Romualdez v COMELEC G.R. No.

167011 April 30, 2008 The Complaint-Affidavit contained a prayer that a preliminary investigation be
conducted by the COMELEC, and if the evidence so warrants, the corresponding
SPOUSES CARLOS S. ROMUALDEZ and ERLINDA R. ROMUALDEZ, petitioners, Information against petitioners be filed before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) for
the prosecution of the same.
CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Ps filed a Joint Counter-Affidavit with Motion to Dismiss. They contended that
FACTS: they did not make any false or untruthful statements in their application for
12 July 2000: Dennis Garay, along with Angelino Aposto, filed a Complaint- registration. They avowed that they intended to reside in Burauen, Leyte, since
Affidavit with the COMELEC charging Ps Carlos S. Romualdez and Erlinda R. the year 1989. On 9 May 2000, they took actual residence in Burauen, Leyte, by
Romualdez with violation of Sec 261(y)(2)8 and Sec 261(y)(5)9 of the Omnibus leasing for 5 years, the house of Juanito and Fe Renomeron at No. 935, San Jose
Election Code, and Sec 12 of RA 8189. Street in Burauen, Leyte. On even date, the Barangay District III Council of
Burauen passed a Resolution of Welcome, expressing therein its gratitude and
They alleged that: appreciation to Carlos S. Romualdez for choosing the Barangay as his official
(1) 9 May 2000 and 11 May 2000, Ps applied for registration as new voters with residence.
the Office of the Election Officer of Burauen, Leyte, as evidenced by Voter
Registration Record Nos. 42454095 and 07902952, respectively. 11 June 2004: the COMELEC En Banc ordered the Law Department to file the
appropriate information with the proper court against spouses ROMUALDEZ for
(2) In their sworn applications, Ps made false and untruthful representations in violation of Sec10 (g) and (j) in relation to Sec45 (j) of the RA 8189.
violation of Section 10 of Republic Act Nos. 8189, by indicating therein that they
are residents of 935 San Jose Street, Burauen, Leyte, when in truth and in fact, Ps filed a MR, but the motion was dismissed.
they were and still are residents of 113 Mariposa Loop, Mariposa Street, Bagong
Lipunan ng Crame, Quezon City, and registered voters of Barangay Bagong 12 January 2006, COMELE's Law Dept. filed with the RTC, Burauen, Leyte,
Lipunan ng Crame, District IV, Quezon City, Precinct No. 4419-A, as evidenced by separate Informations against Ps.
Voter Registration Record Nos. 26195824 and 26195823;
Spouses Carlos S. Romualdez and Erlinda R. Romualdez then filed a Petition for
Thus Ps committed and consummated election offenses in violation of our Review on Certiorari with a prayer for the issuance of a Temporary Restraining
election law: Order and/or Writ of Preliminary Injunction . SC issued a Resolution denying for
Sec. 261, paragraph (y), subparagraph (2), for knowingly making any lack of merit petitioners Motion Reiterating Prayer for Issuance of Writ of
false or untruthful statements relative to any data or information Preliminary Injunction.
required in the application for registration, and
Sec. 261, paragraph (y), subparagraph (5), committed by any person WON P's right to due process was violated when the election offenses for
who, being a registered voter, registers anew without filing an which they are charged by private respondent are entirely different from
application for cancellation of his previous registration, both of the those which they stand to be accused of before the RTC by the COMELEC.
Omnibus Election Code (BP Blg. 881), and Held: No.
Sec. 12, RA 8189 (Voter Registration Act) for failure to apply for transfer Ps' Position:
of registration records due to change of residence to another city or They were not accorded their right to refute or submit documentary
municipality. evidence against the new charges which COMELEC ordered to be filed
 against them. to the proscribed conduct when measured by common understanding and
Sec 45(j) of the Voters Registration Act is vague as it does not refer to a practice. This Court has similarly stressed that the vagueness doctrine merely
definite provision of the law, contravening the fair notice requirement requires a reasonable degree of certainty for the statute to be upheld - not
of the 1987 Constitution, in particular, A3 Sec14(1) and (2). absolute precision or mathematical exactitude.40

SC: As structured, Section 4541 of Republic Act No. 8189 makes a recital of election
The Complaint-Affidavit filed by private respondent with the COMELEC is offenses under the same Act. Section 45(j) is, without doubt, crystal in its
couched in a language which embraces the allegations necessary to support the specification that a violation of any of the provisions of Republic Act No. 8189 is
charge for violation of Sec 10(g) and (j), in relation to Section 45(j) of RA 8189. an election offense. The language of Section 45(j) is precise.

