EN
BANC
|
CARLOS IRWIN G. BALDO, JR.,
Petitioner, - versus
- COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, THE MUNICIPAL
BOARD OF CANVASSERS OF CAMALIG, ALBAY and ROMMEL MUÑOZ, Respondents. |
|
G.R. No. 176135 Present: PUNO, C.J., QUISUMBING, YNARES-SANTIAGO,
CARPIO,
CARPIO
MORALES,* CHICO-NAZARIO,
VELASCO,
JR., NACHURA,
DE
CASTRO, BRION,
PERALTA,
and BERSAMIN,
JJ. Promulgated: June 16, 2009 |
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
CHICO-NAZARIO, J.:
Averring
grave abuse of discretion in its issuance, the instant Petition for Certiorari, under Rule 65 of the Revised
Rules of Court, seeks the review of the Resolution dated 8 January 2007 of the
Commission on Elections (COMELEC) En Banc, affirming the Resolution dated 12
September 2006 of the COMELEC First Division in SPC Case No. 04-087,
which dismissed the appeal, filed by petitioner Carlos Irwin G. Baldo, Jr.
(Baldo), of the ruling of the Municipal Board of Canvassers (MBOC) of Camalig,
Albay, to include in the canvassing of votes the election returns (ERs)
objected to by petitioner Baldo.
Petitioner
Baldo and respondent Rommel Muñoz (Muñoz) were candidates for the position of
municipal mayor of Camalig, Albay in the
During the
canvass proceedings on 11 May 2004, petitioner Baldo objected to the inclusion
of 26 ERs from various precincts based on the following grounds: (1) eight ERs
lack inner seal; (2) seven ERs lack material data; (3) one ER lacks signatures;
(4) four ERs lack signatures and thumbmarks of the members of the Board of
Election Inspectors (BEIs) on the envelope containing them; (5) one ER lacks
the name and signature of the poll clerk on the second page thereof; (6) one ER
lacks the number of votes in words and figures; and (7) four ERs were prepared
under duress and intimidation.
On
Despite the
pendency of SPC Case No. 04-087 with the COMELEC First Division, the MBOC
proclaimed respondent Muñoz as the winning candidate for municipal mayor of
Camalig, Albay, on
On
On
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the
appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit.
Accordingly, the election returns for Precinct Nos. 127B, 40A/41A, 24A,
8A, 57A, 6A/6B, 54A/54B, 141A, 71A/71B, 72A, 19A, 44A, 154A. 47A, 86A, 132A,
145A, 171A,/171B, 39A, 112A, 137A/133A, 99A, 93A, 175A, 106A, 95A, which were
either not included or which were temporarily tallied in a separate statement
of votes and are hereby DIRECTED to be INCLUDED into the OFFICIAL TALLY in
order to determine the total number of votes actually received by the
candidates for mayor in the municipality.
The Municipal Board of Canvassers of
Camalig, Albay is ORDERED to immediately convene with proper notice to the
parties, for the purpose of including in the official canvass the contested
election returns and/or transferring into the official tally the results of the
precincts which were temporarily tallied, compute the complete results from ALL
the 134 precincts which functioned in Camalig, Albay, in the May 10, 2004
elections and forthwith PROCLAIM the winning candidate for mayor of Camalig,
Albay.[1]
Petitioner
Baldo sought reconsideration of the foregoing, but on
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the
Commission RESOLVED, as it hereby RESOLVES to AFFIRM the Resolution of the
Commission (First Division) with the MODIFICATION that the board of election
inspectors concerned in Precinct No. 127B be summoned by the Municipal Board of
Canvassers of Camalig, Albay, to complete the necessary data in the election
returns of the said precinct.[2]
Petitioner
Baldo filed the instant Petition for Certiorari
based on the following grounds:
A.
THE COMELEC
GRAVELY ABUSED ITS DISCRETION AMOUNTING TO LACK AND EXCESS OF ITS JURISDICTION
WHEN IT AFFIRMED THE ASSAILED RULINGS OF PUBLIC RESPONDENT MBOC IN THE 26
CONTESTED ELECTION RETURNS FOR PRECINCT NOS. 99A, 93A, 175A, 106A, 95A, 127B,
40A/41A, 24A, 8A, 57A, 6A/6B, 54A/54B, 141A, 71A/71B, 72A, 132A, 145A,
171A/171B, 39A, 112A, 137A,/133A, 19A, 44A, 154A, 47A, 86A; AND
B.
