TRINIDAD V.

SUNGA
FACTS:
Both Trinidad (incumbent mayor) and Sunga were candidates for the position of Mayor in the
Municipality of Iguig, Province of Cagayan, in the May 8, 1995 elections.
Sunga filed letter-complaints for disqualification against Trinidad. Meanwhile, the election results
showed that Trinidad garnered the highest number of votes thus, he was proclaimed the elected mayor,
prompting Sunga to file another motion to suspend the effects of the proclamation.
On June 22, 1998, the COMELEC disqualified Trinidad as a candidate in the May 8, 1995
elections. Petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration, claiming denial of due process alleging that there
was no hearing conducted. Then May 11, 1998 elections came, and was again proclaimed as duly
elected Mayor of Iguig, Cagayan. But such proclamation was again subsequently annulled.
ISSUE:
May petitioners proclamation as Mayor under the May 11, 1998 elections be cancelled on account of the
disqualification case filed against him during the May 8, 1995 elections?
HELD:
NO. The expiration of the term of office contested in the election protest has the effect of rendering the
election protest moot and academic.
With the complaint for disqualification filed by Sunga rendered moot and academic by the expiration of
Trinidads term of office therein contested, COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion in proceeding
to disqualify petitioner from his reelected term of office in its second questioned Resolution on the ground
that it comes as a matter of course after his disqualification in SPA No. 95-213 promulgated after the 1998
election.
While it is true that the first questioned Resolution was issued eight (8) days before the term of petitioner
as Mayor expired, said Resolution had not yet attained finality and could not effectively be held to have
removed petitioner from his office. Indeed, removal cannot extend beyond the term during which the
alleged misconduct was committed. If a public official is not removed before his term of office expires, he
can no longer be removed if he is thereafter reelected for another term.

GO V. COMELEC
FACTS:
Petitioner was the incumbent representative of the Fifth District, province of Leyte when she filed on
February 27, 2001 with the municipal election officer of the municipality of Baybay, Leyte, a certificate of
candidacy for mayor of the said municipality.
On February 28, 2001, at 11:47 p.m., petitioner filed with the provincial election supervisor of Leyte, with
office at Tacloban City, another certificate of candidacy for governor. Simultaneously therewith, she
attempted to file with the provincial election supervisor an affidavit of withdrawal of her candidacy for

mayor. However, the provincial election supervisor refused to accept the affidavit of withdrawal and
suggested that, pursuant to COMELEC Resolution No. 3253-A, she should file it with the municipal
election officer of Baybay, Leyte where she filed her certificate of candidacy for mayor.
Private respondents filed similar petitions to disqualify petitioner on the ground that petitioner filed
certificates of candidacy for two positions, namely, that for mayor, and that for governor, thus, making her
ineligible for both.
The COMELEC granted the petition and disqualified the petitioner from running for both position.
ISSUE:
Whether an affidavit of withdrawal of candidacy should be filed with the election officer of the place where
the certificate of candidacy was filed
HELD:
NO. There is nothing in Section 73 of the Omnibus Election Code which mandates that the affidavit of
withdrawal must be filed with the same office where the certificate of candidacy to be withdrawn was filed.
Thus, it can be filed directly with the main office of the COMELEC, the office of the regional election
director concerned, the office of the provincial election supervisor of the province to which the municipality
involved belongs, or the office of the municipal election officer of the said municipality. While it may be
true that Section 12 of COMELEC Resolution No. 3253-A requires that the withdrawal be filed before the
election officer of the place where the certificate of candidacy was filed, such requirement is merely
directory, and is intended for convenience.