GR 128165; (April, 1998) (Digest)
G.R. No. 128165 April 15, 1998
EDUARDO V. ROQUERO, petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, REYNALDO A. VILLANO, and HONORABLE OSCAR P. BARRIENTOS, Presiding Judge, RTC, Branch 82, Malolos, Bulacan, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Eduardo V. Roquero and private respondent Reynaldo A. Villano were candidates for Mayor of San Jose del Monte, Bulacan in the May 8, 1995 elections. The Municipal Board of Canvassers proclaimed Roquero the winner on July 19, 1995. On July 24, 1995, Villano filed a motion for reconsideration with the COMELEC assailing its July 18, 1995 order that directed the proclamation. The COMELEC denied this motion on September 8, 1995. Villano then filed a petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court, which was dismissed on January 30, 1996; his motion for reconsideration was denied on April 16, 1996, a resolution he received on May 7, 1996. On May 17, 1996, Villano filed an election protest before the Regional Trial Court (RTC). Roquero filed a motion to dismiss the protest, arguing it was filed beyond the ten-day reglementary period. The RTC denied the motion. Roquero then filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition with the COMELEC, which dismissed it on January 28, 1997. Roquero elevated the case to the Supreme Court via the present petition.
ISSUE
The main issue is whether the election protest filed by private respondent Villano was filed on time.
RULING
No, the election protest was filed out of time. The Supreme Court granted the petition, annulled the COMELEC resolution and the RTC orders, and dismissed the election case for lack of jurisdiction. The ten-day period to file an election protest for a municipal office is mandatory and jurisdictional. Roquero was proclaimed on July 19, 1995. Villano’s filing of a pre-proclamation motion for reconsideration with the COMELEC on July 24, 1995 suspended the running of the ten-day period under Section 248 of the Omnibus Election Code. At that point, five days of the period remained. The suspension continued during the pendency of the pre-proclamation case before the COMELEC and the Supreme Court. The remainder of the period resumed running only upon Villano’s receipt of the Supreme Court’s denial of his motion for reconsideration on May 7, 1996. Consequently, the five-day remainder expired on May 12, 1996. Villano filed his protest on May 17, 1996, which was five days late. The filing beyond the reglementary period deprives the court of jurisdiction over the protest.