THE COMELEC
GRAVELY ABUSED ITS DISCRETION AMOUNTING TO LACK AND EXCESS OF ITS JURISDICTION
WHEN IT ORDERED THE INCLUSIONS OF THE SAID RETURNS IN THE OFFICIAL TALLY, AS
THE SAME ARE MATERIALLY AND FATALLY DEFECTIVE, WHICH ARE PROPER GROUNDS FOR A
PRE-PROCLAMATION CONTROVERSY WITHIN THE AMBIT OF SECTION 243 (b) OF THE OMNIBUS
ELECTION CODE.[3]
While the
instant Petition is pending before this Court, national and local elections
were held on
In Malaluan v. COMELEC,[4] this Court pronounced
that the expiration of the challenged term of office renders the corresponding
petition moot, to wit:
It is significant to note that the term of
office of the local officials elected in the May, 1992 elections expired on
When the appeal from a decision in an election case has
already become moot, the case being an election
protest involving the office of [the] mayor the term of which had expired, the
appeal is dismissible on that ground, unless the rendering of a decision on the
merits would be of practical value. This rule we established in the case
of Yorac v. Magalona which we dismissed because it had been mooted by the expiration of the term of office of the Municipal
Mayor of Saravia, Negros Occidental. x x x. (Underscoring ours.)
(Citation omitted.)
A case becomes moot when there is no more actual controversy
between the parties or no useful purpose can be served in passing upon the
merits. Courts will
not determine a moot
question in a case in which no practical relief can be granted.[5] It is unnecessary to indulge in academic
discussion of a case presenting a moot question,[6] as a judgment thereon cannot have any practical legal effect or,
in the nature of things, cannot be enforced.[7]
In Garcia v. COMELEC,[8] this Court held that where the issues have become moot
and academic, there is no justiciable controversy, thereby
rendering the resolution of the same of no practical use or value.
Similarly,
in Gancho-on v. Secretary of Labor and Employment,[9]
the Court
ruled that:
It is a rule of universal application,
almost, that courts of justice constituted to pass upon substantial rights will
not consider questions in which no actual interests are involved; they decline
jurisdiction of moot cases. And where the issue has
become moot and academic, there is no
justiciable controversy, so that a declaration thereon would be of no practical
use or value. There is no actual substantial relief to which petitioners would
be entitled and which would be negated by the dismissal of the petition.
Since the present
Petition is grounded on petitioner Baldo’s specific objections to the 26 ERs in
the previous local elections, no practical or useful purpose would be served by
still passing on the merits thereof.
Even if the Court sets aside the assailed COMELEC Resolutions and orders
the exclusion of the disputed ERs from the canvass of votes, and as a result
thereof, petitioner Baldo would emerge as the winning candidate for municipal
mayor of Camalig, Albay, in the
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the
Petition is DISMISSED for being MOOT.
SO ORDERED.
|
|
MINITA V. CHICO-NAZARIOAssociate Justice |
WE
CONCUR:
LEONARDO A. QUISUMBING
Associate Justice |
CONSUELO
YNARES-SANTIAGO
Associate Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANTONIO T.
CARPIO Associate Justice |
RENATO C. CORONA
Associate Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On official leave
|
|
CONCHITA CARPIO
MORALES
Associate Justice |
PRESBITERO J.
VELASCO, JR.
Associate Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANTONIO EDUARDO B. NACHURA Associate Justice
|
TERESITA
J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO Associate Justice
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ARTURO D.
BRION Associate Justice
|
DIOSDADO M.
PERALTA
Associate Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LUCAS P.
BERSAMIN Associate Justice |
|
|
|
|
Pursuant
to Article VIII, Section 13 of the Constitution, it is hereby certified that
the conclusions in the above Decision were reached in consultation before the
case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court.
|
|
REYNATO S. PUNO
Chief
Justice
|
* On official leave.
[1] Rollo, p. 36.
[2]
[3]
[4] 324 Phil. 676, 683 (1996).
[5] Villarico v. Court of Appeals, 424 Phil. 26, 33-34 (2002).
[7] Lanuza, Jr. v.
Yuchengco, G.R. No. 157033,
[8] 328 Phil. 288 (1996).
[9] 337 Phil. 654, 658 (1997).