GR 150540; (October, 2003) (Digest)
G.R. No. 150540 October 28, 2003
DIMALUB P. NAMIL, ABDULNASSER TIMAN, TERESITA G. AKOB, MALIGA AMILUDIN and EPAS GUIAMEL, petitioners, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, public respondent. JOENIME B. KAPINA, MONIB B. WALINGWALING, MAULANA G. KARNAIN, ABDULGAPHAR M. MUSTAPHA, ABDULRAKMAN TALIKOP and WILSON SABIWANG, private respondents.
FACTS
Following the May 14, 2001 elections in Palimbang, Sultan Kudarat, two conflicting Certificates of Canvass of Votes and Proclamation (COCVP) were issued for the Sangguniang Bayan. The Municipal Board of Canvassers issued COCVP No. 8031108 on May 20, 2001, proclaiming the petitioners and others as winners. They took their oaths and assumed office on June 30, 2001. The next day, May 21, 2001, the same board issued COCVP No. 8031109, proclaiming a different set of winners, the private respondents. The private respondents then requested the COMELEC to recognize their proclamation.
Acting on the request, the COMELEC, through Commissioner-in-Charge Mehol K. Sadain, conducted an investigation. Based on memoranda from field officials, including a confidential certification declaring COCVP No. 8031109 as genuine and COCVP No. 8031108 as fictitious, Commissioner Sadain recommended the validation of the second proclamation. The COMELEC En Banc adopted this recommendation in Resolution No. 4615, dated November 6, 2001, declaring the proclamation under COCVP No. 8031109 as valid and ordering the immediate installation of the private respondents as members of the Sangguniang Bayan.
ISSUE
Whether the COMELEC En Banc committed grave abuse of discretion in issuing Resolution No. 4615, which annulled the petitioners’ proclamation and ordered the installation of the private respondents, without prior notice and hearing.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court granted the petition and set aside the COMELEC resolution. The Court ruled that the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in annulling the petitioners’ proclamation without affording them due process. While the COMELEC has the authority to annul an illegal proclamation motu proprio under Section 242 of the Omnibus Election Code, this power is not absolute. The phrase “motu proprio” refers only to the manner of initiating the proceedings, not to the conduct of the proceedings themselves. Whether initiated motu proprio or by petition, the annulment of a proclamation is a quasi-judicial function that demands prior notice and hearing to the affected parties. The petitioners, who had already been proclaimed, taken their oaths, and assumed office, had a vested right to their positions that could not be stripped away through an ex parte investigation and resolution. The COMELEC’s failure to observe this fundamental procedural requirement rendered its assailed resolution void.