Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC G.R. No.

160465 April 28, 2004

ROMEO M. ESTRELLA, petitioners, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, HON. COMMISSIONER RALPH C. LANTION a ! ROLAN"O #. SAL$A"OR, respondents. RESOL !"ON CARPIO MORALES, J.% Before this Court is a petition for certiorari under Rule #$ see%in& to set aside and nullif' the Nove(ber ), *++, Status Quo Ante Order- issued b' the Co((ission on Elections .COMELEC/ En Banc in EAC No. A0-+0*++*, 1Romeo F. Estrella v. Rolando F. Salvador.1 Ro(eo M. Estrella .petitioner/ and Rolando 2. Salvador .respondent/ 3ere (a'oralt' candidates in Baliua&, Bulacan durin& the Ma' -$, *++- Elections. !he Municipal Board of Canvassers proclai(ed respondent as 3inner. Petitioner thereafter filed before the Re&ional !rial Court .R!C/ of Bulacan an election protest, doc%eted as EPC No. -+0 M0*++-, 3hich 3as raffled to Branch -+ thereof.* B' 4ecision of April -+, *++*, the R!C annulled respondent5s procla(ation and declared petitioner as the dul' elected (a'or of Baliua&., Respondent appealed the R!C decision to the COMELEC 3here it 3as doc%eted as EAC No. A& 10&2002, and raffled to the second 4ivision thereof, 3hile petitioner filed before the R!C a (otion for e6ecution of the decision pendin& appeal.$ !he R!C, b' Order of April -#, *++*, &ranted petitioner5s (otion for e6ecution pendin& appeal and accordin&l' issued a 3rit of e6ecution.) Respondent thus assailed the April -#, *++* Order of the R!C via petition for certiorari filed on April *$, *++* before the COMELEC 3here it 3as doc%eted as SPR No. 21&2002, and raffled also to the Second 4ivision thereof.# Petitioner later (oved for the inhibition7 of Co((issioner Ralph C. Lantion, a (e(ber of the COMELEC Second 4ivision. On Ma' ,+, *++*, the COMELEC Second 4ivision issued a Status Quo Ante Order,8

B' Order of 9ul' :, *++*, the (otion for inhibition of Co((issioner Lantion 3as denied b' the COMELEC Second 4ivision. On 9ul' --, *++*, petitioner filed before this Court a petition for certiorari ;uestionin& the COMELEC Second 4ivision Ma' *+, *++* Status <uo Ante Order, 3hich petition 3as supple(ented on 9ul' ,+, *++*. !he petition 3as doc%eted b' this Court as =.R. No. -)$+$-. As no te(porar' restrainin& order 3as issued b' this Court, the Ma' ,+, *++* Status Quo Ante Order of the COMELEC Second 4ivision 3as i(ple(ented on or about 9ul' -7, *++,, resultin& in the ouster of petitioner fro( the (a'oral post. "n the (eanti(e, durin& the 9ul' *,, *++* hearin& of SPR No. 21&2002, COMELEC Co((issioner Lantion inhibited hi(self.: Co((issioner Ressureccion >. Borra 3as, b' Order of Au&ust *), *++*,-+ thus desi&nated in place of Co((issioner Lantion. 4urin& the pendenc' of =.R. No. -)$+$- before this Court, the COMELEC Second 4ivision, b' Order of 9anuar' -#, *++,, nullified in SPR No. 21&2002 the 3rit of e6ecution-- issued b' the R!C. Respondent filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the said Order 3hich (otion 3as dul' certified to the COMELEC En Banc. On Septe(ber -#, *++,, this Court, b' Resolution on even date, dis(issed =.R. No. -)$+$- on the &rounds that -/ the case had beco(e (oot and acade(ic because of the COMELEC Second 4ivision5s resolution on the (erits of SPR No. *-0*++*, and .*/ this Court has no ?urisdiction over 4ivision orders or rulin&s of the COMELEC. On October -), *++,, the COMELEC Second 4ivision, issued in EAC No. A&10&2002 an Order-* adoptin& the order of substitution in SPR No. 21&2002 dated Au&ust *), *++* desi&natin& Co((issioner Borra as substitute (e(ber thereof. On October *+, *++,, the COMELEC Second 4ivision issued in EAC No. A&10&2002 a Resolution-, affir(in& 3ith (odifications the R!C decision and declarin& petitioner as the dul' elected (a'or. On even date, respondent (oved to reconsider-$ the said October *+, *++, Order. Petitioner, in the (eanti(e, filed on October **, *++, a (otion for i((ediate e6ecution-) of the COMELEC Second 4ivision October *+, *++, Resolution, 3hich 3as set for hearin& on October *8, *++, but reset to Nove(ber $, *++,. On October *:, *++,, respondent filed before the COMELEC Second 4ivision a 1ver' ur&ent (otion to consider the instant case certified to the Co((ission en banc.1-# Respondent later filed on Nove(ber ,, *++, a 1ver' ur&ent (anifestation and (otion to suspend proceedin&s.1-7 @earin& of the incidents in EAC No. A0-+0*++* 3as conducted on Nove(ber $, *++,. !he follo3in& da' or on Nove(ber ), *++,, the COMELEC Second 4ivision issued an Order-8 den'in& respondent5s plea for suspension of proceedin&s and &rantin& petitioner5s (otion for