Significantly, the allegations in the Complaint-Affidavit which was filed with the WON the COMELEC En Banc, premised its finding on a misapprehension of
Law Department of the COMELEC, support the charge directed by the COMELEC facts, and committed grave abuse of discretion in directing the filing of
En Banc to be filed against petitioners with the RTC. Even a mere perusal of the Informations against them with the RTC.
Complaint-Affidavit would readily show that Section 10 of Republic Act No. 8189 Held: No
was specifically mentioned therein. The Article IX (C), Section 2 (6) of the 1987 Constitution grants to the COMELEC
the power to prosecute cases or violations of election laws.
Petitioners cannot be said to have been denied due process on the claim that the
election offenses charged against them by private respondent are entirely This power to prosecute necessarily involves the power to determine who shall
different from those for which they stand to be accused of before the RTC, as be prosecuted, and the corollary right to decide whom not to prosecute.
charged by the COMELEC. There appears to be no incongruity between the Evidently, must this power to prosecute also include the right to determine
charges as contained in the Complaint-Affidavit and the Informations filed under which laws prosecution will be pursued. The courts cannot dictate the
before the RTC, notwithstanding the denomination by private respondent of the prosecution nor usurp its discretionary powers. As a rule, courts cannot
alleged violations to be covered by Section 261(y)(2) and Section 261(y)(5) of the interfere with the prosecutors discretion and control of the criminal
Omnibus Election Code and Section 12 of Republic Act No. 8189. Evidently, the prosecution
Informations directed to be filed by the COMELEC against petitioners, and which
were, in fact, filed with the RTC, were based on the same set of facts as originally DECISION: Petition denied
alleged in the private respondents Complaint-Affidavit.
------------ CARPIO, J.: DISSENTING OPINION
The void-for-vagueness doctrine holds that a law is facially invalid if men of
common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its Ps constitutional attack on Section 45(j) under the due process clause puts in
application. However, this Court has imposed certain limitations by which a issue two other requirements for the validity of a penal statute. First, a penal
criminal statute may be scrutinized. This Court has declared that facial statute must prescribe an ascertainable standard of guilt to guide courts in
invalidation or an "on-its-face" invalidation of criminal statutes is not adjudication. Second, a penal statute must confine law enforcers within well-
appropriate as enunciated in Romualdez v. Sandiganbayan. defined boundaries to avoid arbitrary or discriminatory enforcement of the law.

Be that as it may, the test in determining whether a criminal statute is void for Ps challenge the constitutionality of Section 45(j) "as applied" to them. In an "as
uncertainty is whether the language conveys a sufficiently definite warning as applied" challenge, the P who claims a violation of his constitutional right can
raise any constitutional ground - whether absence of due process, lack of fair First, does Section 45(j) give "fair notice" or warning to ordinary citizens as to
notice, lack of ascertainable standards, overbreadth, or vagueness. what is criminal conduct and what is lawful conduct? Put differently, is Section
The rule prohibits one from challenging the constitutionality of the statute 45(j) so vague that ordinary citizens must necessarily guess as to its meaning
based solely on the violation of the rights of third persons not before the court. and differ as to its application?
This rule is also known as the prohibition against third-party standing.
No. There are many provisions of RA No. 8189 that may be violated by a voter,
Exception to the prohibition: a petitioner may mount a "facial" challenge to the Election Officer, or other officials of the COMELEC without committing the
constitutionality of a statute whereby a petitioner has only to show violation "Election Offenses" specified in Section 45(a) to (i) of RA No. 8189. However, the
under the assailed statute of the rights of third parties. This exception allowing ordinary citizen has no way of knowing which provisions of RA No. 8189 are
"facial" challenges, however, applies only to statutes involving free speech. The covered by Section 45(j) even if he has before him a copy of RA No. 8189.
ground allowed for a "facial" challenge is overbreadth or vagueness of the
statute. To punish as crimes acts not expressly declared unlawful or prohibited by law
violates the Bill of Rights. A3 Sec14(1) and (2).
The rationale for this exception allowing a "facial" challenge is to counter the
"chilling effect" on protected speech that comes from statutes violating free Second, is Section 45(j) so vague that it prescribes no ascertainable standard of
speech. guilt to guide courts in judging those charged of its violation?
Yes. Judges and Justices will differ as to which provisions of RA No. 8189 fall
The overbreadth doctrine is closely related to the vagueness doctrine. Both under Section 45(j). The prosecution office of the Comelec has not specified
doctrines are often simultaneously invoked to mount "facial" challenges to which provisions of RA No. 8189 fall under Section 45(j). There is no legal
statutes violating free speech. textbook writer who has attempted to enumerate the provisions of RA No. 8189
that fall under Section 45(j). Members of the Commission on Elections will
The doctrines of overbreadth and vagueness, as devices to mount "facial" certainly dispute that failure by the Commission to reconstitute lost or
challenges to penal or non-penal statutes violating free speech, are not destroyed registration records constitutes a crime on their part.
applicable to the present petition for two reasons.
First, petitioners here assert a violation of their own constitutional rights, not
Third, is Section 45(j) so vague that law enforcers - the police and prosecutors -
the rights of third-parties. can arbitrarily or selectively enforce it?
Second, the challenged statute - Section 45(j) of RA No. 8189, does not involve Yes. Under RA No. 8189, law enforcement officers have wide latitude to choose
free speech. which provisions of the law to consider a crime since there is no specific
enumeration of provisions falling under Section 45(j). Prosecutors can choose to
The present petition indisputably involves an "as applied" challenge to the prosecute only those who violate certain provisions of RA No. 8189. Judges
constitutionality of Section 45(j) of RA No. 8189. As an "as applied" challenge, trying violators of the law have no ascertainable standard to determine the guilt
petitioners may raise any constitutional ground to strike down Section 45(j). In of a person accused of violating Section 45(j). There is no certainty which
this "as applied" challenge, petitioners may invoke the overbreadth and provisions of RA No. 8189 fall under Section 45(j).
vagueness doctrines to test the constitutionality of Section 45(j).
Decision: Section 45(j) of RA No. 8189 UNCONSTITUTIONAL, and to GRANT the
The threshold issue on the constitutionality of Section 45(j) now turns on three petition.
tests: