EN BANC
[ G.R. No. 52527, September 04, 1980 ]
NENA S. POTENCION, PETITIONER, VS. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, RESPONDENT.
D E C I S I O N
FERNANDO, C.J.:
This petition raises no novel question. It arose from a resolution of respondent Commission on Elections, dated February 4, 1980, ordering the proclamation of Luis S. Etcubañez as the Governor-elect of the Province of Aurora. Accordingly, the
Provincial Board of Canvassers did so.[1] The petition likewise encloses the aforesaid resolution worded as follows: "In the matter of the sworn petition dated January 25, 1980, filed by Rodolfo G. Gonzales, a registered voter in the municipality of Baler,
province of Aurora, seeking the disqualification of respondent [Luis S. Etcubañez], a candidate for Governor of said province of Aurora under the Kilusang Bagong Lipunan (KBL), on the ground that respondent was the official candidate of the Liberal Party and won as Lt. Governor
of the Sub-province of Aurora (now province of Aurora) in the local elections of 1971, in violation of Section 10, Article XlI (C) of the Constitution, Batas Pambansa Blg. 52 and P.D. 1661, as amended: Considering the allegations in respondent's urgent motion to dismiss dated
February 4, 1980, more particularly the statement that in the elections for members of the Interim Batasang Pambansa in 1978 the respondent was the campaign manager of the KBL in Aurora and so under P.D. 1667 dated January 26, 1980 he shall be deemed to be a member of the KBL as
of the date of the political campaign in 1978, aside from the fact that the Liberal Party may be deemed to have become inexistent as it did not nominate candidates both in the elections of 1978 and 1980, and in the light of our resolutions in the other cases of similar nature as
in PDC No. 32, entitled De Leon v. Rodriguez; the Commission [Resolved] motu proprio to [dismiss] the petition of Rodolfo G. Gonzales. The proclamation of respondent as the winning candidates (if it has not yet taken place) for Governor of the province of Aurora
shall be, as it is hereby ordered to take place immediately."[2] In the next paragraph of such petition, there was an admission that Luis S. Etcubañez was the Governor-elect, but it was asserted that prior to the order of such proclamation there was already
filed by petitioner with the respondent Commission, a petition for disqualification reiterating petitions previously filed by a certain Rodolfo G. Gonzales and a Nacionalista party candidate Estrello T. Ong.[3] Respondent Commission was required to
comment. Accordingly the Solicitor General[4] did so. It was therein pointed out that in the elections for governor of Aurora, the results were as follows: "Luis Etcubañez (KBL) - 19,533 votes Estrello Ong (NP) - 16,877 votes Nena Potencion
(IND.) - 3,899 votes."[5] Then came this portion of the Comment: "On February 4, 1980 Etcubañez filed an urgent motion with the respondent Comelec for the dismissal of the petitions for disqualification. On the same date, respondent Comelec dismissed
the petition of Gonzales on the grounds that Etcubañez joined the KBL in 1978 when he served as the official campaign manager of that party in the elections for members of the Interim Batasang Pambansa and that the Liberal Party of which he was formerly a member may be deemed to
have become non-existent due to its failure to nominate any candidate in the 1978 and 1980 elections. In its resolution respondent Comelec directed the proclamation of Etcubañez if the same had not yet been done. * * * The petition of Ong was similarly
dismissed."[6]
The Comment was considered as the answer and the case submitted for decision. On the above undisputed facts and in the light of the recent rulings of this Court, this case has to be remanded to the Commission on Elections so that there could be a full-dress hearing on the question of disqualification.
This approach to the resolution of this controversy is in accordance with Reyes v. Commission on Elections,[7] where the ban imposed by the Constitution providing the change of political party by an elective officer during the term for which he was elected was discussed at some length.[8] As is clear from the assailed order of February 4, 1980, there was no hearing whatsoever on the petition for disqualification of Luis S. Etcubañez thereafter proclaimed as Governor-elect of the Province of Aurora. As far back as Pimentel v. Commission on Elections,[9] this Court made clear that there must be compliance with the cardinal requirements of procedural due process, one of which is the right to be heard. The petition in this case was filed with this Court only on February 11, 1980. A week before, on February 4, 1980, Luis S. Etcubañez was proclaimed. What was said, therefore, in Venezuela v. Commission on Elections,[10] where disqualification was sought on the very day of the proclamation of respondent therein finds application. As in that case, "the present proceeding cannot with precision be described as a pre-proclamation controversy."[11] In order, however, that the parties could have this case terminated with the least possible delay, it is appropriate that it be remanded to the Commission on Elections. That would be in accordance with the controlling provision of the 1978 Election Code, which provides: "The Commission shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the elections, returns, and qualifications of all members of the interim Batasang Pambansa and elective provincial and city officials."[12]
WHEREFORE, this petition is remanded to respondent Commission on Elections and should be treated as either a regular election protest or a quo warranto proceeding based on ineligibility of Luis S. Etcubañez, who should be impleaded by petitioner as the private respondent. No costs.
