Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR NO. 170678 2006-07-17	ROMMEL G. MUÑOZ v. COMELEC YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
In Sarmiento v. Commission on Elections[23] and Zarate v. Commission on Elections,[24] the Court similarly held that "election cases must first be heard and decided by a Division of the Commission," and that the "Commission, sitting en banc, does not have the authority to hear and decide the same at the first instance."
	GR Nos. 153991-92 2003-10-16	ANWAR BERUA BALINDONG v. COMELEC TINGA, J.
In the definitive case of Sarmiento v. COMELEC,[38] this Court explicitly held that the COMELEC en banc does not have the requisite authority to hear and decide pre-proclamation controversies at the first instance. The Court declared:"It is clear from the abovequoted provision of the 1987 Constitution that election cases include pre-proclamation controversies, and all such cases must first be heard and decided by a Division of the Commission. The Commission sitting en banc, does not have the authority to hear and decide the same at the first instance.