GUERRERO VS COMELEC

THE CASE:
This is a case of petition for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus, with prayer for a
TRO filed by Arnold V. Guerrero assailing the Order of COMELEC dismissing the
petition filed by Guillermo Ruiz to disqualify Rodolfo Farinas as a candidate for
Congressman of the 1st District of Ilocos Norte. The petitioner also assailed the
Resolution of the COMELEC en banc, denying the motion for reconsideration filed by
Ruiz and dismissing the petition-in-intervention filed by the petitioner Guerrero.
FACTS OF THE CASE:
The pertinent facts of the case are as follow:

In relation to the May 11, 1998 national elections, Guillermo Ruiz, a candidate
for Congressman in the 1st District of Ilocos Norte, filed a petition with the
COMELEC 2nd Division seeking to disqualify Rodolfo Farinas as a candidate for
Congressman and asking the COMELEC to declare Farinas as a nuisance
candidate. Ruiz alleged that Farinas had been campaigning as a candidate
for Congressman despite his failure
to file a COC for said office.
On May 8, 1998, 3 days before the elections, Rodolfo Farinas filed his COC
with the COMELEC, substituting candidate Chevylle Farinas who withdrew on
April 3, 1998.
Ruizs petition was dismissed by the COMELEC 2 nd Division stating that there
was none in the records to consider respondent Farinas an official candidate
to speak of without filing of COC. Hence, theres no COC to be cancelled,
consequently, no candidate to be disqualified.
In May 11, 1998, the elections push through and after the canvassing of
ballots, Rodolfo Farinas garnered the highest number of votes and was duly
proclaimed winner.
Ruiz then filed a motion for reconsideration, contending that Farinas could not
validly substitute for Chevylle Farinas since the latter was an independent
candidate. This was in violation of Sec 77 of the Omnibus Election Code
stating, among others, that only a person belonging to, and certified by, the
same political party may file a certificate of candidacy to replace a candidate
who died, withdrew or was disqualified.
On June 10, 1998, several days after Farinas took his oath of office as
member of the HoR, herein petitioner Guerrero filed a Petition-inIntervention questioning the validity of Farinas COC and asking the position
of Rep for the 1st District of Ilocos Norte be considered vacant and also asked
for special elections.
Both motion for reconsideration and petition-in-intervention were dismissed
by the COMELEC en banc for lack of jurisdiction. The COMELEC held that the
determination of the validity of the certificate of candidacy of respondent
Farias is already within the exclusive jurisdiction of the HRET.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in holding

that it had lost jurisdiction over the case when Farinas took his oath and
assumed office as member of the HoR?

HOLDING:

The Court held that there was no grave abuse of discretion on the part of the
COMELEC.
o RATIO 1
The court said that while the COMELEC was vested with the
power to declare valid or invalid a certificate of candidacy, its
refusal to exrcise said power following the proclamation and
assumption of the position by Farinas was a recognition of the
jurisdictional boundaries separating the COMELEC and the HRET.
Under Sec. 17, Art. VI of the 1987 Constitution, Thus, once a
winning candidate had been proclaimed, taken his oath, and
assumed office as a member of HoR, COMELECs jurisdiction
over election contests relating to his election, returns and
qualifications ends, and the HRETs own jurisdiction begins.
o RATIO 2
The petitioner contended that the jurisdiction of the HRET as
defined under Sec. 17, Article VI of the Consti is limited only to
the qualifications prescribed under Art. VI, Sec. 6 of the Consti.
The Court dismissed said contention stating that the word
qualifications cannot be read as qualified by the term
constitutional. The court also said that where the law does not
distinguish, the courts should not distinguish.
o RATIO 3
In an electoral contest where the validity of the proclamation of
a winning candidate who has taken his oath of office and
assumed his post as Congressman is raised, that issue is best
addressed to the HRET.
The reason for this was to avoid duplicity of proceedings and a
clash of jurisdiction between constitutional bodies.