Barredo, Makasiar, Aquino, Concepcion, Jr., Guerrero, De Castro, and Melencio-Herrera, JJ., concur.
Teehankee, J., files separate opinion.
[1] Petition, par. 6.
[2] Ibid., Annex E.
[3] Ibid., par. 7.
[4] Solicitor General Estelito P. Mendoza was assisted by Assistant Solicitor General Vicente V. Mendoza and Solicitor Roberto A. Abad.
[5] Comment, 3.
[6] Ibid.
[7] G.R. No. 52699 May 15, 1980.
[8] According to Article XII, C, Section 10 of the Constitution: "No elective public officer may change his political party affiliation during his term of office, and no candidate for any elective public office may change his political party affiliation within six months immediately preceding or following an election."
[9] G.R. No. 52428, February 21, 1980.
[10] G.R. No. 53532, July 25, 1980.
[11] Ibid., 3.
[12] Article XVIII, Sec. 188, The 1978 Election Code.
The Comment was considered as the answer and the case submitted for decision. On the above undisputed facts and in the light of the recent rulings of this Court, this case has to be remanded to the Commission on Elections so that there could be a full-dress hearing on the question of disqualification.
This approach to the resolution of this controversy is in accordance with Reyes v. Commission on Elections,[7] where the ban imposed by the Constitution providing the change of political party by an elective officer during the term for which he was elected was discussed at some length.[8] As is clear from the assailed order of February 4, 1980, there was no hearing whatsoever on the petition for disqualification of Luis S. Etcubañez thereafter proclaimed as Governor-elect of the Province of Aurora. As far back as Pimentel v. Commission on Elections,[9] this Court made clear that there must be compliance with the cardinal requirements of procedural due process, one of which is the right to be heard. The petition in this case was filed with this Court only on February 11, 1980. A week before, on February 4, 1980, Luis S. Etcubañez was proclaimed. What was said, therefore, in Venezuela v. Commission on Elections,[10] where disqualification was sought on the very day of the proclamation of respondent therein finds application. As in that case, "the present proceeding cannot with precision be described as a pre-proclamation controversy."[11] In order, however, that the parties could have this case terminated with the least possible delay, it is appropriate that it be remanded to the Commission on Elections. That would be in accordance with the controlling provision of the 1978 Election Code, which provides: "The Commission shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the elections, returns, and qualifications of all members of the interim Batasang Pambansa and elective provincial and city officials."[12]
WHEREFORE, this petition is remanded to respondent Commission on Elections and should be treated as either a regular election protest or a quo warranto proceeding based on ineligibility of Luis S. Etcubañez, who should be impleaded by petitioner as the private respondent. No costs.
Barredo, Makasiar, Aquino, Concepcion, Jr., Guerrero, De Castro, and Melencio-Herrera, JJ., concur.
Teehankee, J., files separate opinion.
[1] Petition, par. 6.
[2] Ibid., Annex E.
[3] Ibid., par. 7.
[4] Solicitor General Estelito P. Mendoza was assisted by Assistant Solicitor General Vicente V. Mendoza and Solicitor Roberto A. Abad.
[5] Comment, 3.
[6] Ibid.
[7] G.R. No. 52699 May 15, 1980.
[8] According to Article XII, C, Section 10 of the Constitution: "No elective public officer may change his political party affiliation during his term of office, and no candidate for any elective public office may change his political party affiliation within six months immediately preceding or following an election."
[9] G.R. No. 52428, February 21, 1980.
[10] G.R. No. 53532, July 25, 1980.
[11] Ibid., 3.
[12] Article XVIII, Sec. 188, The 1978 Election Code.