G.R. No.
206666, January 21, 2015 the second highest number of votes on the May 10, 2010 synchronized
ATTY. ALICIA RISOS-VIDAL, ALFREDO S. LIM PETITIONER-
INTERVENOR,
VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND JOSEPH EJERCITO ESTRADA
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.:
NATURE:
These are petitions including:
1) a Petition for Certiorari filed by Atty. Alicia Risos-Vidal, which essentially
prays for the issuance of the writ of certiorari annulling and setting aside
the April 1, 2013 and April 23, 2013 Resolutions of the Commission on
Elections (COMELEC), Second Division and En banc, respectively.
[
(2) a Petition-in-Intervention filed by Alfredo S. Lim praying to be declared
the 2013 winning candidate for Mayor of the City of Manila in view of
private respondent former President Joseph Ejercito Estradas)
disqualification to run for and hold public office
FACTS:
On September 12, 2007, the Sandiganbayan convicted former President
Estrada, a former President of the Republic of the Philippines, for the crime
of plunder and was sentenced to suffer the penalty of Reclusion
Perpetua and the accessory penalties of civil interdiction during the
period of sentence and perpetual absolute disqualification.
On October 25, 2007, however, former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo
extended executive clemency, by way of pardon, to former President
Estrada explicitly states that He is hereby restored to his civil and
political rights.
On November 30, 2009, former President Estrada filed a Certificate of
Candidacy[7] for the position of President but was opposed by three
petitions seeking for his disqualification. None of the cases prospered and
MRs were denied by Comelec En Banc. Estrada only managed to garner
elections.
On October 2, 2012, former President Estrada once more ventured into
the political arena, and filed a Certificate of Candidacy, [10] this time vying
for a local elective post, that of the Mayor of the City of Manila.
Petitioner Risos-Vidal filed a Petition for Disqualification against former
President Estrada before the COMELEC because of Estradas Conviction for
Plunder by the Sandiganbayan Sentencing Him to Suffer the Penalty of
Reclusion Perpetua with Perpetual Absolute Disqualification. Petitioner
relied on Section 40 of the Local Government Code (LGC), in relation to
Section 12 of the Omnibus Election Code (OEC)
In a Resolution dated April 1, 2013, the COMELEC, Second Division,
dismissed the petition for disqualification holding that President Estradas
right to seek public office has been effectively restored by the pardon
vested upon him by former President Gloria M. Arroyo.
Estrada won the mayoralty race in May 13, 2013 elections. Petitioner-
intervenor Alfredo Lim garnered the second highest votes intervene and
seek to disqualify Estrada for the same ground as the contention of Risos-
Vidal and praying that he be proclaimed as Mayor of Manila.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in ruling that former President
Estrada is qualified to vote and be voted for in public office as a result of
the pardon granted to him by former President Arroyo.
HELD:
No. The COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in issuing the assailed
Resolutions. The arguments forwarded by Risos-Vidal fail to adequately
demonstrate any factual or legal bases to prove that the assailed
COMELEC Resolutions were issued in a whimsical, arbitrary or capricious
exercise of power that amounts to an evasion or refusal to perform a
positive duty enjoined by law or were so patent and gross as to
constitute grave abuse of discretion.
Former President Estrada was granted an absolute pardon that fully
restored allhis civil and political rights, which naturally includes the right
to seek public elective office, the focal point of this controversy. The
wording of the pardon extended to former President Estrada is complete,
unambiguous, and unqualified. It is likewise unfettered by Articles 36 and
41 of the Revised Penal Code. The only reasonable, objective, and
constitutional interpretation of the language of the pardon is that the
same in fact conforms to Articles 36 and 41 of the Revised Penal Code.
The proper interpretation of Articles 36 and 41 of the Revised
Penal Code.
A close scrutiny of the text of the pardon extended to former President
Estrada shows that both the principal penalty of reclusion perpetua and its
accessory penalties are included in the pardon. The sentence which states
that (h)e is hereby restored to his civil and political rights, expressly
remitted the accessory penalties that attached to the principal penalty
of reclusion perpetua. Hence, even if we apply Articles 36 and 41 of the
Revised Penal Code, it is indubitable from the text of the pardon that the
accessory penalties of civil interdiction and perpetual absolute
disqualification were expressly remitted together with the principal
penalty of reclusion perpetua.
The disqualification of former President Estrada under Section 40
of the LGC in relation to Section 12 of the OEC was removed by
his acceptance of the absolute pardon granted to him
While it may be apparent that the proscription in Section 40(a) of the LGC
is worded in absolute terms, Section 12 of the OEC provides a legal
escape from the prohibition a plenary pardon or amnesty. In other words,
the latter provision allows any person who has been granted plenary
pardon or amnesty after conviction by final judgment of an offense
involving moral turpitude, inter alia, to run for and hold any public office,
whether local or national position.
FALLO: Petition is dismissed