SAMBARANI v. COMELEC (15 September 2004, CARPIO, J.) Subst !

t" #

Issue 1$ WON a special election should be called Pet"t"%!ers$ The special barangay and SK elections failed because Election Officer Maulay did not use the voters list used during the 200 !"MM elections# Neither did Maulay segregate those e$cluded voters# %inally& Maulay did not delete fro' the certified list of candidates the na'e of dis(ualified candidate Manding# )OME*E)s refusal to call another special election conflicts +ith established ,urisprudence& specifically the ruling in -asher v# )OME*E)

Resp%!&e!t$ ! special election can be held only +ithin .0 days after the cause of postpone'ent or failure of election has ceased#

'e#&$ /ES R t"%$ Sec# 20 1 of !rt# 230)1 of the )onstitution gives the )OME*E) the broad po+er to 4enforce and ad'inister all la+s and regulations relative to the conduct of an election& plebiscite& initiative& referendu'& and recall#5 o The functions of the )OME*E) are essentially e$ecutive and ad'inistrative in nature# 2n ad'inistrative la+ that 4courts +ill not interfere in 'atters +hich are addressed to the sound discretion of govern'ent agencies65 The authority given to )OME*E) to declare a failure of elections and to call for special elections falls under its ad'inistrative function# )OME*E) anchored its refusal to call another special election on the last portion of Sec# 7 of the OE)# Sec# 7 construed together +ith the case of 8anganda'an v# )OME*E)9 o The prohibition on conducting special elections after .0 days fro' the cessation of the cause of the failure of elections is not absolute# 2t is directory& not 'andatory& and the )OME*E) possesses residual po+er to conduct special elections even beyond the deadline prescribed by la+#
1

SE)# 7# %ailure of election:3 3 3 The )o''ission shall& on the basis of a verified petition by any interested party and after due notice and hearing& call for the holding or continuation of the election not held& suspended or +hich resulted in a failure to elect on a date reasonably close to the date of the election not held& suspended or +hich resulted in a failure to elect but not later than thirty days after the cessation of the cause of such postpone'ent or suspension of the election or failure to elect#

The )OME*E) 'ay fi$ other dates for the conduct of special elections +hen the sa'e cannot be reasonably held +ithin the period prescribed by la+# More in point is Sec# ;<2 of the OE) +hich specifically deals +ith the election of barangay officials# =nli>e Sec# 7& Sec# ; does not state that special elections should be held on a date reasonably close to the date of the election not held# 2nstead& Sec# ;< states that special elections should be held +ithin .0 days fro' the cessation of the causes for postpone'ent# *ogically& special elections could be held anyti'e& provided the date of the special elections is +ithin .0 days fro' the ti'e the cause of postpone'ent has ceased# o Thus& in -asher& the )OME*E) declared the 2? May @@? barangay elections a failure and set special elections on 2 Aune +hich also failed# The )OME*E) set another special election on .0 !ugust +hich the )ourt declared irregular and void# On 2 !pril 2000& the )ourt ordered the )OME*E) 4to conduct a special election for punong barangay as soon as possible#5 This despite the provision in Sec# 2 of "! 77?@ stating that the special barangay election should be held 4in all cases not later than @0 days fro' the date of all the original election#5 The operational& logistical and financial proble's +hich )OME*E) clai's it +ill encounter +ith the holding of a second special election can be solved +ith proper planning& coordination and cooperation a'ong its personnel and other deputiBed agencies of the govern'ent# ! special election +ill re(uire e$traordinary efforts& but it is not i'possible# 2n applying election la+s& it +ould be better to err in favor of popular sovereignty than to be right in co'ple$ but little understood legalis's#

Issue 2$ Whether the C2*D 'ay appoint the barangay and SK officials Pet"t"%!ers$ !s the incu'bent elective punong barangays& they should re'ain in office in a holdE over capacity until their successors have been elected and (ualified# 0Sec# <& "! @ 7;1

'e#&$ NO R t"%$ The language of Section < of "! @ 7; is clear# Since there +as a failure of elections in the < Auly 2002 regular elections and in the . !ugust 2002 special elections& petitioners can legally re'ain in office as barangay chair'en of their

SEC. 45. Postponement or failure of election.X X X The Commission, on the basis of a verifie petition of an intereste part!, an after ue notice an hearin", at #hich the intereste parties are "iven e$ual opportunit! to be hear shall call for the hol in" or continuation of the election #ithin thirt! a!s after it shall have verifie an foun that the cause or causes for #hich the election has been postpone or suspen e have cease to e%ist&

respective barangays in a holdEover capacity# True& Sec# ;.0c1 of the *D) li'its the ter' of elective barangay officials to . years# Fo+ever& Sec# < of "! @ 7; e$plicitly provides that incu'bent barangay officials 'ay continue in office in a hold over capacity until their successors are elected and (ualified# Sec# < of "! @ 7; reiterates Sec# ; of "! 77?@ +hich provides that 4!ll incu'bent barangay officials shall re'ain in office unless sooner re'oved or suspended for cause $$$ until their successors shall have been elected and (ualified#5 Sec# G of the sa'e "! 77?@ also states that incu'bent elective barangay officials running for the sa'e office 4shall continue to hold office until their successors shall have been elected and (ualified#5 The application of the holdEover principle preserves continuity in the transaction of official business and prevents a hiatus in govern'ent pending the assu'ption of a successor into office# !s held in Nueno v# !ngeles& cases of e$tre'e necessity ,ustify the application of the holdEover principle#