e6ecution pendin& appeal and accordin&l' directin& the issuance of a 3rit of e6ecution. On even date, the COMELEC En Banc issued the ;uestioned Nove(ber ), *++, Status Quo Ante Order. 2ive .)/ (e(bers includin& Co((issioner La 'io participated in this Nove(ber ), *++, Order 3herein Co((issioner Lantion stated that 1his previous voluntar' inhibition is onl' in the SPR cases and not in the EAC1 and 1as further a&reed in the Second 4ivision, AheB 3ill not participate in the 4ivision deliberations but 3ill vote 3hen the case is elevated Ato theB en banc.1 Of the five Co((issioners, Co((issioner Borra dissented. @ence, the present petition, alle&in& as follo3sC ". !@E NOD. ) S!A! S < O AN!E OR4ER "S N LL AN4 DO"4 2OR EAN! O2 CONS!"! !"ONAL AN4 S!A! !ORF A !@OR"!F O2 !@E COMELEC !O "SS E S C@ AN4 OR4ER. "". !@E COMELEC EN BANC PALPABLF AC!E4 E"!@O ! 9 R"S4"C!"ON AN4 "N 2LA=RAN! BREAC@ O2 "N!ER0COLLE="AL COM"!F E@EN "! "SS E4 !@E NOD. ) OR4ER CONS"4ER"N= !@A! EAC NO. A0-+0*++* "S S!"LL N4ER !@E PR"MARF AN4 CON!"N "N= 9 R"S4"C!"ON O2 !@E SPEC"AL SECON4 4"D"S"ON E@"C@ @AS FE! !O 2 LLF 4"SPOSE O2 ES!RELLA5S !"MELF 2"LE4 MO!"ON 2OR "MME4"A!E EGEC !"ON. """. 4 E !O @"S PRED"O S DOL N!ARF "N@"B"!"ON "N A RELA!E4 CASE, SPR NO. *-0*++* AN4 A! !@E 4"D"S"ON LEDEL "N !@E SAME CASE, EAC NO. A0-+0*++*, COMM"SS"ONER LAN!"ON5S DO!E "N !@E ASSA"LE4 OR4ER S@O L4 BE 4"SRE=AR4E4 AN4 CANCELLE4. !@E EN BANC5S NOD. ) OR4ER "S !@ S "NDAL"4 2OR 2 R!@ER REASON !@A! "! "S NO! S PPOR!E4 BF !@E RE< "RE4 MA9OR"!F DO!E. "D. !@E COMELEC EN BANC ALSO AC!E4 ARB"!RAR"LF AN4 "N MAN"2ES! =RADE AB SE O2 4"SCRE!"ON AMO N!"N= !O LACH AN4IOR EGCESS O2 9 R"S4"C!"ON E@EN "! PREDEN!E4 !@E EN2ORCEMEN! O2 !@E 4"D"S"ON5S OR4ER O2 EGEC !"ON !@E "SS ANCE O2 E@"C@ "S LE=ALLF 9 S!"2"E4 N4ER !@E APPL"CABLE CASE PRECE4EN!S AN4 EARRAN!E4 N4ER !@E SPEC"2"C 2AC!S AN4 C"RC MS!ANCES O2 !@E CASE. D. !@E COMELEC EN BANC =ROSSLF D"OLA!E4 ES!RELLA5S R"=@! !O E< AL PRO!EC!"ON O2 !@E LAES AN4 E< AL OR 2A"R !REA!MEN! E@EN "! "=NORE4 "!S OEN CASE PRECE4EN!S AN4 PRAC!"CE. "N S!ARH CON!RAS! !O E@A! "! 4"4 "N !@"S CASE, !@E EN BANC @A4 PRED"O SLF ALLOEE4 !@E 2"RS! 4"D"S"ON, "N A! LEAS! !EO RECEN! CASES .EPC NO. *++-0-: AN4 EAC NO. A0$0 *++,+ !O RESOLDE !"MELF 2"LE4 MO!"ON 2OR EGEC !"ON PEN4"N= RECONS"4ERA!"ON AN4 =ADE SA"4 4"D"S"ON A 2REE @AN4 A! 2 LLF 4"SPOS"N= O2 SA"4 "NC"4EN!S.

