiorari, a party raises questions of law in the Supreme Court. Where there is no proof of grave abuse of discretion, arbitrariness, fraud or error of law in the questioned decision, order or resolution, the Supreme Court may not review the factual findings of the Commission, nor substitute its own findings on the sufficiency of evidence.
Reason for limited review.
In the performance of its functions, the Commission on Elections should be given considerable latitude in devising means and methods that will insure the accomplishment of the great objectives for which it was created — free, orderly, honest, and peaceful elections.
The choice of means taken by the Commission may not be agreeable to the minds of the court, but unless these are clearly illegal or arbitrary or constitute gross abuse of discretion, the court should not interfere.
Due regard to the independent character of the Commission as a constitutional body requires that the power of the court to review the acts of that body should, as a general proposition, be used sparingly or restrictively, with care and caution, but firmly in appropriate cases.
Lower courts have no authority to review orders or decisions of the Commission on Elections.
Under Section 2(2) its decisions, final orders or rulings on election contests involving elective municipal and barangay offices are final, executory and not appealable.
Order granting execution pending appeal.
In resolving a special civil action for certiorari assailing an order granting execution pending appeal for having been issued with grave abuse of discretion, and appellate tribunal — or the COMELEC in appropriate election cases — is not limited in its inquiry to the challenged order alone but must likewise take into account the decision itself.
This is obvious from the fact that execution pending appeal allowed by Section 2 of Rule 39 of the Rules of Court is an exception to the general rule that only final judgments may be executed; accordingly, the provision must be strictly construed.
Execution pending appeal can only be allowed:
on the basis of "good reasons" to be stated in a special order;
the reasons must be of such urgency as to outweigh the injury or damage of the losing party should the latter secure a reversal of the judgment on appeal; and
there must be a motion by the prevailing party with notice to the adverse party.
Rules of procedure.
The Commission on Elections en banc may promulgate its own rules concerning pleadings and practice before it or before any of its offices.
Such rules, however, shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights.
Substantive rights are rights which substantive law declares or rights concerning life, liberty, or property.
Examples are the rights provided in Article IlI (Bill of Rights) of the Constitution.
Procedural rights, on the other hand, refer to the remedies or means by which an aggrieved party, whose (substantive) rights have been violated, may bring his case to suit, trial, and judgment.
An example is the right of a party to appeal a decision of a lower court to a higher court.
The Commission has discretion to liberally construe its Rules.
It may even suspend its Rules or any portion thereof in the interest of justice.
The settled rule is that the COMELEC Rules of Procedure are subject to liberal construction.
The Rules of Court applies suppletorily to proceedings before the Commission.
Votes required for rendition of decision.
Under Article IX-A, Section 7 of the Constitution, the Commission on Elections "shall decide by a majority vote of all its members any case or matter brought before it. x x x"
Section 5 of COMELEC Resolution No. 1669 reads as follows:
SEC. 5. Quorum: votes required; substitution.
Two members shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of the official business of the Division.
A case being heard by it shall be decided with the unanimous concurrence of all three Commissioners and its decision shall be considered a decision of the Commission.
If this required number is not obtained, as when there is a dissenting opinion, the case may be appealed to the Commission en banc, in which case the vote of the majority thereof shall be the decision of the Commission. x x x"
Cua v. Commission on Elections, 156 SCRA 587 (1980):
In a case, the First Division of the COMELEC rendered a 2-1 decision favoring the petitioner but nevertheless suspended his proclamation as winner in the congressional election due to the lack of the unanimous vote required by the procedural rules in Resolution No. 1669. Pursuant to said rules, the respondent filed a "motion for reconsideration/appeal" of the said decision with the COMELEC en banc, where three (3) members voted to sustain the First Division, with two (2) dissenting and one (1) abstaining (one (1) member having died earlier).
On the strength of this 3-2 vote, petitioner moved for his proclamation by the board of canvassers, which reconvened, and granted his motion.
He took his oath the same day, but the next day the respondent filed with the COMELEC an urgent motion to suspend the proclamation or to annul or suspend its effect if already made. The COMELEC set the motion for hearing and it issued a restraining telegram enjoining petitioner from assuming the office of member of the House of Representatives.
