Villanueva vs. Comelec,
G.R. No. L-54718, December 04, 1985
En Banc, TEEHANKEE, J.
Facts:
Narciso
Mendoza, Jr. had filed on January 4, 1980, the last day for filing of
certificates of candidacy in the January 30, 1980 local elections, his sworn
certificate of candidacy as independent for the office of vice-mayor of the
municipality of Dolores, Quezon. But later on the very same day, Mendoza filed
an unsworn letter in his own handwriting withdrawing his said certificate of
candidacy "for personal reasons."
Later on January 25, 1980, petitioner Crisologo
Villanueva, upon learning of his companion Mendoza's withdrawal, filed his own
sworn "Certificate of Candidacy in Substitution" of Mendoza's for the
said office of vice mayor as a one-man independent ticket.
The results showed petitioner to be the clear
winner over respondent with a margin of 452 votes (3,112 votes as against his
opponent respondent Lirio's 2,166 votes). But the Municipal Board of Canvassers
disregarded all votes cast in favor of petitioner as stray votes on the basis
of the Provincial Election Officer's erroneous opinion that since petitioner's
name does not appear in the Comelec's certified list of candidates for that
municipality, it could be presumed that his candidacy was not duly approved by
the Comelec so that his votes could not be "legally counted." The
canvassers accordingly proclaimed respondent Vivencio G. Lirio as the only
unopposed candidate and as the duly elected vice mayor of the municipality of
Dolores.
Comelec contended that petitioner Villanueva
could not have substituted for Candidate Mendoza on the strength of Section 28
of the 1978 Election Code which he invokes. For one thing, Mendoza's withdrawal
of his certificate is not under oath, as required under Section 27 of the Code;
hence it produces no legal effect. For another, said withdrawal was made not
after the last day (January 4, 1980) for filing certificates of candidacy, as
contemplated under Sec. 28 of the Code, but on that very same day."
Issue:
Whether
Comelec erred in holding that Villanueva could not have substituted for
Candidate Mendoza because the latter’s withdrawal of his certificate is not
under oath as required by law.
Held:
Yes; the
Court holds that the Comelec's first ground for denying due course to
petitioner's substitute certificate of candidacy, i.e. that Mendoza's
withdrawal of his certificate of candidacy was not "under oath,"
should be rejected. It is not seriously contended by respondent nor by the
Comelec that Mendoza's withdrawal was not an actual fact and a reality, so much
so that no votes were cast for him at all. In fact, Mendoza's name, even though
his candidacy was filed on the last day within the deadline, was not in the
Comelec's certified list of candidates. His unsworn withdrawal filed later on
the same day had been accepted by the election registrar without protest nor
objection. On the other hand, since there was no time to include petitioner's
name in the Comelec list of registered candidates, because the election was
only four days away, petitioner as substitute candidate circularized formal
notices of his candidacy to all chairmen and members of the citizens election
committees in compliance with the suggestion of the Comelec Law Manager, Atty.
Zoilo Gomez.
The
fact that Mendoza's withdrawal was not sworn is but a technicality which should
not be used to frustrate the people's will in favor of petitioner as the
substitute candidate. In Guzman vs. Board of Canvassers, 48 Phil. 211, clearly
applicable, mutatis mutandis, this Court held that "The will of the people cannot be
frustrated by a technicality that the certificate of candidacy had not been
properly sworn to. This legal provision is mandatory and non-compliance
therewith before the election would be fatal to the status of the candidate
before the electorate, but after the people have expressed their will, the
result of the election cannot be defeated by the fact that the candidate has
not sworn to his certificate or candidacy."
No comments:
Post a Comment