Petitioner ar&ues that Co((issioner Lantion5s vote in the assailed order should be disre&arded because of his previous inhibition in a si(ilar case and in the sa(e case in the 4ivision level, thus (a%in& said assailed order null and void as it 3as not concurred b' the re;uired (a?orit'. Petitioner5s ar&u(ent is (eritorious. Co((issioner Lantion5s voluntar' piece(eal inhibition cannot be countenanced. No3here in the COMELEC Rules does it allo3 a Co((issioner to voluntaril' inhibit 3ith reservation. !o allo3 hi( to participate in the En Banc proceedin&s 3hen he previousl' inhibited hi(self in the 4ivision is, absent an' satisfactor' ?ustification, not onl' ?udiciall' unethical but le&all' i(proper and absurd. Since Co((issioner Lantion could not participate and vote in the issuance of the ;uestioned order, thus leavin& three .,/ (e(bers concurrin& there3ith, the necessar' votes of four .$/ or (a?orit' of the (e(bers of the COMELEC 3as not attained. !he order thus failed to co(pl' 3ith the nu(ber of votes necessar' for the pronounce(ent of a decision or order, as re;uired under Rule ,, Section ).a/ of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure 3hich providesC Section ). <uoru(J Dotes Re;uired. K .a/ Ehen sittin& en banc, four .$/ Me(bers of the Co((ission shall constitute a ;uoru( for the purpose of transactin& business. T() *o *+rr) *) o, a -a.ori'/ o, '() M)-0)r1 o, '() Co--i11io 1(all 0) )*)11ar/ ,or '() pro o+ *)-) ' o, a !)*i1io , r)1ol+'io , or!)r or r+li 2. 3HERE#ORE, the instant petition is GRANTE". !he Status Quo Ante Order dated Nove(ber ), *++, issued b' the COMELEC En Banc is hereb' NULLI#IE". !his Resolution is IMME"IATEL4 E5ECUTOR4. SO OR"ERE". Davide, Jr., Puno, Vitug, Panganiban, Quisumbing, Ynares Santiago, Sandoval !utierre", #ar$io, Austria %artine", #orona, #alle&o, Sr., A"cuna, and 'inga, JJ., concur.

#oo' o')1
-

Rollo at ))0)#. (d. at -,0-$. (d. at -$. (bid. (bid.

(d. at -$0-). (d. at #-0#7. (d. at -). (d. at #8. (d. at #:. (d. at -7. (d. at -7-. (d. at 8,0-#:. (d. at -7$0-8+. (d. at -8-0*++. (d. at **,0**:. (d. at *,+0*,,. (d. at *,)0*,:.

-+

--

-*

-,

-$

-)

-#

-7

-8