Where a senatorial candidate has already been proclaimed winner, the petitioner’s proper remedy is to file a regular election protest which under the Constitution and the Omnibus Election Code exclusively pertains to the Senate Electoral Tribunal.
Facts:
Private respondent Teresa Aquino-Oreta was proclaimed as the 12th winning candidate in the May 1998 senatorial elections. Petitioner Santanina Rasul questioned the said proclamation. She argued that the COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of or in excess of jurisdiction when, acting as a National Board of Canvassers, it declared that the remaining uncanvassed certificates would no longer affect the results and proceeded to proclaim the twelve (12) winning candidates. She contends that if the number of registered voters who have yet to cast their votes where special elections have been suspended is combined with the uncanvassed votes from other areas of the country, there is a possibility that the 12th ranking senatorial candidate, Teresa Aquino-Oreta could be dislodged by the l3th placer, Roberto Pagdanganan. The petitioner submits that the inclusion of Aquino-Oreta among the winning candidates was premature and based on incomplete canvass. Thus, she filed a petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court.
Issue:
Whether or not the petition for certiorari filed before the Supreme Court is proper remedy.
Held:
Petition for certiorari is not the proper remedy for the petitioner. Sec. 17, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution as well as Section 250 of the Omnibus Election Code provide that "(t)he Senate and the House of Representatives shall each have anElectoral Tribunal which shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of their respective Members..."
The phrase "election, returns and qualifications" should be interpreted in its totality as referring to all matters affecting the validity of the contestee's title. But if it is necessary to specify, we can say that "election" referred to the conduct of the polls, including the listing of voters, the holding of the electoral campaign, and the casting and counting of the votes; "returns" to the canvass of the returns and the proclamation of the winners, including questions concerning the composition of the board of canvassers and the authenticity of the election returns; and "qualifications" to matters that could be raised in a quo warranto proceeding against the proclaimed winner, such as his disloyalty or ineligibility or the inadequacy of his certificate of candidacy.
The word “sole” in the Constitution and the Omnibus Election Code underscores the exclusivity of the Tribunal’s jurisdiction over election contests relating to its members.
Inasmuch as petitioner is contesting the proclamation of Aquino-Oreta as the 12th winning candidate, her proper recourse is to file a regular election protest which pertains to the Senate Electoral Tribunal. (Santanina Rasul vs. COMELEC and Teresa Aquino-Oreta, G.R. No. 134142, Aug24, 1999, EN BANC; Gonzaga-Reyes, J.)
0
Comments
