ANAGA, JR. vs.

COMELEC
G.R. No. 134696
July 31, 2000
This special civil action for certiorari seeks to annul the en banc resolution o
f public respondent Commission on Elections promulgated on June 29, 1998, in a C
OMELEC special action case, SPA No. 98-383.
Facts:
Petitioner Banaga, Jr. and respondent Bernabe, Jr. were both candidates for vice
-mayor of the City of Paraaque in the May 1998 election. In said election, the ci
ty board of canvassers proclaimed respondent Bernabe, Jr., as the winner for hav
ing garnered 71,977 votes over petitioner Banaga, Jr. s 68,970 votes.
Dissatisfied with the result, petitioner filed with the COMELEC on May 1998, a P
etition to Declare Failure of Elections and/or For Annulment of Elections, alleg
ing that said election was replete with election offenses, such as vote buying a
nd flying voters. He also alleged that numerous Election Returns pertaining to t
he position of Vice-Mayor in the City of Paraaque appear to be altered, falsified
or fabricated.
In fact, there were people arrested who admitted the said election offenses. The
refore, the incidents were sufficient to declare a failure of elections because
it cannot be considered as the true will of the people.
Petitioner Banaga, Jr. is praying that he should be adjudged as the duly elected
Vice-Mayor in the City of Paraaque, during the May 1998 local elections.
Respondent COMELEC dismissed petitioner s suit and held that the election offenses
relied upon by petitioner do not fall under any of the instances enumerated in
Section 6 of the Omnibus Election Code. The election tribunal concluded that bas
ed on the allegations of the petition, it is clear that an election took place a
nd that it did not result in a failure to elect and therefore, cannot be viewed
as an election protest.
Thus, this petition for certiorari alleging that the respondent COMELEC committe
d grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction for dism
issing his petition motu propio without any basis whatsoever and without giving
him the benefit of a hearing.
Issue:
WON petition to declare a failure of elections and/or for annulment of election
is considered as an election protest.
WON respondent COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion in dismissing petiti
oners petition, in the light of petitioners foregoing contentions.
Decision:
WHEREFORE, the instant petition is DISMISSED. The assailed RESOLUTION of public
respondent is AFFIRMED. Costs against petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi:
1) No. Mr. Banaga, Jr. s petition docketed as SPA-98-383 before the COMELEC was a
special action under the 1993 COMELEC Rules of Procedure. An election protest is
an ordinary governed by Rule 20 on ordinary actions, while a petition to declar
e failure of elections is covered by Rule 26 under special actions. Petitioner a
lso did not comply with the requirements for filing an election protest such as
failing to pay filing fee and cash deposits for an election protest.
2) No. Respondent COMELEC committed no grave abuse of discretion in dismissing t
he petition to declare failure of elections and/or for annulment of elections fo
r being groundless. The petition to declare a failure of election and/or to annu
l election results must show on its face that the conditions necessary to declar
e a failure to elect are present. Respondent COMELEC only based its decision on
the provisions of the Omnibus Election Code with regard to declaring a failure o
f election. There are three instances where a failure of election may be declare
d, namely:
(a) the election in any polling place has not been held on the date fixed on acc
ount of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud or other analogous causes;
(b) the election in any polling place has been suspended before the hour fixed b
y law for the closing of the voting on account of force majeure, violence, terro
rism, fraud or other analogous causes; or
(c) after the voting and during the preparation and transmission of the election
returns or in the custody or canvass thereof, such election results in a failur
e to elect on account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud or other anal
ogous causes.
The instances being not present in the petition of Mr. Banaga, Jr. The responden
t COMELEC have no other recourse but to dismiss the petition.
fr: atty. manuel >.<