The petitioner then came to the Supreme Court to enjoin the COMELEC from acting on the said motion and enforcing its restraining order. He argues that the quoted provision applies to the COMELEC both in division and in en banc. The Supreme Court held:
After considering that the issues and the arguments raised by the parties, the Court holds that the 2-1 decision rendered by the First Division was a valid decision under Article IX-A, Section 7 of the Constitution. Furthermore, the three (3) members who voted to affirm the First Division constituted a majority of the five (5) members who deliberated and voted thereon en banc and their decision is also valid under the aforecited constitutional provision. Hence, the proclamation of Cua (petitioner) on the basis of the two (2) aforecited decisions was a valid act that entitles him now to assume his seat in the House of Representatives.
It is expected that the above categorical rulings will put an end to the seemingly interminable debates on this matter that have been festering for quite some time now not only in this case but also in other cases still pending in the COMELEC. The indecisiveness of the public respondent in the appreciation and application of its own rules has seriously prejudiced a considerable number of our people who remain unrepresented to date in the House of Representatives despite the fact that the congressional elections were held more than seven months ago.
Incidentally, a decision or resolution becomes binding only after it is promulgated and not before. If at the time of the promulgation a member of the Commission has already vacated his office, his vote is automatically withdrawn or cancelled.
Additional functions as may be provided by law.
The Commission on Elections shall perform such other functions as may be provided by law.
Thus, by means of legislation, the Commission on Elections can be given the necessary measure of flexibility in the discharge of its constitutional tasks. Of course, Congress cannot diminish the powers and functions granted by the Constitution to the Commission.
Powers and functions of the Commission under the Omnibus Election Code.
Among others, they are the following:
Exercise direct and immediate supervision and control over national and local officials or employees, including members of any national or local law enforcement agency and instrumentality of the government required by law to perform duties relative to the conduct of election. In addition, it may authorize CMT cadets 18 years of age and above to act as its deputies for the purpose of enforcing its orders;
Promulgate rules and regulations implementing the provisions of this Code or other laws which the Commission is required to enforce and administer, and require the payment of legal fees and collect the same in payment of any business done in the Commission, at rates that it may provide and fix in its rules and regulations;
Summons the parties to a controversy pending before it, issue subpoena and subpoena duces tecum, and take testimony in any investigation or hearing before it, and delegate such power to any officer of the Commission who shall be a member of the Philippine Bar. In case of failure of a witness to attend, the Commission, upon proof of service of the subpoena to said witnesses, may issue a warrant to arrest the witness and bring him before the Commission or the officer before whom his attendance is required;
When necessary, avail of the assistance of any national or local law enforcement agency and/or instrumentality of the government to execute under its direct and immediate supervision any of its final decisions, orders, instructions or rulings;
Punish contempts provided for in the Rules of Court in the same procedure and with the same penalties provided therein. Any violation of any final and executory decision, order or ruling of the Commission shall constitute contempt thereof;
Enforce and execute its decisions, directives, orders and instructions which shall have precedence over those emanating from any other authority, except the Supreme Court and those issued in habeas corpus proceedings;
Prescribe the forms to be used in the election plebiscite or referendum;
Procure any supplies, equipment, materials or services needed for the holding of the election by public bidding;
Prescribe the use or adoption of the latest technological and electronic devices, taking into account the situation prevailing in the area and the funds available for the purpose;
Carry out a continuing and systematic campaign through newspapers of general circulation, radios and other media forms to educate the public and fully inform the electorate about election laws, procedures, decisions, and other matters relative to the work and duties of the Commission and the necessity of clean, orderly and honest electoral processes;
Enlist non-partisan groups or organizations of citizens from the civic, youth, professional, educational, business or labor sectors known for their probity, impartiality and integrity with the membership and capability to undertake a coordinated operation and activity to assist it in the implementation of the provisions of the Code and the resolutions, orders and instructions of the Commission for the purpose of ensuring free, orderly and honest elections in any constituency. Such groups or organizations shall function under the direct and immediate control and supervision of the Commission;
Conduct hearings on controversies pending before it in the cities or provinces upon proper motion of any party, taking into consideration the materiality and number of witnesses to be presented, the situation prevailing in the area and the fund aVailable for the purpose; and
Fix other reasonable periods for certain pre-election requirements in order that voters shall not be deprived of their right of suffrage and certain groups of rights granted them in the Code. Unless indicated in the Code, the Commission is authorized to fix the appropriate period for the various prohibited acts enumerated therein, consistent with the requirements of free, orderly and honest elections.